Al-Mizan (al i Imran)

c Tafseer Al-Mizan By the late Allamah Muhammad Hussain Tabatabai "Though I be a thorn, and though there be a flower to grace the meadow, I grow by that Hand which nurtures me." - Allamah Tabatabai î

   
  In this preface we shall describe the method adopted in this book to find out the meanings of the verses of the Qur'an. at-Tafsir (exegesis), that is, explaining the meanings of the Qur'anic verse, clarifying its import and finding out its significance, is one of the earliest academic activities in Islam. The interpretation of the Qur'an began with its revelation, as is clear from the words of Allah: Even as We have sent among you an Apostle from among you who recites to you Our communications and purifies you and teaches you the Book and the wisdom and teaches you that which you did not know (2:151). The first exegetes were a few companions of the Prophet, like Ibn 'Abbas, 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar, Ubayy (ibn Ka'b) and others. (We use the word, 'companion', for other than 'Ali - a.s; because he and the lmams from his progeny have an unequalled distinction - an unparalleled status, which we shall explain somewhere else). Exegesis in those days was confined to the explanation of literary aspects of the verse, the background of its revelation and, occasionally interpretation of one verse with the help of the other. If the verse was about a historical event or contained the realities of genesis or resurrection etc., then sometimes a few traditions of the Prophet were narrated to make its meaning clear. The same was the style of the disciples of the companions, like Mujahid, Qatadah, Ibn Abi Layla, ash-Sha'bi, as-Suddi and others, who lived in the first two centuries of hijrah. They relied even more on traditions, including the ones forged and interpolated by the Jews and others. They quoted those traditions to explain the verses which contained the stories of the previous nations, or which described the realities of genesis, for example, creation of the heavens and the earth, beginning of the rivers and mountains, the "Iram" (the city of the tribe of 'Ad), of Shaddad the

so-called "mistakes" of the prophets, the alterations of the books and things like that. Some such matters could be found even in the exegesis ascribed to the companions. During the reign of the caliphs, when the neighboring countries were conquered, the Muslims came in contact with the vanquished people and were involved in religious discussions with the scholars of various other religions and sects. This gave rise to the theological discourses, known in Islam as 'Ilmu 'I-kalam. Also, the Greek philosophy was translated into Arabic. The process began towards the end of the first century of hijrah (Umayyad's period) and continued well into the third century (Abbasid's reign). This created a taste for intellectual and philosophical arguments in the Muslim intelligentsia. At the same time, at-tasawwuf (Sufism, mysticism) raised its head in the society; and people were attracted towards it as it held out a promise of revealing to them the realities of religion through severe self-discipline and ascetical rigors instead of entangling them into verbal polemics and intellectual arguments. And there emerged a group, who called themselves people of tradition, who thought that salvation depended on believing in the apparent meanings of the Qur'an and the tradition, without any academic research. The utmost they allowed was looking into literary value of the words. Thus, before the second century had proceeded very far, the Muslim society had broadly split in four groups: The theologians, the philosophers, the Sufi's and the people of tradition. There was an intellectual chaos in the ummah and the Muslims, generally speaking, had lost their bearing. The only thing to which all were committed was the word, "There is no god except Allah, and Muhammad (s.a.w.)** is the Messenger of Allah". They differed with each other in everything else. There was dispute on the meanings of the names and attributes of Allah, as well as about His actions; there was conflict about the reality of the heavens and the earth and what is in and on them; there were controversies about the decree of Allah and the divine measure; opinions differed whether man is a helpless tool in divine hands, or is a free agent; there were wranglings about various aspects of reward and punishment; arguments were kicked like ball, from one side to the other concerning the realities of death, al-barzakh (intervening period between death and the Day of Resurrection); resurrection, paradise and. hell. In short, not a single subject, having any relevance to religion was left without a discord of one type or the other. And this divergence, not unexpectedly, showed itself in exegesis of the Qur'an. Every group wanted to support his views and opinions from the

Qur'an; and the exegesis had to serve this purpose. The people of tradition explained the Qur'an with the traditions ascribed to the companions and their disciples. They went ahead so long as there was a tradition to lead them on, and stopped when they could not find any such tradition (Provided the meaning was not self -evident). They thought it to be the only safe method, as Allah says: ...and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say:' "We believe in it, it is all from our Lord..." (3:7). But they were mistaken. Allah has not said in His Book that rational proof had no validity. How could He say so when the authenticity of the Book itself depended on rational proof. On the other hand, He has never said that the words of the companions or their disciples had any value as religious proof. How could He say so when there were such glaring discrepancies in their opinions? In short, Allah has not called us to the sophistry which accepting and following contradictory opinions and views would entail. He has called us, instead, to meditate on the Qur'anic verses in order to remove any apparent discrepancy in them. Allah has revealed the Qur'an as a guidance, and has made it a light and an explanation of everything. Why should a light seek brightness from others' light? Why should guidance be led by others' guidance? Why should "an explanation of everything" be explained by others' words? The theologians' lot was worse all the more. They were divided into myriad of sects; and each group clung to the verse that seemed to support its belief and tried to explain away what was apparently against it. The seed of sectarian differences was sown in academic theories or, more often than not, in blind following and national or tribal prejudice; but it is not the place to describe it even briefly. However, such exegesis should be called adaptation, rather than explanation. There are two ways of explaining a verse - One may say: "What does the Qur'an say?" Or one may say: "How can this verse be explained, so as to fit on my belief? " The difference between the two approaches is quite clear. The former forgets every pre-conceived idea and goes where the Qur'an leads him to. The latter has already decided what to believe and cuts the Qur'anic verses to fit on that body; such an exegesis is no exegesis at all. The philosophers too suffered from the same syndrome. They tried to fit the verses on the principles of Greek philosophy (that was divided into four branches: Mathematics, natural science, divinity and practical subjects including civics). If a verse was clearly against those principles it was explained away. In this way the

verses describing metaphysical subjects, those explaining the genesis and creation of the heavens and the earth, those concerned with life after death and those about resurrection, paradise and hell were distorted to conform with the said philosophy. That philosophy was admittedly only a set of conjectures - unencumbered with any test or proof; but the Muslim philosophers felt no remorse in treating its views on the system of skies, orbits, natural elements and other related subjects as the absolute truth with which the exegesis of the Qur'an had to conform. The Sufis kept their eyes fixed on esoteric aspects of creation; they were too occupied with their inner world to look at the outer one. Their tunnel-like vision prevented them from looking at the things in their true perspective. Their love of esoteric made them look for inner interpretations of the verses; without any regard to their manifest and clear meanings. It encouraged the people to base their explanations on poetic expressions and to use anything to prove anything. The condition became so bad that the verses were explained on the-basis of the numerical values of their words; letters were divided into bright and dark ones and the explanations were based on that division. Building castle in the air, wasn't it? Obviously, the Qur'an was not revealed to guide the Sufis only; nor had it addressed itself to only those who knew the numerical values of the letters (with all its ramifications); nor were its realities based on astrological calculations. Of course, there are traditions narrated from the Prophet and the lmams of Ahlulbayt (a.s.) saying for example: "Verily the Qur'an has an exterior and an interior, and its interior has an interior up to seven (or according to a version, seventy) interiors ... But the Prophet and the lmams gave importance to its exterior as much as to its interior; they were as much concerned with its revelation as they were with its interpretation. We shall explain in the beginning of the third chapter, The Family of 'Imran', that "interpretation" is not a meaning against the manifest meaning of the verse. Such an interpretation should more correctly be called "misinterpretation". This meaning of the word, "interpretation", came in vogue in the Muslim circles long after the revelation of the Qur'an and the spread of Islam. What the Qur'an means by the word, "interpretation", is something other than the meaning and the significance. In recent times, a new method of. exegesis has become fashionable. Some people, supposedly Muslims, who were deeply influenced by the natural sciences (which are based on observations and tests) and the social ones (that rely on induction), followed the materialists of Europe or the pragmatists. Under the influence of those anti-Islamic theories, they declared that the religion's realities cannot go against scientific knowledge; one should not believe except that which is perceived by any

one, of the five senses; nothing exists except the matter and its properties. What the religion claims to exist, but which the sciences reject -like The Throne, The Chair, The Tablet and The Pen - should be interpreted in a way that conforms with the science; as for those things which the science is silent about, like the resurrection etc., they should be brought within the purview of the laws of matter; the pillars upon which the divine religious laws are based - like revelation, angel, Satan, prophethood, apostleship, Imamah (Imamate) etc. - are spiritual things, and the spirit is a development of the matter, or let us say, a property of the matter; legislation of those laws is manifestation of a special social genius, who ordains them after healthy and fruitful contemplation, in order to establish a good and progressive society. They have further said: One cannot have confidence in the traditions, because many are spurious; only those traditions may be relied upon which are in conformity with the Book. As for the Book itself, one should not explain it in the light of the old philosophy and theories, because they were not based on observations and tests - they were just a sort of mental exercise which has been totally discredited now by the modem science. The best, rather the only, way is to explain the Qur'an with the help of other Qur'anic verses - except where the science has asserted something which is relevant to it. This, in short, is what they have written, or what necessarily follows from their total reliance on tests and observations. We are not concerned here with the question whether their scientific principles and philosophic dicta can be accepted as the foundation of the Qur'an's exegesis. But it should be pointed out here that the objection which they have leveled against the ancient exegetes - that theirs was only an adaptation and not the explanation is equally true about their own method; they too say that the Qur'an and its realities must be made to conform with the scientific theories. If not so, then why do they insist that the academic theories should be treated as true foundations of exegesis from which no deviation could be allowed? This method improves nothing on the discredited method of the ancients. If you look at- all the above-mentioned ways of exegesis, you will find that all of them suffer from a most serious defect: They impose the results of academic or philosophic arguments on the Qur'anic meanings - they make the Qur'an conform with an extraneous idea. In this way, explanation turns into adaptation, realities of the Qur'an are explained away as-allegories and its manifest meanings are sacrificed for so-called "interpretations".

As we mentioned in the beginning, the Qur'an introduces itself as the guidance for the worlds (3:96); the manifest light (4:174), and the explanation of every thing (16:89). But these people, contrary to those Qur'anic declarations, make it to be guided by extraneous factors, to be illuminated by some outside theories, and to be explained by something other than itself. "What is that "something else"? What authority has it got? And if there is any difference in various explanations of a verse and indeed there are most serious differences - which mediator should the Qur'an refer to? What is the root-cause of the differences in the Qur'an's explanations? It could not happen because of any difference in the meaning of a word, phrase or sentence. The Qur'an has been sent down in plain Arabic; and no Arab (or Arabic-knowing non-Arab) can experience any difficulty in understanding it. Also, there is not a single verse (out of more than six thousand) which is enigmatic, obscure or abstruse in its import; nor is there a single sentence that keeps the mind wandering in search of its meaning. After all, the Qur'an is admittedly the most eloquent speech, and it is one of the essential ingredients of eloquence that the talk should be free from obscurity and abstruseness. Even those verses that are counted among the "ambiguous" ones, have no ambiguity in their meanings; whatever the ambiguity, it is in identification of the particular thing or individual from among the group to which that meaning refers. This statement needs some elaboration:In this life we are surrounded by matter; even our senses and faculties are closely related to it. This familiarity with matter and material things has influenced our mode of thinking. When we hear a word or a sentence, our mind races to its material meaning. When we hear, for example, the words, life, knowledge, power, hearing, sight, speech, will, pleasure, anger, creation and order, we at once think of the material manifestations of their meanings. Likewise, when we hear the words, heaven, earth, tablet, pen, throne, chair, angel and his wings, and Satan and his tribe and army, the first things that come into our minds are their material manifestations. Likewise, when we hear the sentences, "Allah created the universe", "Allah did this", "Allah knew it", "Allah intended it" or "intends it", we look at these actions in frame of "time" because we are used to connect every verb with a tense. In the same way, when we hear the verses: ...and with Us is more yet (50:35),

...We would have made it from before Ourselves (21:17), ...and that which is with Allah is best... (62:11), ...and to Him you shall be brought back (2:28, etc.), we attach with the divine presence the concept of "place", because in our minds the two ideas are inseparable. Also, on reading the verses: And when We intend to destroy a town (I7:16), And We intend to bestow a favor... (28:5), and Allah intends ease for you (2:185), we think that the "intention" has the same meaning in every sentence, as is the case with our own intention and will. In this way, we jump to the familiar (which most often is material) meaning of every word. And it is but natural. Man has made words to fulfill his social need of mutual intercourse; and society in its turn was established to fulfill the man's material needs. Not unexpectedly, the words became symbols of the things, which men were connected with and which helped them in their material progress. But we should not forget that the material things are constantly changing and developing with the development of expertise. Man gave the name, lamp, to a certain receptacle in which he put a wick and a little fat that fed the lighted wick which illuminated the place in darkness. That apparatus kept changing until now it has become the electric bulb of various types; and except the name "lamp" not a single component of the original lamp can be found in it. Likewise, there is no resemblance in the balance of old times and the modern scales - especially if we compare the old apparatus with the modern equipment for weighing and measuring heat, electric current's flow and blood-pressure. And the armaments of old days and the ones invented within our own times have nothing in common, except the name. The named things have changed so much that not a single component of the original can be found in them; yet the name has not changed. It shows that the basic element that allows the use of a name for a thing is not the shape of that thing, but its purpose and benefit. Man, imprisoned as he is within his habitat and habit, often fails to see this reality. That is why al-Hashawiyyah and those who believe that God has a body interpret the Qur'anic verses and phrases within the fame-work of the matter and the nature. But in fact they are stuck with their habit and usage, and not to the exterior of the Qur'an and the traditions. Even in the literal meanings of the Qur'an we find ample

evidence that relying on the habit and usage in explanation of the divine speech would cause confusion and anomaly. For example, Allah says: nothing is like a likeness of Him (42:11); Visions comprehended Him not, and He comprehends (all) visions; and He is the Knower of subtleties, the Aware (6:73); glory be to Him above what they ascribe (to Him) (23:91; 37:159). These verses manifestly show that what we are accustomed to cannot be ascribed to Allah. It was this reality that convinced many people that they should not explain the Qur'anic words by identifying them with their usual and common meanings. Going a step further, they sought the help of logical and philosophical arguments to avoid wrong deductions. This gave a foot-hold to academic reasoning in explaining the Qur'an and identifying the individual person or thing meant by a word. Such discussions can be of two kinds: i) The exegete takes a problem emanating from a Qur'anic statement, looks at it from academic and philosophical point of view, weighs the pros and cons and with the help of the philosophy, science and logic decides what the true answer should be. Thereafter, he takes the verse and fits it anyhow on that answer which, he thinks, is right. The Muslim philosophers and theologians usually followed this method; but, as mentioned earlier, the Qur'an does not approve of it. ii) The exegete explains the verse with the help of other relevant verses, meditating on them together - and meditation has been forcefully urged upon by the Qur'an itself - and identifies the individual person or thing by its particulars and attributes mentioned in the verse. No doubt this is the only correct method of exegesis. Allah has said: ...and We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything (16:89). Is it possible for such a book not to explain its own self? Also He has described the Qur'an in these words: a guidance for mankind and clear evidence of guidance and discrimination (between wrong) (2:185); and He has also said: and We have sent down to you a manifest light (4:174). The Qur'an is, accordingly, a guidance, an evidence, a discrimination between right and wrong and a manifest light for the people to guide them aright and help them in all their needs. Is it imaginable that it would not guide them aright in its own matter, while it is their most important need? Again Allah says: And (as for) those who strive hard for Us, We will most certainly guide them on to Our ways (2 9: 69). Which

striving is greater than the endeavor to understand His Book? And which way is more straight than the Qur'an? Verses of this meaning are very numerous, and we shall discuss them in detail in the beginning of the third chapter, The Family of 'Imran. Allah taught the Qur'an to His Prophet and appointed him as the teacher of the Book: The Faithful Spirit has descended with it upon your heart that you may be of the warners, in plain Arabic language (26:193 - 4); and We have revealed to you the Reminder that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to them, and that haply they may reflect (16:44); ...an Apostle who recites to them His communications and purifies them, and teaches them the Book and the Wisdom (62:2). And the Prophet appointed his progeny to carry on this work after him. It is clear from his unanimously accepted tradition - I am leaving behind among you two precious things; as long as you hold fast to them you will never go astray after me: The Book of Allah and my progeny, my family members; and these two shall never separate from each other until they reach me (on) the reservoir. And Allah has confirmed, in the following two verses, this declaration of the Prophet that his progeny had the real knowledge of the Book: Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, 0 people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying (33:33); Most surely it is an honored Qur'an, in a Book that is hidden; None do touch it save the purified ones (56:77-79). And the Prophet and the Imams from his progeny always used this second method for explaining the Qur'an, as may be seen in the traditions that have been narrated from them on exegesis, some of which will be quoted in this book in appropriate places. One cannot find a single instance in their traditions where they might have taken help of an academic theory or philosophical postulate for explaining a verse. The Prophet has said in a sermon: "Therefore, when mischief come to confuse you like the segments of darkened night, then hold fast to the Qur'an; as it is the intercessor whose intercession shall be granted; and a credible advocate; and whoever keeps it before him, it will lead him to the Garden; and whoever keeps it behind, it will drive him to the Fire; and it is the guide that guides to the best path; and it is a book in which there is explanation, particularization and recapitulation; and it is a decisive (world), and not a joke; and there is for it a manifest (meaning) and an esoteric (one); thus its apparent (meaning) is firm, and its esoteric (one) is knowledge; its exterior is elegant and its interior deep; it has (many) boundaries, and its boundaries have (many) boundaries; its wonders shall not cease, and its

(unexpected marvels shall not be old. There are in it the lamps of guidance and the beacon of wisdom, and guide to knowledge for him who knows the attributes. Therefore, one should extend his sight; and should let his eyes reach the attribute; so that one who is in perdition may get deliverance, and one who is entangled may get free; because meditation is the life of the heart of the one who sees, as the one having a light (easily) walks in darkness; therefore, you must seek good deliverance and (that) with little waiting. 'Ali (a.s.) said, inter alia, speaking about the Qur'an in a sermon: "Its one part speaks with the other, and one portion testifies about the other." This is the straight path and the right way which was used by the true teachers of the Qur'an and its guides, may Allah's blessings be on them all! We shall write, under various headings, what Allah has helped us to understand from the honored verses, by the above mentioned method. We have not based the explanations on any philosophical theory, academic idea or mystical revelation. We have not put into it any outside matter except a fine literary point on which depends the understanding of Arabic eloquence, or a self-evident or practical premises which can be understood by one and all. From the discussions, written according to the above- mentioned method, the following subjects have become crystal-clear: 1. The matters concerning the names of Allah, and His attributes, like His Life, Knowledge, Power, Hearing, Sight and Oneness etc. As for the Person of Allah, you will find that the Qur'an believes that He needs no description. 2. The matters concerning the divine actions, like creation, order, will, wish, guidance, leading astray, decree, measure, compulsion, delegation (of Power), pleasure, displeasure and other similar actions. 3. The matters concerned with the intermediary links between Allah and man, like the Curtain, the Tablet, the Pen, the Throne, the Chair, the Inhabited House, the Heavens, the Earth, the Angels, the Satans, and the Jinns etc. 4. The details about man before he came to this world. 5. The matters related to man in this life, like the history of mankind, knowledge of his self, the foundation of society, the prophethood and the apostleship, the revelation, the inspiration, the book and the religion and law. The high status of the prophets, shining through their stories, come under this heading. 6. The knowledge about man after he departs from this world, that is, al-Barzakh. 7. The matters about human character. Under this heading come the various stages

through which the friends of Allah pass in their spiritual journey, like submission, faith, benevolence, humility, purity of intention and other virtues. (We have not gone into details of the verses of the law, as more appropriately it is a subject for the books of jurisprudence.) As a direct result of this method, we have never felt any need to interpret a verse against its apparent meaning. As we have said earlier, this type of interpretation is in fact misinterpretation. As for that "interpretation" which the Qur'an has mentioned in various verses, it is not a type of "meaning"; it is something else. At the end of the commentaries, we have written some traditions of the Prophet and the Imams of Ahlulbayt (a.s.), narrated by the Sunni and Shi'ah narrators. But we have not included the opinions of the companions and their disciples, because, first, there is too much confusion and contradiction in them; and second, they are not vested with any authority in Islam. On going through those traditions of the Prophet and the lmams (peace be on them all!), you will notice that this "new" method of exegesis (adopted in this book) is in reality the oldest and the original method which was used by the Teachers of the Qur'an (peace of Allah be on them all!). Also, we have written separately various topics - philosophical, academic, historical, social and ethical - when there was a need for it. In all such discussions, we have confined our talk to the basic premises, without going in too much detail. We pray to Allah, High is He, to guide us and keep our talk to the point; He is the Best Helper and the Best Guide. Dependent on Allah, Muhammad Husayn at-Tabataba'i c c å
 
    

  Ϣ˶ ϴ˶Σή˴˷ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˶ Ϥ˸Σή˴˷ ϟ΍ Ϳ ˶ ΍ Ϣ˶ ˸δΑ˶ - Ϣϟ΍{1} ˸ϟ΍ ϲ ˵˷ ˴Τ˸ϟ΍ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϫ˴ ϟ˴·˶ ϻ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϡ˵ Ϯ˷ϴ˵ Ϙ˴ {2} Ϧ ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ Ύ˴Ϥϟ˶˷ Ύ˱ϗΪ˶˷ μ ˴ ϣ˵ ϖ ˶˷ Τ ˴ ˸ϟΎ˶Α Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ˴ϝΰ˴˷ ϧ˴ Ϟ ˴ ϴ˶Πϧ˶Ϲ΍˴ϭ Γ˴ ΍˴έ˸ϮΘ˴˷ϟ΍ ϝ ˴ ΰ˴ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ ˸ϳΪ˴ ϳ˴ {3} ˲Ώ΍˴άϋ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳ΂˶Α ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ˴˷ϥ·˶ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ˸ήϔ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ϝ ˴ ΰ˴ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ Ϡ˷ϟ˶ ϯ˱Ϊϫ˵ Ϟ ˵ ˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ

ΰ˶ ϋ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˲Ϊϳ˶Ϊη ˴ ϡ˳ Ύ˴ϘΘ˶ ϧ΍ ϭ˵Ϋ ˲ΰϳ{4} ˯Ύ˴Ϥδ ˴˷ ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ˲˯˸ϲη ˴ Ϫ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ϰ ˴ ϔ˴ ˸Ψϳ˴ ϻ ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶{5} ϱ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ Ϣ˵ ϴ˶ϜΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ΰ˵ ϳ˶ΰό˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϫ˴ ϟ˴·˶ ϻ ˴ ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ ϒ ˴ ˸ϴϛ˴ ϡ˶ Ύ˴Σ˸έϷ ˴ ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ˸Ϣϛ˵ έ˵ Ϯ˶˷ μ ˴ ϳ˵ {6} In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. - {1} Alif Lam Mim. {2} Allah,(there is) no god but He, the Everliving, the Self-subsisting by Whom all things subsist {3} He has revealed to you the Book with truth, verifying that which is before it, and He revealed the Tavrat and the Injeel aforetime, a guidance for the people, and He sent the Furqan. {4} Surely they who disbelieve in the communications of Allah they shall have a severe chastisement; and Allah is Mighty, the Lord of retribution. {5} Allah-- surely nothing is hidden from Him in the earth or in the heaven. {6} He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He likes; there is no god but He, the Mighty, the Wise. -

å
 This chapter aims at exhorting the believers to remain united in religion and to defend its cause with patience, forbearance and determination. It makes them aware of the dangers surrounding them: Their enemies, the Jews, the Christians and the polytheists, have made their preparations, and are determined to extinguish the Light of Allah with their hands and mouths. In all likelihood, the chapter was revealed all together; its verses - 200 in all - seem to be well-connected and adhere to a laid down scheme. From the beginning to the end, the verses are related to one another and have consistent aims. It looks as if this chapter was revealed when Islam had begun to spread in Arabia, but had not yet established a firm foothold outside Medina. It mentions the battle of Uhud, describes the planned imprecation with the Christians of Najran; speaks about the Jews and exhorts the believers against the polytheists; and in all these discourses, there is a constant refrain telling them to remain patient and united. It supports the view that this chapter was revealed at a time when the Muslims were engaged in defense of religion with all their might and when all their resources were devoted to this one task. On one side, they had to remain alert against internal sabotage planned by the Jews and the Christians; the believers had not only to refute their arguments, but also to neutralize their craftily-planned subterfuges to demoralize the Muslims. On the other, they had to fight the polytheists; they lived in a state of war, and peace seemed a forlorn hope. The call of Islam was reaching far and wide; this had prompted the enemies of truth - the Jews, the Christians and the Arabian polytheists to attack the Muslims, in order to annihilate them before it was too late. Beyond the boundary of Arabia, the Byzantines and the Persians had

the same design. Allah in this chapter reminds the believers of the realities of religion that would make them happy and remove from their hearts the rust of doubts and satanic suggestions; and will keep them on guard against the deceptions of the People of the Book. He makes it clear that He has not relinquished the management of His kingdom for a single moment; nor have His creatures made Him weary. He has chosen the religion for them, and has guided a group of His servants to it according to His established system: the system of cause and effect. Believer and unbeliever both walk on this very path. One day it is the unbeliever that looks victorious, the other day the believer vanquishes the unbeliever. The world is the place of tests and trials; the time is the time of action; and the result will be known tomorrow - not today. å
    !Allah is He besides Whom there is no god, the Ever-living, the Selfsubsisting by Whom all subsist: Its explanation has been given in "the verse of the Chair" (2:255). It might be inferred from it that Allah looks after the affairs of creation and management in the most comprehensive. and perfect way. The whole universe, all the things and their actions and reactions, are managed by Allah. This management is not like that of the physical and natural causes that create an effect on an object but have no sense or understanding themselves. His management is that of "life" that entails knowledge and power. The Divine knowledge is comprehensive - nothing is hidden from Him; the Divine power controls everything - nothing can happen unless He intends it to happen and allows it to appear. That is the reason why, after two more verses, it has been said: Allah, surely nothing is hidden from Him in the earth or in the heaven (5). He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He likes... (6). These six verses are a sort of prologue of this chapter, giving in a nutshell what the chapter contains in detail. Of these verses, this one is a sort of introducing speech, describing a basic truth that leads to the intended result. And the fifth and sixth verses, mentioned above, give the reason of the preceding verses. Therefore, the main theme of the prologue is contained in the two verses of the middle: He has revealed to you the Book with truth, verifying that which is before... and Allah is Mighty, the Lord of retribution.

According to these verses, the believers must remember that Allah, in Whom they believe, is One in His Godhead, maintains the creation and manages its affairs - a living management; He cannot be overpowered in His kingdom, nor there happens anything therein except what He intends and allows to happen:' If they believe in it, they shall know that it is He Who has revealed the Book that guides to the truth; the Separator that distinguishes the right from the wrong. They shall appreciate that in this matter also, He has decreed the same system of cause and effect, and has therefore given the man freedom of choice; he who believes shall have his reward; he who disbelieves, shall get its chastisement, because Allah is Mighty, the Lord of retribution. It is because He is Allah, besides Whom there is no god to decide in these affairs; nothing of His servants' affairs is hidden from Him; their belief and disbelief is not independent of His will and decree.   !He has revealed to you the Book with truth, verifying that which is before it: The word translated as "revealed" is a verbal form of "at-tanzil" It was explained in the second volume that at-tanzil (to send down) implies gradualness, while "alinzal" shows sending down all at once. It may be argued that the following verses go against this implied gradualness: ... Why has not the Qur'an been revealed to him all at once? (25:32); ... Is thy Lord able to send down to us food from heaven? (5:112); ... Why has not a sign been sent down to him from his Lord? Say: Surely Allah is able to send down a sign... (6:37). In all the four instances, verbs derived from at-tanzil have been used, but they do not mean gradual descent. An exegete has tried to overcome this difficulty by suggesting that the words, "sent down (i.e., revealed) to you the Book", means: sent it down sending after sending. [
! Gradualness in revelation (sending down) does not necessarily mean considerable gap between revelation of one part and the other. There are composite things whose existence is the same as that of their parts, like rain. Sometimes the speaker looks at the rain as a whole, and treats it as one undivided thing - it is quite in order, in this case, to describe it with the verb al-inzal (sending down all at once), as Allah says using this same verb: He sends down water from the heavens (13:17). At other times, He looks at its parts, that is drops of water, descending one after the other - it does not matter whether the gap between two drops is considerable or minimal - and then it may be described with the verb at-tanzil (sending down gradually), as Allah has done in another verse: And He it is Who

sends down the rain... (42:28). It appears from above that the verses, put forth against our explanation that at-tanzil is for sending down gradually, are not against it at all. For example, the verse, . . . why has not the Qur'an been revealed to him all at once? means: Why has not the Qur'an been revealed to him verse after verse at one stretch without considerable gaps between their revelation? Other verses may be correctly understood in this light. So far as the said exegete's proposed meaning is concerned, it, first of all, necessitates inventing a meaning according to one's own liking, and it is not permissible in any language. And even then the suggested meaning does not remove the objection in any way. Allah frequently uses the words, at-tanzil and al-inzal when describing the revelation of the Book to the Prophet. "Coming down" requires a higher level from which a thing departs and a lower level where it reaches and settles. Allah has used for His Person the attribute of highness, as He says, for example: ...surely He is High, Wise (42:51). And He has said about His Book that it is from Him: And when there came to them a Book from Allah verifying that which they have... (2:89). Therefore, it is very appropriate to use the word, "coming down", when describing the revelation settling down into the heart of the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.). "al-Haqq" and "as-sidq both are translated as "truth". But al-haqq is the information in as much as there is an established fact in front of it; and as-sidq is the information in as much as it conforms with a such a fact. The emphasis in the former is on the established fact, while in the latter it is on conformity. According to this explanation, the word al-haqq is used for Allah and for other existing realities, because they are true and actual facts about which the information is given. Anyhow, the word "truth", as used in this verse, means an established fact that cannot be invalidated. The preposition "bi" (with) in "bi 'l-haqq" (with truth) is for togetherness. The verse, therefore, means: He has revealed to you the Book, a revealing accompanied by truth. Naturally, this accompanying would mean that untruth and falsehood could never mix with it; it is always safe from falling a prey to falsity and lie. The verse, thus, hints at this fact obliquely. Some other exegetes have explained the preposition, "with", in some other ways; but none of them is free from defects. at-Tasdiq" is derived from as-sidq (truth) and means to verify, to acknowledge the truth of, to believe one to be truthful in the given information. "That which is before it", refers to the Torah and Injil.Allah says: Surely We sent down the Torah

in which was guidance... And We gave ('Isa) the Injil in which was guidance... And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the book and a guardian over it... (5:44-48). These verses show that the Old and the New Testaments that are today in the hands of the Jews and the Christians contain between them some of the revelations sent to Musaand 'Isa (a.s.), although they are not free from omissions and alterations. The Torah and the Injil found in the days of the Apostle of Allah were the same Pentateuch and the same four Gospels that are known to us today; and the Qur'an verifies the same scriptures that were in existence then and have continued to our days. But this verification is partial, not total. There are many Qur'anic verses that speak of omission and alteration in these two scriptures. Allah says: ...We cursed (the Jews) and made their hearts hard; they alter the words from their places, and have forgotten a part of what they were admonished with . . . And of those who say, "Verily, we are Nazarenes (Nasara = Christians)", We did take their covenant, but they forgot a portion of what they were admonished with... (5: 13-14).   !"""and He revealed the Torah and the Injil, aforetime, a guidance for the people: Torah is a Hebrew word for "law". Injil is the Arabic rendering of a Greek word, meaning 'good news". Some people say that it is derived from a Persian word. We shall discuss in detail about these two books under the verse: Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and ligh t... (5:44). The Qur'an insists on naming the book of 'Isa as Injil (Gospel, in singular) and on saying that it was sent down from Allah. It is in spite of the fact that there are several Gospels, and the four attributed to Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, existed since before the revelation of the Qur'an, and were well known at that time. These two factors - the use of singular, Gospel, and the declaration that it was sent down from Allah - clearly show the Qur'anic belief that there was a Gospel, revealed to 'Isa (a.s.) that was later altered and deleted. Anyhow, the references to these two books so early in the beginning is an allusion to the Jews and the Christians, hinting that the affairs of these two groups (including the story of 'Isa) are to be described in this chapter.   ! and He sent down the al-Furqan: "al-Furqan" as explained in as-Sihah, is what distinguishes truth from falsehood. The word, literally, means "that which distinguishes one thing from another". Allah

says: ...on the day of distinction, the day on which the two parties met... (8:41); ...He will grant you a distinction... (8:29). The distinction and discrimination, that Allah approves in matter of guidance, is the distinction between truth and falsehood in belief and knowledge, and between what constitutes the duty of a servant of Allah and what does not do so. Thus, al-Furqan (distinction) may correctly be used for all basic principles and adjunct matters revealed by Allah to His prophets - whether it is in form of a book or not. Allah says: And certainly We gave to Musa and Harunthe al-Furqan... (21:48); And when We gave Musathe Book and the distinction (al-Furqan)... (2:53); Blessed is He Who sent down the al-Furqan upon His servant that he may be a warner to the nations (25:1). Allah has also described the same meaning with the word, "al-mizan" (weighing scale, balance) in the verse: Certainly We sent Our apostles with clear arguments, and sent down with them the Book and the balance that men may conduct themselves with equity (57:25). This verse has the same import as the verse: Mankind was but one people; so Allah sent the prophets as bearers of good news and as warners, and He sent down with them the Book with truth, so that it might judge between the people in that in which they had differed (2:213). The balance, like the distinction, is the religion that decides between the people with equity, and contains the true knowledge and explains the duties of the servants towards their Lord. Others have interpreted the word 'distinction' in various ways: It has been said that the word means the Qur'an; the proof that separates right from wrong; the convincing argument of the Prophet against those who talked with him about 'Isa; the (Divine) help; or the wisdom. But what we have said gives the basic meaning and implication of the word.   ! Surely those who disbelieves... the Lord of retribution: "al-Intiqam" (retribution) is said to mean punishing the wrong-doer for his wrong. It is not done necessarily to satisfy the feeling of the wronged party. Of course, this happens in man's retribution; when one does a wrong to us, it causes a damage or shortcoming on our side, and we make that up by severe retribution that assuages our heart feelings. But Allah is too great to get any profit or loss from any action of His servants. Yet, He has given us a promise - and His promise is true - that He shall surely judge between His servants with truth, and will give them their dues if good, then good, and if evil, then evil. He has said: And Allah judges with the

truth (40:20); ...that He may reward those who do evil according to what they do, and (that) He may reward those who do good with goodness (53:31). He is Mighty in the most comprehensive meaning of the might, nobody and nothing can do any harm to Him. (It has been said that the basic meaning of the "might" is invincibility.) The verse says that surely those who disbelieve in the signs of Allah - they shall have a severe chastisement. The chastisement is not restricted to the Day of Resurrection or to the next world. The verse, therefore, may refer to chastisement in both worlds this life as well as the life hereafter. This is a Qur'anic dictum to which the scholars have paid little attention. This neglect betrays a basic misunderstanding of ours: We never think that a thing is a chastisement unless it inflicts pain upon our body or causes decrease or deterioration in our material belongings. Loss of property, death of kith and kin and weakness or sickness of body are the examples of chastisement in our eyes. But the Qur'an gives us a totally different concept of chastisement. å


#
$ 
   In the eyes of the Qur'an, a man who forgets his Lord lives a straitened life even though in our eyes he may be living most luxuriously. Allah says: And whoever turns away from My remembrance, his shall surely be a straitened life... (20:124); and it counts even the wealth and the children as chastisements, even though we count them as pleasant blessings: And let not their properties and their children excite your admiration; Allah only wishes to chastise them with these in this world and (that) their souls may depart while they are unbelievers (9:85). It was described, in short, under the verse 2:35 (And We said: "O Adam! dwell you and your wife in the garden...") that:  !Man's joy and sorrow, pleasure and displeasure, attraction and repulsion, enjoyment and suffering, all depend on his views as to what constitutes his good fortune, and what his misfortune. %
 $! Comfort and discomfort etc., vary according to the subjects to which they are related. The spirit has its own joy and sorrow; and the body its own comfort and discomfort. Likewise, animal's sense of ease or pain is not on the same level as that of man. A man having material outlook does not acquire the Divine attributes, and his characteristics do not reflect the light of sublime virtues. Such a man counts the

material felicity as the true felicity; in his eyes, spiritual bliss is not a bliss at all. He remains inordinately engrossed in wealth, children, prestige and worldly power and domination. It is reasonable to suppose that once he gets these things he would be happy and his bliss would be complete. But reality belies expectation. What he wanted was pure blessing free from every shade of distress. What he got was a pleasure surrounded by a thousand agonies. When he had not got what he longed for, he was distressed because of deprivation; when he got it he was grieved because it was very different from what he expected. Each acquirement brought with it a lot of stings; the causes he relied upon failed to bring about the desired effects. And as he had not established any connection with the 'real cause' beyond the apparent causes, he could not find solace in any misery, nor could he get peace of mind in any adversity. Thus, even after getting what he strived for, he remained in despair and desolation. Such dissatisfaction of man with what he gets spur-, him to even farther goals, in the hope of a really blessed future. And the story is repeated again and again. He remains worried before getting his objective; he becomes distressed after getting it. The Qur'an, on the other hand, teaches us that man is made of two things: a spirit that is eternal, and a body that is subject to changes and deterioration. fie remains like this, until he returns to his Lord; then he gets eternity without any change or deterioration. Whatever constitutes the bliss of the spirit, (for example, knowledge) is his real bliss; and whatever is the bliss of the spirit and the body together, like property and children, is also his bliss and felicity - and what a good thing it is! provided it does not divert his attention from Allah and does not tie him down to materialistic ideas. In the same way, a thing which causes discomfort, or even destruction, to the body, but brings about spiritual blessings, is his blessing (Re being killed in the way of Allah, destruction of property in the cause of religion and so on). It is like tolerating, for a moment, the bitter taste of a medicine to secure permanent health. On the contrary, what brings about a comfort to the body but harms the spirit, is the real suffering of man; it is his chastisement and evil reward. The Qur'an calls the comfort of the body only as a brief enjoyment: Let it not deceive you that those who disbelieve go to and fro in the cities (fearlessly). A brief enjoyment! then their abode is hell, and evil is the resting place (3:196-197). Also that which harms the body and spirit both, is called by the Qur'an a chastisement. The unbelievers too call it a chastisement, but their reasoning is different from that of the Qur'an. The Qur'an calls it a chastisement because it

harms the spirit; they call it a chastisement, because it harms the body. Look, for example, at various retributions sent down to previous nations. Allah says: Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with 'Ad, the (people of) Iram, possessors of many-columned buildings, the like of which were not created in the cities; and (with) Thamud, who hewed out the rocks in the valley; and (with) Pharaoh, the lord of the stakes, who transgressed in the cities; so they made great mischief therein? Therefore, your Lord let fall upon them the whip of chastisement, Most surely your Lord is on watch (89:6-14). The pleasure and displeasure, for sentient things, depend on feeling and perception. We do not count a pleasant thing used by us, as a blessing, if we did not feel it. Likewise, a painful experience is not painful to us if we do not feel its affect. It shows that what the Qur'an teaches us about the happiness and unhappiness is quite different from material comfort and discomfort. Man, surrounded by material things, needs some especial training to perceive the real Happiness as happiness, and the real unhappiness as unhappiness. It is for the purpose of this training, that the Qur'an asks its people not to attach their hearts to other than Allah; to realize that their Lord is the Real Owner Who owns everything; everything depends on Him; nothing should be obtained but for His sake. A man having this outlook will always find in this world unlimited sources of happiness: either the bliss of spirit and body together, or that of the spirit only. Other things, he will count as misfortune and as sources of unhappiness. But a man who is entangled in worldly pleasure and material comfort, thinks, at least in the beginning, that what he has acquired of the trinkets of this world is a blessing and good fortune for him, that it is the root of his happiness. But soon he realizes that he is wandering aimlessly in a desert full of dangerous beasts, poisonous snakes and tormenting scorpions. What he thought to be his good fortune turns into greatest misfortune. Allah says: Therefore, leave them to go on with (false) discourses and sport until they come face to face with that day of theirs which they are promised (70:42); Certainly you were heedless, of it; but now We have removed from you your veil, so your sight today is sharp (50:22); Therefore turn aside from him who turns his back upon Our reminder and does not desire anything but this world's life. That is the (last) reach of their knowledge... (53:29 30). Whatever pleasure they get is contaminated with a lot of worry and distress. This leads us to believe that the perception and thinking found in the people of Allah and the Qur'an, are quite different from those of other people, although both

groups are human beings. And between the two extremes there are countless ranks of those believers who have not yet perfected their divine character. This, in short, is the chastisement, as explained by the Qur'an. Of course, the Qur'an uses the word torment or chastisement for bodily discomfort and pain also. But it counts it as the discomfort of body, unrelated to the real, that is, spiritual chastisement. Allah quotes Ayyub (a.s.) as saying: The Satan has affected me with toil and torment (adhab).(38:41); also He says: And when We delivered you from Pharaoh's people who subjected you to severe punishment (adhab), killing your sons and sparing your women, and in this there was a great trial from your Lord (7:141). Note how Allah calls what they were subjected to as a trial and test from Allah, but a torment in itself - not from Allah.   ! Allah, surely nothing is hidden from Him in the earth or in the heaven: In the preceding verse, Allah mentioned, as the reason of His punishing the disbelievers, the fact that He "is Mighty, the Lord of retribution". But there was a possibility of misunderstanding there - someone might think that the Mighty Lord of retribution might remain unaware of one's disbelief and thus one might escape His retribution. Hence, this verse that shows that He is such a Mighty One that nothing is hidden from Him. Possibly, what is "in the earth" and "in the heaven" may refer to the actions done by the body's organs, and the ideas settled in the mind, respectively, as we had hinted in commentary of the verse: ... and whether you manifest what is in your souls or hide it, Allah will call you to account for it (2:284).   ! He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He likes: "at- Taswir" is to give "as-surah" form a thing. The "form" means twodimensional pictures as well as three-dimensional objects - or, as they say in Arabic, that which does not have a shadow, and that which has; "womb" is uterus, the organ in female mammal in which child or young is conceived and nourished till birth. This verse takes the discourse to a level higher than the preceding two. First it was said that Allah would chastise those who disbelieve in His signs, because He is Mighty, Lord of retribution Who knows what is hidden and what is manifest; He is not overpowered in His affairs; He it is Who dominates everything. Now this verse says that the reality is even greater than that. The one who rejects Allah's signs and disobeys His commandments has no power of his own to do any work - even when He disbelieves in Divine signs and thinks that he is independent of Allah in his

actions, he does so by the power given to him by none other than Allah. It is not that he overpowers the decree of Allah, nor that he disturbs the fine system which Allah has established for His creatures; nor does his will overcome the will of Allah. The fact is that Allah Himself has given him the latitude to do as he wishes whether he walks on the straight path of belief and obedience or wanders away in the wilderness of disbelief and disobedience. Allah has given this freedom of choice to man so that the test may be meaningful; so that whosoever wishes so, may believe, and whosoever wishes so, may disbelieve. And they do not wish except that Allah wishes, the Lord of the universe. Everything - including the belief and disbelief - is from a Divine decree: Allah has created everything and programmed it in such a way that it smoothly proceeds towards its intended goal and acquires its objective. And this Divine decree is allencompassing and predominates all wills and power. And Allah is Predominant in His affairs, Overpowering in His will, Guardian over His creatures. Man, in his ignorance, thinks that he does what he does, by his own will and choice, and that when he goes against the commandments of Allah, he disturbs the system which Allah has established. But the reality is otherwise. Man is irremovably imprisoned in the above-mentioned Divine system; and even this transgression and rebellion is governed by that very system - the system of free will and choice. To this hints the sentence, "He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He likes". Your existence is so programmed from the earliest days of your fetal life that you irresistibly proceed on the road Allah has opened for you - opened it by giving you freedom of will, not by compelling you to follow a certain path. The verse only mentions the decree so far as man is concerned; it does not involve itself with other things; thus it keeps itself confined to the topic at hand. Also, it is an oblique hint against the Christians concerning their belief about Jesus Christ; even the Christians do no deny Christ's development inside the womb; and that he did not make himself. Allah changed the pronoun from singular (revealed to "thee") to plural (shape "you") in this verse to show that even the belief of the believers, just like the disbelief of the disbelievers, is not independent of that decree. By appreciating this truth, the believers will be happy with the mercy and bounties that Allah has bestowed on them; and will not be depressed on hearing about the retribution that shall be meted out to disbelievers.   ! there is no god but He, the Mighty, the Wise: The verse reverts to the initial topic, that is, monotheism. It, in a way, condenses the arguments for the sake

of emphasis. The topics described in the preceding verses - guiding the creatures after creating them, revealing the book and establishing a criterion for discrimination between right and wrong, confirming the arrangement by punishing the disbelievers - all need a god to manage them; and as there is no god except Allah, then it is He Who guides the people, reveals the Book and sends down the distinction, and chastises those who disbelieve in His signs; and whatever He does, He does it by His Might and His wisdom.  $  It is reported in Majma'u 'l-bayan, from al-Kalbi, Muhammad ibn Ishaq and arRabi' ibn Anas that eighty odd verses from the beginning of the chapter were revealed about the delegation of Najran. And they were sixty riders; they came to the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.); and among them were fourteen persons from their nobles; and three among those fourteen had the final authority in their hands: (1) al-'Aqib, the leader of his people and their counsellor, they did nothing without his advice, and his name was 'Abdu 'l-Masih; (2) as-Sayyid, their patron and leader of their caravan, and his name was al-Ayham; and (3) Abu Harithah ibn 'Alqamah, their bishop, prelate, religious leader, and head of their schools; he had very high prestige in their eyes and had studied their books; the Byzantine emperors accorded him great respect, and had built for him many churches; all this was because of his learning and energetic efforts. So they came to the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) in Medina, and entered his mosque when he had finished the afternoon prayer. They had put on fme Yemenite clothes: cloaks and mantles; (they were) handsome like the people of Balharith ibn Ka'b. Some of the companions of the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.); who had seen them, have said: "We never saw a delegation like them." Then the time of their prayer came, and they started ringing their bell and stood up and prayed in the Mosque of the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.). The companions said: "O Apostle of Allah. This (is happening) in your mosque?" The Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) said: "Do not disturb them". So they prayed facing towards the east. Then as-Sayyid and al-'Aqib had a talk with the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.). The Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) then invited them to become Muslim. They replied: "We had been Muslims (i.e., believers) before you". He said: "You both tell wrong. What prevents you from accepting Islam is your claim that Allah has a son, and your worship of the cross and your eating the pig."

They said: "If he (i.e., Jesus Christ) was not son of God, then who was his father?" Then they all started arguing about Jesus. Thereupon, the Prophet told them: "Do you not know that there is no son but that he resembles his father?" They said: "Yes." He said: "Do you not know that our Lord is Ever-living, He shall not die? And that 'Isa will die?" They said: "Yes." He said: "Do you not know that our Lord is the Guardian of everything; He protects it and gives it sustenance?" They said: "Yes." He said: "Does 'Isa possess any such power?" They said: "No." He said: "Do you not know that nothing is hidden from Him in the earth or in the heaven?" They said: "Yes." He said: "Then does 'Isa know anything of it except that which he was taught?" They said: " No." He said: "So our Lord shaped 'Isa in the womb as He liked; and our Lord neither eats, drinks nor does He discharge excrement?" They said: "Yes." He said: "Do you not know about 'Isa that his mother kept him (in womb) as a woman does, and gave birth to him as a woman does; then he was fed as a child is fed; then he used to eat, drink and discharge excrement? They said: "Yes." He said: "Then how can it be as you think? Thereupon, they remained silent. Then Allah revealed about them eighty odd verses from the beginning of the Chapter of "The Family of 'Imran". 
 ! The same thing has been narrated by as-Suyuti in ad-Durru 'lmanthur from Abu Ishaq, Ibn Jarir and Ibnu 'l-Mundhir from Muhammad ibn Ja'far ibn az-Zubayr; and also from Ibn Ishaq from Muhammad ibn Sahl ibn Abi Amamah. The story shall be quoted later; as regards their claim that (only) the first eighty odd verses were revealed in this connection, it appears that it was their personal

opinion; otherwise, as earlier explained, the context and style obviously show that the whole chapter was revealed all together. It is narrated from the Prophet: The unfortunate is he who became unfortunate in the womb of his mother; and the fortunate is he who became fortunate in the womb of his mother. It is narrated in al-Kafi from al-Baqir (a.s.) that he said: "When Allah wants to create a semen - and it is among that from which covenant was taken from the loin of Adam - (or as He may decide later); and (wants) to put it in the womb, He excites the man for sexual intercourse, and reveals to the womb, 'Open thy door so that My creature and My firm decree may enter into thee.' So it opens its door. The sperm reaches the womb, and moves therein for forty days: then it becomes a clot for forty days; then becomes a lump of flesh for forty days, then flow in it interlaced veins. Then Allah sends two creator angels who make in the wombs what Allah wishes; they enter into the belly of the woman, from the woman's mouth; so they reach the womb, and in it is the ancient spirit, that was transferred into loins of men and wombs of women. Then they blow in it the spirit of life and eternity, and they create openings for his hearing and sight, and (make) his limbs and all that is in the stomach, by permission of Allah. Then Allah reveals to the two angels: 'Write on him My decree and My destiny and firm order; and write down that I may change that which you write.' They say: 'O Lord! what are we to write?' Thereupon Allah reveals to them to raise their heads towards the head of the mother. They raise their heads, and lo! there is a tablet striking the mother's forehead. They look into it and find in it his features, his embellishment, his death time, his covenant - whether he shall be a fortunate or an unfortunate one, and all his affairs. Thereupon, one of them dictates to the other; thus they write down all that is in the tablet, and make it conditional on the final decision (of Allah). Then they seal the writing and put it between his eyes. Then they make him stand upright in the womb of his mother." (The Imam) said: "Sometimes he disobeys and turns upside down, and it does not happen except in case of an arrogant and rebellious one. And when time comes for the fetus to come out, developed or undeveloped, Allah reveals to the, womb: 'Open thy door so that My creature may go out to My earth, and My order may be enforced about him, because now time has come for him to go out.'" (The Imam) said: "Then the womb opens the door of the child; so he turns upside down, his feet go over his head, his head reaches the lower part of the (mother's) stomach. (It is done) so that delivery may be easier for

the woman and the child. Then Allah sends to him an angel, named 'the Admonisher', who sternly tells him to go out; the child becomes frightened; when it delays some more, the angel tells him once again to get out; the child becomes (even more) frightened and falls on the earth crying, terrified because of that rebuke." 
 ! The words of the Imam, "When Allah wants to create a semen", mean, when Allah wants to create a well-made perfect human being from a semen. The parenthetic sentence, "it is among that from which covenant was taken" alludes to the fact that man before coming into this world existed in a world, called in the traditions as "the world of motes" and "the world of covenant"; and this life follows the pattern of that one. Whatever soul made covenant in that world must surely be born in this world well-made and perfect. The other parenthetic sentence, "or as He may decide later", refers to that fetus that is not from among those who had covenanted in that world; such fetus does not develop to its perfection and is miscarried. The phrase, "and to put it in the womb" is in conjunction with the preceding words, "when Allah wants to create". "They enter into the belly of the woman, from the woman's mouth": There is a possibility that the phrase, "from the woman's mouth", is an explanatory note added by the narrator of the tradition; this possibility is supported by the fact that the word "woman's" has been repeated instead of saying "from her mouth". But if it is the word of the Imam then it shows that their entrance is not as a body enters into another body. The way into womb is from vagina; the only other way may be through blood vessels including that through which menstrual blood reaches uterus. Surely, this passage is not easier than the vagina. And it proves that their entering through mouth has some reason other than - the ease of passage. "And in it is the ancient spirit that was transferred into loins of men and wombs of women": Probably it is the spirit of vegetation that is the source of nourishment and growth. "Then they blow in it the spirit of life and eternity": Apparently, the pronoun, "it", refers to the ancient spirit; accordingly, the spirit of life and eternity is blown into the spirit of vegetation. If the pronoun stands for the "lump of flesh", then it would mean that the spirit of life and eternity is blown into the lump of flesh that has already got vegetative life. In any case, it shows that flowing of human spirit into fetus is a forward step of vegetative life; and that at that stage it gets a new vigor and vitality.

The above explanation also throws light on transference of the ancient spirit into loins of men and wombs of women. The spirit exists with the body, that is, the semen and the menstrual blood that feeds the fetus; and these two things are parts of the bodies of the parents. Thus, the fetus has its share from the lives of its parents, and they in their turn are arts of the lives of their parents, and so on. Whatever happens to a man is somewhat a reflection of the lives of his father and mother. In a miniature form he represents all his ancestors - he is in a waythe "contents" of the book that existed before him This also may explain the sentence, "Allah reveals to (the angels) to raise their heads towards the head of the mother". So far as the decrees concerning the child are concerned, their link with his father was disconnected when the semen separated from him; now his only relation is with the mother. It is referred to in these words: "and lo! there is a tablet striking the mother's forehead." The forehead is centre of perceptive powers and a main feature of one's appearance. The angels on studying it find in it the child's features, appearance and life as well as his covenant, whether he will be a fortune or an unfortunate person; in short, they see in it all his affairs; one of the angels dictates it all to the other - their mutual relationship is like that of an active agent and a passive one. They write all that is in the tablet. "And make it conditional on the final decision of Allah": The feature does not contain all the causes and factors affecting a man's life. External events and circumstances also play important part in it. Hence the need of this conditional phrase. This tradition attributes to Allah all the details of conception and birth of a child: Allah excites the man; reveals to the womb, sends two angels to shape the child, and another angel to get him out of the womb, and so on. The tradition does not deny the existence of natural causes for these events. According to Islam, there are two sets of perfect causes for every happening - one metaphysical and the other physical. They are not against one another; nor do they together constitute a joint perfect cause. Both are perfect causes - each on its own level. Allah sends the prophets and Imams to guide the people to their spiritual bliss and happiness'; and to lead them to their spiritual perfection; the path laid down for it is spiritual. It is those divine leaders' duty to talk to their people in a way that they

may proceed and progress on this path. For this purpose, it is essential that the people be reminded of their Lord at every step. That is why the religious guides attribute man's all affairs to Allah, mention the agency of angels and explain that good fortune and felicity depend on their help; and that misfortunate and trouble are caused by the Satan and their deception; then they remind that ultimately everything is attributed to Allah, so far as it is proper for His sanctity and sublimity. Thus, the people come to understand guidance and misguidance, profit and harm and, in short, every affair of the life hereafter. But those leaders did not deny the natural causes, nor did they put it in second place. Physical and natural causes are one of the two pillars of human life; they are the foundations upon which is based the life of this world. It is essential for man to know all about these causes too as it is for him to know all about metaphysical and spiritual causes. Only then he will know his own "self"; and that will lead him to know his Lord. å
 
    

& ' Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˵˷ ΃˵ Ϧ ˴˷ ϫ˵ ˲ΕΎ˴ϤϜ˴ ˸Τϣ˵˷ ˲ΕΎ˴ϳ΁ Ϫ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶ ˴ΏΎ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ϝ ˴ ΰ˴ ϧ˴΃ ϱ ˴ ά˶ ϟ˴˷΍ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ˲ώ˸ϳί˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ Α˶ Ϯ˵Ϡϗ˵ ϲ˶ϓ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˷ϣ˴ ΄˴ϓ˴ ˲ΕΎ˴ϬΑ˶ Ύ˴θΘ˴ ϣ˵ ή˵ ˴Χ΃˵ϭ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴ϳ˶ϭ˸΄Η˴ Ϣ˵ Ϡ˴˸όϳ˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˶ϳ˶ϭ˸΄Η˴ ˯Ύ˴ϐΘ˶ ˸Α΍˴ϭ Δ˶ Ϩ˴ ˸Θϔ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ˯Ύ˴ϐΘ˶ ˸Α΍ Ϫ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶ Ϫ˴ Α˴ Ύ˴θΗ˴ Ύ˴ϣ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵όΒ˶ Θ˴˷ϴ˴ ϓ˴ Ϫ˶ Α˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϣ˴ ΁ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϟϮ˵Ϙϳ˴ Ϣ˶ ˸Ϡό˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ψγ ˶ ΍˷ή˴ ϟ΍ ˸Ϧϣ˶˷ ˲Ϟ ˷ ϛ˵ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴Β˸ϟϷ ˴ ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟ˸ϭ΃˵ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ ή˵ ϛ˴˷ ά˴˷ ϳ˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ύ˴ϨΑ˶˷έ˴ Ϊ˶ Ϩ˶ϋ{7} Ϛ ˴ ϧ˴˷·˶ Δ˱ Ϥ˴ ˸Σέ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϧ˵Ϊϟ˴˷ Ϧ˶ϣ Ύ˴Ϩϟ˴ ˸ΐϫ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϨΘ˴ ˸ϳΪ˴ ϫ˴ ˸Ϋ·˶ Ϊ˴ ˸όΑ˴ Ύ˴ϨΑ˴ Ϯ˵Ϡϗ˵ ˸ύΰ˶ Η˵ ϻ ˴ Ύ˴ϨΑ˴˷ έ˴ Ώ ˵ Ύ˷ϫ˴ Ϯ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ζ ˴ ϧ˴΃{8} Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϫ˶ ϴ˶ϓ ΐ ˴ ˸ϳέ˴ ϻ ˴˷ ˳ϡ˸Ϯϴ˴ ϟ˶ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ ϊ˵ ϣ˶ Ύ˴Ο Ϛ ˴ ϧ˴˷·˶ Ύ˴ϨΑ˴˷έ˴ Ω˴ Ύ˴όϴ˶Ϥ˸ϟ΍ ϒ ˵ Ϡ˶˸Ψϳ˵ ϻ ˴ Ϫ˴ {9} {7} He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding. {8} Our Lord! make not our hearts to deviate after Thou hast guided us aright, and grant us from Thee mercy; surely Thou art the most liberal Giver. {9} Our Lord! surely Thou art the Gatherer of men on a day about which there is no doubt; surely Allah will not fail (His) promise. å
 

([ )! He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In this verse, the verbal form "al-inzal" (= to send down all together) has been used, instead of at-tanzil (to send down gradually) that was used in the verse 3. It is because this verse looks at the whole Book in its entirety, and describes some especial characteristics of the complete Book. It discloses that the Book on the whole contains some decisive verses and some ambiguous ones, import of which may be known by returning them to the decisive ones. As the Book is here looked at as one entity, the use of the verbal form al-inzal was more appropriate. ([ )! ...of it there are some verses decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are ambiguous: "al-Muhkamat" (translated here as decisive) is derived from the root word h - k m; this root implies that a thing is so protected that nothing can pervert or break it or interfere with it. Some infinitive verbs made from it are al-ihkam (to make precise, to confirm, to strengthen), at-tahkim = to arbitrate) and al-hukm (to judge); some other words are al-hikmah (perfect knowledge, wisdom) and al-hakamah (bit of a horse's bridle). All these meanings have the elements of protection and preciseness in them. Some people say that the root-word gives the meaning of protection and reformation. al-Ihkam of the verses means making them so precise that no ambiguity remains therein, contrary to "al-mutashdbihat" (ambiguous) ones. Before going further, it should be mentioned here that in various places, Allah has described all the verses as being al-muhkamat; and again the whole Book has been called al-mutashabih. But the words have been used in those verses for meanings other than "decisive" and "ambiguous" respectively. Allah says: (This is) a Book, whose verses were confirmed; uh- kimat, then they were divided, from one Wise All- aware (11:1). This verse uses the verbal form of al-ihkam (to confirm, to make precise); but it goes on to mention "division"; this association shows that the verb al-ihkam (to confirm) refers to that state when the Book, before its revelation, was an indivisible one; it points to that "confirmation" and stability which was found in it before it was subjected to particularization for the purpose of revelation. This confirmation is an attribute, of the whole Book; and obviously it is something different from al-ihkam (decisiveness), mentioned in the verse under discussion, which is an attribute of only a part of the Book - those verses that are unambiguous in their meaning.

In other words, when Allah divided the verses of the Book in two categories, the decisive (i.e., unambiguous) and ambiguous, it was self-evident that the preciseness and decisiveness mentioned in this verse was not the same preciseness and confirmation which was attributed to the whole Book in verse 11:1. Likewise, Allah says: Allah has revealed the best discourse, a Book mutashabihan, conforming (in its various parts) oft-repeated... (39:23). Here the whole Book has been called mutashabihan (conforming); so we know that in this verse it means something other than mutashabihat (ambiguous), mentioned in the verse under discussion, in which only a part of the Book is given this name. The decisive, unambiguous verses have been called. "ummu1-kitab" (translated here as the "basis of the Book"). "al-Umm" literally means a thing to which another thing returns; in which it takes refuge. That is why the mother is called al-umm. The decisive and unambiguous verses have been given this title because the ambiguous verses return to them. One part of the Book (i.e., the ambiguous verses) returns to the other part, (i.e., to the unambiguous ones). The possessive case "the basis of the Book" does not imply that this basis is something different from the Book, as is the case, for example, in "the mother of the children" - the mother is different from the children. Rather it denotes a portion or part, as in the phrase, "women of the nation" women are a part of the nation; in the same way the basis of the Book is a part or portion of the Book. The Book contains some verses that are the basis of the other verses. "Basis" is singular; it shows that there is no difference in the unambiguous decisive verses; all are united and well-connected. The verse contrasts the decisive verses with the ambiguous ones - which it calls mutashabihat. "at-Tashabuh" means similarity of different things in some of their characteristics and conditions. As mentioned above, Allah has praised the Qur'an with this word in the verse: Allah has revealed to thee the best discourse, a Book conforming (in its various parts), oft-repeated, whereat do shudder the skins of those who fear their Lord... (39:23). Obviously, it refers to the fact that there is a consistency in the style of the Qur'an; eloquent composition and elegant modality, coupled with unveiling of realities and guidance to unalloyed truth (as the words used in this verse show) are the common and ever-present features of the Book. But at-tashabuh mentioned in the verse under discussion means something different. The verse contrasts such verses with the decisive ones that are the basis of the Book, and then goes on to say that those in whose heart there is perversity follow such verses seeking to mislead people and to give them their own

interpretation. This context makes it clear that the adjective mutashabihat, refers here to ambiguous verse whose connotation cannot be decided by the hearer just by hearing; his mind remains undecided between one meaning and the other; this continues until he refers to the decisive verses and only then is able to fix the true connotation and semantic value of the ambiguous one. At this stage, the ambiguous verse too becomes decisive and unambiguous but with the aid of decisive verse; while the decisive verse is decisive by itself. For example, when man first hears the verse, The Beneficent God (istawa) firmly sat upon the Throne (20:5), he is unable to decide whether these words have been used in their literal sense. Then he refers to other verses like: nothing is like a likeness of Him (42:11); then only he understands that "firmly sitting on the Throne" means mastery over the kingdom and dominance over the creatures; that it does not mean sitting in a place or on a thing, because it is an attribute of body and Allah is not a body, because nothing is like Him. Thus, by returning that ambiguous verse to a decisive one, he will translate it as, "The Beneficent God is firm in power ". Another example: When the verse: Looking to their Lord (75:23), is returned to the verse: Visions comprehend Him not, and He comprehends (all) visions (6:103), it becomes clear that "looking at" in the former does not mean "seeing" with the eyes. In the same way, when an abrogated verse is returned to the abrogating one, it is known that the order given in the former was for a limited time until the latter was revealed. And so on. This is the meaning of "decisive" and "ambiguous", as an average man may easily understand, looking at the whole verse together. At least this verse is surely "decisive", even if all others be not. Just think of the troubles that would crop up if this verse is said to be ambiguous: First, the whole Qur'an would be ambiguous, as no other verse has clearer meaning; second, the categories (decisive and ambiguous) mentioned in it would be meaningless; third, the remedy shown in the words, "they are the basis of the Book", would be useless; fourth, the words of Allah: A Book of which the verses are made plain, an Arabic Qur'an for a people who know, a herald of good news and a wamer... (41:3-4), would not be true; fifth, the argument contained in the verse: Do they not then meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy (4:82), would not signify anything. Add to it all those verses that say that the Qur'an is a light, a guidance, a

clarification, an explanation and an open reminder, etc., that shall be deprived of meaning if this verse under discussion is said to be ambiguous. No one can find a single verse in the Qur'an whose words or phrases are bereft of meaning. Every verse points to its true meaning - either it is the only meaning understood by an Arabic-speaking person, or is one of several meanings which may be inferred from it. When a verse is ambiguous and can be interpreted in more than one way, the true meaning is surely one of those interpretations. The true meaning cannot go against the accepted principles of the Qur'an, like the existence of the Creator, His Oneness, coming of the prophets, promulgation of the law, the Day of Judgment etc. It conforms with those principles, and is based on them; and those principles decide which of the possible meanings is the true one. Thus, some parts of the Qur'an explain the others; some verses are the basis to which the others are returned. When such a reader shall read this verse, "of it there are some verses decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are ambiguous", he will certainly know that the decisive are those verses that contain the accepted principles of religion, and ambiguous those whose meaning can be decided through these principles. 
 ! In every subject there are some principles and some adjuncts; the latter are invariably always referred to the former. It is true in other writings as much as about the Qur'an. But it does not create ambiguity in other books. So why in the Qur'an? [
! The Qur'an contains two sets of realities, and there is possibility of ambiguity in each: ! There are high spiritual and metaphysical realities that are beyond the scope of perception or matter. A man of average understanding, on hearing such verse, is perplexed whether the words have been used in their literal (that is often physical) meaning, or denote something higher. For example, when he hears the words: Most surely your Lord is on watch (89:14); And your Lord vomes... (89:22), his mind races at first to the literal senses of these words, which if accepted, would show that Allah is a body! The uncertainty is removed when he refers these verses to the Qur'anic principles which show that Allah is not a body, and that matter and actions and reactions connected with matter cannot be attributed to Him. This type of ambiguity occurs in all metaphysical and spiritual talks and writings; it is not peculiar to the Qur'an. Other scriptures - the unaltered parts - when talking

of high spiritual things face the same difficulty. Even philosophy suffers from this handicap. To this fact, the Qur'an refers in the following verses: He sends down water from the heavens, then the valleys flow according to their measure, and the torrent bears along the swelling foam; and from what they melt in the fire for the sake of (making) ornaments or apparatus arises a scum like it; thus does Allah compare truth and falsehood; then as for the scum, it passes away as a worthless thing; and as for that which profits the people, it remains in the earth; thus does Allah set forth parables (13:17). Surely We have made it an Arabic Qur'an, so that you may understand. And surely it is in the Original of the Book with Us, truly elevated, full of wisdom (43:3-4). %
 $! There are social legislations and other rules. Some rules, when the reasons for which they were legislated were no longer valid, were abrogated. Moreover, the verses were revealed piecemeal. These two factors create ambiguity in such verses; and it is necessary to return the abrogated verses to the abrogating ones; and then the ambiguousness goes away. ([ )! then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is ambiguous, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation: "az-Zaygh" is deviation; it is accompanied by anxiety and disquite. The verse goes on to contrast such people with those who are firmly rooted in knowledge, who say: "We believe in it, it is all from our Lord." It divides the people, so far as their behaviour regarding the Qur'an is concerned, in two categories: There are they in whose hearts is deviation, who are worried and pertubed - they follow the ambiguous verses to mislead the people and to interpret the verses according to their own liking. And there are those who are firmly rooted in knowledge, with stable mind - they follow the decisive verses, and believes in the ambiguous ones but do not act upon them, and pray to Allah not to make their hearts deviate after guidance has come to them. It shows that "following ambiguous verses" means to act upon them. They are condemned because they follow the ambiguous verses without returning (i.e., referring) them to the decisive ones. Had they referred them to decisive verses before acting upon them, it would, in effect, have been acting upon the decisive verses; -and they would have been free from reproach.

"al-Fitnah" (literally, mischief) means here to mislead the people. Making mischief and misleading are near in meaning. Allah says that they follow ambiguous verses so that they may mislead the people. Not only this - they want something even more grievous: They seek to acquire the knowledge of the interpretation of the Qur'an; their aim is to find everything from ambiguous verses, so that they would be independent of the decisive ones, and thus the foundation of the religion of Allah would be destroyed completely. "al-Ta'wil" is derived from al-awl (to return). at-Ta'wil of an ambiguous verse is its "returning base" to which it is returned. at-Ta'wil of the Qur'an is the source from which it gets its realities. For want of a better word, it is mostly translated as interpretation, final interpretation, or the end; although these words do not convey its true connotation. We shall try to lead the reader step by step to its real significance. Allah has used the word at-tawil in various places in the Qur'an: 1. And certainly We have brought them a Book which We have made clear with knowledge, a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe. Do they wait for aught but its final interpretation? On the day when its final interpretation comes about, those who neglected it before will says: "Indeed the apostles of our Lord had brought the truth..." (7:52-53). That is, what the apostles told their people was all truth: that Allah is their True Lord; that what they call upon besides Allah has no reality at all; that the prophethood is truth and the religion is truth; that Allah will surely raise those who are in graves; in short, all the information about the unseen, truth of which will be manifest on the Day of Resurrection. Keeping in view this manifestation, it has been said that al-Ta'wil of a verse is the fact with which that verse conforms, and that it would be manifested later on; like the happenings on the Day of Judgment that would be in conformity with the information given by the prophets and the Books. But this explanation is not comprehensive. It covers only those verses that describe the Divine attributes and actions, and explain the events of the Day of Judgment. But many more verses have no "facts" that would manifest themselves later on: the verses containing law and rules - they give orders, not information, and thus have no facts to conform with; the ones describing what is a clear rational proposition, for example, many ethical teachings - their ta'wil (in the proposed events) is within

themselves, it is not to appear later; those narrating the stories of the prophets and past nations - their ta'wil has already appeared, it is not to appear on the Day of Judgment. And the verse under discussion is talking about at-ta'wil of the whole Book: "Ta'wilahu" its, i.e., Book's, final interpretation. Clearly the suggested meaning of at-ta'wil cannot be applied here, because, as described above, it is true for only a portion of the Book, not for the whole. 2. And this Qur'an is not such as could be forged by those besides Allah, but it is a verification of that which is before it and a clear explanation of the Book, there is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds. Or do they say: "He has forged it?" Say: "Then bring a chapter like this and call whom you can besides Allah, if you are truthful." Nay, they have rejected that of which they have no comprehensive knowledge, and its final interpretation has not yet come to them; even thus did those before them reject (the truth); see then what was the end of the unjust (10:37-39). Here again at-ta'wil has been attributed to the whole Book. Someone has improved upon the definition of at-ta'wil suggested in (1); he has said: at-ta'wil is the real fact upon which the talk depends. If the talk contains an information, then the event or fact mentioned is its "interpretation" - it does not matter whether the events have already passed, like those of the prophets and past nations, or will be manifested in future, as concerning the verses describing the attributes, names and promises of Allah and all that is to happen on the Day of Judgment and if it promulgates a law, then the benefit emanating from it is its "interpretation". Look, for example, at the words of Allah: Anil give full measure when you measure out, and weigh with a true balance; this is good and the fairest "in the end" (17:35). The original word, translated here as "in the end", is "ta'wila". It shows that the "final interpretation" of giving full measure and weighing with true balance is the benefit accruing to the society from honest dealing. But this explanation too is defective, as will be seen from the following clarifications.  ! The verse of measure and weight is clear on one point: the "final interpretation", that is, the social benefit, depends on people's doing what they have been told to do, tliat is, on their actually giving full measure and correct weight; those benefits would not occur merely by promulgating this rule. In other words, the final interpretation is a real fact (benefit to the society) that emanates from a real fact (measuring and weighing correctly). Obviously, the "final interpretation" is a real fact; and the thing that "returns" to it,

or, let us say, through which that final interpretation emanates is also a real fact - it is not only an information or order. When Allah says that the verses of the Hook have "final interpretation", it means that those verses narrate some real facts (as, for example, in the stories) or are concerned with actually-existing practical matters (as, for example, in the verses promulgating laws), which, in their turn, have a final interpretation. This capability of having a final interpretation is not an attribute of the speech; it is the property of the subject matter of the speech. %
 $! As explained earlier, at-ta'wil literally means to return, or the returning base. But it is not every return or returning base, but a special type of it. A dependent returns In his principal, but the principal is not his "final interpretation"; all numbers return to "one", but "one" is not their final interpretation. To understand it more clearly let us look at the Qur'anic story of Musa and Khidr (a.s.). Khidr (a.s.) used the word at-ta'wil twice when he told Musa: ...now I will uijonn you of the interpretation of that with which you could not have patience (18:78); This is the interpretation of that with which you could not have patience (18:82). What he explained to Musa was the true significance of his three actions which Musa had misjudged because of his un-awareness of their real purposes. The three events were as follows: 1.c ... until when they embarked in the boat he made a hole in it... (18:71). 2.c ... until when they met a boy, he slew him (ibid. 74). 3.c ... until when they came to the people of a town, they asked them for food, but they refused to receive them as guests. Then they found in it a wall which was on the point of falling, so he set it upright (ibid. 77). And this is how Musa (a.s.) misconstrued these events: 1.c (Musa) said: "Have you made a hole in it to drown its inmates? Certainly you have done a grievous thing" (ibid. 71). 2.c (Musa) said: "Have you slain an innocent person otherwise than for manslaughter? Certainly you have done a horrible thing (ibid. 74). 3.c (Musa) said: "If you had pleased, you might certainly have taken a recompense for it" (ibid. 77).

And the following are the "final interpretations" of them, as explained by Khidr (a.s.): 1.c "As for the boat, it belonged to (some) poor men who worked on the river and I wished that I should damage it, and there was behind them a king who seized every boat by force" (18:79). 2.c "And as for the boy, his parents were believers and we feared lest he should oppress them by disobedience (to them) and disbelief (in God). So we desired that their Lord might give them in his place one better than him in purity and nearer to having compassion" (ibid. 80 - 81). 3.c "And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure belonging to them, and their father was a righteous man; so your Lord desired that they should attain their maturity and take out their treasure, a mercy from your Lord... (ibid. 82). Then he answered all the objection of Musa (a.s.) in a short sentence: "And I did not do it of my own accord" (ibid.). It is now obvious that the "return" mentioned in these verses is just as a punishment given to a child "returns" to his character-building he is punished for the "purpose" of his reform. It is this type of "return" that is meant by at-ta'wil in the above-mentioned verses. It does not mean that conformity which a true information has with its fact - as the sentence, Zayd came, has with the coming of Zayd. For further clarification let us look at uses of this word in Chapter 12 (Joseph): 1. When Joseph said to his father: "O my father! surely I saw eleven stars and the sun and the moon - I saw them prostrating before me" (12:4); And he raised his parents upon the throne and they (all) fell down in prostration before him, and he said: "O my father! this is the interpretation of my vision of old; my Lord has indeed made it to be true..." (ibid. 100). In this instance, the dream he saw of the sun, the moon and eleven stars prostrating before him "returned" to the prostration of his parents and eleven brothers. But this "returning" was just as an allegory returns to the thing for which it is used. The same is the case with the following verses: 2. And the king said: "Surely I see eleven fat kine which seven lean ones devoured;

and seven green ears and (seven) others dry; O Chiefs! explain to me my dream, if you can interpret the dream". They said: "Confused dreams, and we do not know the interpretation o/(such) dreams." And of the two (prisoners) he who had found deliverance and remembered after a long time said: "I will inform you of its interpretation, so let me go." Joseph! O truthful one! explain to us seven fat kine which seven lean ones devoured, and seven green ears and (seven) others dry, that I may go back to the people so that they may know." He said: "You shall sow for seven years continuously, then what you reap leave it in its ear except a little of which yon eat. Then there shall come after that seven years of hardship which shall eat away all that you have beforehand and laid up in store for them, except a little of what you shall have preserved" (12:43-48). 3. And two youths entered the prison with him. One of them said: "I saw myself pressing wine." And the other said: "I saw myself carrying bread on my head, of which birds ate. Inform us of its interpretation; surely we see you to be of the doers of good" (ibid. 36); "O my two mates of the prison! as for one of you, he shall give his lord to, - drink wine; and as for the other, he shall be crucified, so that the birds shall eat from his head; the matter is decreed concerning which you enquired" (ibid. 41) 4. "...and teach you the interpretation of saying..." (ibid. 6). 5... and that We might teach him the interpretation of sayings... (ibid. 21). 6. "...and taught me of the interpretation of sayings..." (ibid. 101). The word at-ta'wit in all these verses is used for the events to which the dreams referred. The dreamers saw the events not as they actually happened but in their allegorical forms; and Joseph "returned" those allegories to the real events which they represented. The dreams were the forms, and their interpretations were the substances behind those forms. In other words at-ta'wil (interpretation) is the reality that is allegorically represented by the words or expressions; those words or expressions must be "returned" to the realities which they represent, if one wants to know their true significance. The verse quoted above in the story of Musa and Khidr (peace be on them) also were of the same nature, as are the words of Allah mentioned earlier: And give full measure when you measure out, and weigh with a true balance; this is good and the fairest "in the end" (17:35).

Pondering over the verses about the Day of Judgment, one realizes that this word has been used in the same meaning in the earlier mentioned verses: Nay, they have rejected that of which they have no comprehensive knowledge, and its final interpretation has not yet come to them (10:39); Do they wait for aught but its final interpretations? On the day when its final interpretation comes about... (7:53). Look at verses such us: Certainly you were heedless of it, but now We have removed from you your veil, so your sight today is sharp (50:22). It shows that the vision with which man will see the informations brought by the prophets and the Book turning into reality will be of a different kind - that perception will not be like this physical perception, which we are used to in this world. Even the manifestation of the Day of Judgment as well as the governing principle of that day shall be something beyond the worldly perception of ours. (It will be further explained somewhere else.) Therefore, when it is said that the informations given in the Book and tradition shall "return" to their true meanings on the Day of Judgment it is not the same thing as fulfilment of a forecast in future. From the above discourse, it becomes clear that:  ! The sentence, "This verse has an at-ta'wil to which il returns", conveys a meaning different from the sentence, "this verse is ambiguous and it returns to a decisive verse" %
 $! at-Ta'wil is not a peculiarity of the ambiguous verses; it is an attribute of the whole Qur'an; decisive verses have their at-ta'wil, as do the ambiguous ones.  $! at-Ta'wil is not the meaning of a word; it is some real fact found outside the imagination. When we say that this verse has an at-ta'wil, we mean that the verse describes a real fact (past or future) or a real happening, which in its turn points to another reality - and that is its at-ta'wil, or final interpretation. )
! In later days, this word was taken to mean "the Interpretation that is against the apparent meaning of the word", But it is not interpretation; it is misinterpretation, an abuse of language. This wrong connotation was unknown at the time when the Qur'an was revealed, and there is no evidence to suggest that this late meaning is intended in this verse. *

$* 

*
+
 $,

 $
  

 

What we have explained above (see 3:7-9) about the meaning of decisive and ambiguous verses, as well as their "interpretation", is what one understands after deep consideration of the Qur'anic verses and the traditions of our lmams. But the Muslims have entangled themselves in sharp controversies about every aspect of these subjects right from the early days; and divergent views have been quoted regarding every detail even from the companions of the Prophet and their disciples. And in all this confusing polemics, not a single explanation conforms with ours; we may say that none of them even superficially resembles it. The main cause of this conflict is the confusion which exists about the subject matter - they have mixed the discussion of decisive and ambiguous verses with that of interpretation. As a result, they are in a muddle concerning the issues to be decided; there is disorderliness in their ways of arguments and they are confused about the conclusions drawn from their discourses. We propose to give a systematic analysis of all their opinions under different headings. "
*
+
 $
,

 "al-Ihkaam" (to make to precise, to conform, to make decisive, to strengthen) and "at-tashaabuh" (conformity of one thing with other, ambiguity) are commonly used words with clear meanings. Allah has attributed these adjectives and verbs to the whole Book: (This is) a Book whose verses were confirmed... (11:1); «a Book conforming (in its various parts), oft-repeated. (39: 23). These verses point to the fact that the whole Book has a forceful eloquence, and a well-integrated style, and that its various parts conform with each other in structural elegance and elocutionary beauty - and its every word leads to sublime realities. But when we look at the verse, "He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book, of it there are some verses decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are ambiguous...", We know that the adjectives, "al-muhkamaat" (confirmed, decisive) and "al-mutashaabihaat" (conforming, ambiguous), as used in this verse, mean something different from the earlier mentioned two verses. Why? Because this verse divides the verses in two categories and then says that only one is "decisive" and the other is "ambiguous". These words in this verse cannot have the same meanings which were applicable to the whole Book. The exegetes should have endeavored to find out from the Qur'anic verses themselves which meanings could be applied in this case. Instead, various people have interpreted them, according to their own thinking, in more than fifteen ways:

 ! The decisive are the three verses in Chapter 6 (Cattle): Say: "Come I will recite what your Lord has forbidden to you - (remember) that you do not associate anything with Him and be good to (your) parents, and do not slay your children for (fear of) poverty - We provide for you and for them - and do not draw near to indecencies... this He has enjoined you with that you may be mindful (6:152-154). And the ambiguous are those parts that confused the Jews, and they are the "letter symbols" revealed at the beginning of many Qur'anic chapters, like Alif lam mim ra, Ha mim, etc. As it happened, the Jews tried to interpret them in the light of their numerical values, and they thought that Alif lam mim hinted that the Muslim nation would continue for only 71 (1 + 30 + 40) years. Then other "letter symbols were revealed, and the Jews became confused. This opinion has been attributed to Ibn 'Abbas, a companion of the Prophet (s.a.w.). å
! First, it is an opinion without any proof or evidence. Second, there is no evidence that decisive and ambiguous verses are only those three and the letter symbols respectively. Third, if we accept this view, then almost the whole Qur'an except those three verses and the letter symbols - would fall in a third category "non-decisive, non- ambiguous"; but the verse clearly divides the whole Book in two categories only. The fact is that attribution of this view to Ibn 'Abbas is out of place. According to the narration, he had said that the three verses were decisive - he had not said that the decisive verses were only these three. It is reported in ad-Durru 'l-manthur from Sa'id ibn Mansur, Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Hakim (who said that the tradition was correct) and Ibn Marduwayh that 'Abdullah ibn Qays said: "I heard Ibn 'Abbas saying about the words of Allah: of it there are some verses decisive; he said: three verses at the end of the Chapter of the Cattle are decisive: Say: 'Come... and two following verses." That he mentioned these verses just as an example, is supported by another tradition narrated from him by the same author - that explaining the words of Allah, "verses decisive", he said: "From here, Say: 'Come... ' upto three verses, and from here, And your Lord has commanded that you shall not worship (any) but Him... (17: 23 - 25) upto three verses ". Both traditions clearly show that he mentioned these verses as examples of decisive verses; not that the decisive verses were only these.

%
 $! Opposite of the first view: The decisive are the letter symbols at the beginning of various chapters; and ambiguous are all the other verses. It has been attributed to Abu Fakhitah; he said about the words of Allah, they are the basis of the Book, that they are the opening words of the chapters; the Qur'an is composed from them: Alif lam mim; this Book, there is no doubt in it, the Chapter of the Cow is composed from them: Alif lam mim; Allah is He besides Whom there is no god, the Chapter of the Family of 'Imran is composed from them. A similar interpretation is reported from Sa'id ibn Jubayr, about the words: they are the basis of the Book. He said: "The basis of the Book, because they are written in all the books." It appears that, according to Abu Fakhitah and Sa'id ibn Jubayr, the letter symbols at the beginning of the chapters are just that - the symbols of the alphabets; and that by putting them in the beginning, Allah has drawn the attention of the hearers to the fact that this Book, which is revealed to you, is made up of these alphabets from which words and sentences are made, and yet no one can bring a like of it. It is one of the views about the significance of the letter symbols. å
! First, it is based on a premise (the supposed significance of the letter symbols) which itself is without any proof or evidence. Second, it is not in conformity with the verse under discussion. According to this interpretation the whole Qur'an, other than the letter symbols, is "ambiguous"; and Allah has in this verse condemned those who follow the ambiguous verses, and has said that it results from perversity of their hearts; it means that one should not follow any verse of the Qur'an, except the letter symbols - and there is nothing to follow in those symbols! On the other hand, Allah praises those who follow the Qur'an; in fact, to follow it is the most important obligation. For example, He says: ...and follow the light which has been sent down with him, these it is that are the successful (7:157).  $! Ambiguous means unspecified, indistinct, vague verses, and decisive are the specified and clear ones. å
! The particulars mentioned in the verse, about the decisive and ambiguous verses, do not fit this interpretation.

A word is called vague and indistinct, when various aspects of its meaning are mixed together and it is difficult to disentangle them and to know which one is really intended. Such a word is not acted upon unless it is joined by another clarifying word which makes its meaning clear, and then it is acted upon and followed. It must be noted here that, in the above-mentioned case, what is followed is the same previously indistinct and vague word as clarified by the distinct and clear one. The clarifying word, in itself, is not followed. Therefore, if ambiguous means the vague and indistinct verse and decisive is the distinct and clear one, then it is the ambiguous verse that should be followed when clarified by the decisive one - and not the decisive verse itself. Accordingly, to follow an ambiguous verse should not invite condemnation and should not be associated with perversity of heart. And coming to the practical side, no one - neither those whose hearts are perverted nor those who are firmly rooted in knowledge - follows a vague word unless it is clarified. But Allah condemns the former for following ambiguous verses. It means that ambiguous verses are not vague.  ! Ambiguous are those verses which were abrogated; one believe in them but does not act upon them. Decisive are the verses that abrogated the former, because they are believed in and acted upon. This opinion has been ascribed to Ibn 'Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud and some other companions. And that is why Ibn 'Abbas used to say that he knew the interpretation of the Qur'an. å
! First, even if we accept this explanation as correct, there is no proof that only the abrogated verses are ambiguous. The description that some people follow the ambiguous verses to mislead the people and to interpret them in their own way, is true about a lot of unabrogated verses too, like the ones about the attributes and actions of Allah. Second, this explanation leaves a majority of the verses unaccounted for - those that neither abrogated any, nor were abrogated by any. Was there a third category, which Allah did not mention? And so far as the view of Ibn 'Abbas is concerned, it is known that his explanation of decisive and ambiguous verses was more comprehensive, and that he mentioned these two types - abrogated ones and those that abrogate - just as examples. It is

quoted in ad-Durru 'l-manthur from Ibn Jarir, Ibnu 'l-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Hatim, through the chain of 'Ali, from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "The decisive verses are the ones that abrogated other verses, contain the lawful and unlawful, describe the limits and duties, and (in short) those which are believed in (and acted upon); and the ambiguous are the ones that are abrogated, in which there is some juxtaposition, the parables, the oaths, and that which is believed in but not acted upon." ! Decisive are those verses whose proof is clear and evident, like the proofs of Oneness of Allah, and of His power and wisdom. And ambiguous are those which require thinking and consideration. å
! What is the meaning of a verse having clear and evident proof? Does it mean that the main idea of a verse should have a rational and self-evident proof? If so, then all verses containing the laws or explaining the duties would become ambiguous, because not a single such law has a self-evident rational proof. Consequently, acting upon the verses containing the rules of the shari'ah would be condemnable! And Islam says that they must be followed and acted upon! Or does it mean that the idea of a verse should have a clear proof from the Book itself? If so, then all the verses do have this quality. And why not? After all, it is a Book, conforming in its various parts, oft-repeated, a light, a clear discourse. So, according to this interpretation, all the verses would be decisive, and there would remain no ambiguous one. But the Qur'an says that some of its verses are ambiguous. %#! Decisive is everything that can be known with the help of a clear or hidden proof; and ambiguous is that which cannot be known in any way, like the time of resurrection. å
! Being decisive or ambiguous are the characteristics of the verses of the Book. The Arabic name of a verse is al-ayah (sign), because it shows a reality from the Divine realities. Whatever is described by a Qur'anic verse cannot be said, by any stretch of imagination, to be "unknowable"; nor is it incomprehensible - it may surely be correctly understood either by itself or with the help of other verses. How can it be said that a verse intends to say something but its words fail to convey the intended meaning? Allah has described His Book as the guidance, the light and the clarification; and that even unbelievers could comprehend it - let alone the believers: A revelation from the Beneficent, the Merciful Allah, a Book of which the verses are made plain, an Arabic Qur'an for a people who know; a herald of good news and a warner but most of them turn aside so they hear not

(41:2 - 4); Do they not then meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy (4:82). Obviously, no subject matter dealt with in the Qur'an is incomprehensible or unknowable. And what cannot be known, like the time of resurrection and other secrets of the unseen, has not been touched by any verse. So, how can any verse be called ambiguous in the suggested meaning? In fact, this explanation confuses between the meanings of "ambiguous" and "final interpretation", (the true significance of which has already been described by us in the beginning). %
+
! Decisive are the verses containing the laws and the shari'ah; and ambiguous are the other verses, some of which affects the others. This opinion has been attributed to Mujahid among others. å
! This interpretation is wrong in both ways: Apparently "affecting each other" means helping in fixation of the intended meaning, as a specifying word qualifies a general one; or as a context pin-points the idea conveyed. If so, then even the verses containing the laws should be counted as ambiguous, because they too are subject to this inter-action. On the other hand, this interpretation gives an impression about the basic characteristic of a decisive verse: That there is no vagueness in its meaning; it distinctly points to its intended idea; that its import is known by itself, while others' sense is understood by its help. If it is so, and if it is accepted that only the verses containing the laws are decisive, then nothing of the Qur'anic knowledge and realities (except the rules of the shari'ah) can be known; there is supposedly no decisive verse in that group and, therefore, those verses cannot be referred to any decisive one, and consequently, their substance would remain unknowable for ever. Ô,! Decisive is the verse that cannot be interpreted except in one way; ambiguous is the one that may be interpreted in more than one way. It has been ascribed to ash-Shafi'i. Probably, he means that the decisive verse "apparently" has only one meaning; and the ambiguous has more than one "apparent" meaning. å
! This "explanation" just changes one word with another: "decisive" has

been changed to "one having only one meaning", and "ambiguous" to "one having more than one meaning". Apart from that in his view, at-ta'wil (interpretation) signifies the meaning of the word; and, as we have earlier explained, it is not correct. It'"interpretation" is the same thing as the meaning of a word, then its knowledge could not be restricted to Allah, (or to Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge). We know that the verses of the Qur'an explain the meanings of each other; and believers and unbelievers; those firmly rooted in knowledge and those in whose hearts is perversity -- all equally understand this meaning. ) ! Decisive are those verses which have been confirmed and in which the news of the prophets and their peoples has been given in detail; and those "conforming to each other" are those stories that have been repeatedly mentioned in various chapters and whose words conform to each other. According to this interpretation, the two categories -decisive and ambiguous - are confined to the stories only. å
! First, there is no proof that the Qur'anic division is confined to the verses of the stories. Second, the given characteristics of decisive and ambiguous verses - that those who follow the ambiguous do so to mislead the people and to give the verse their own interpretation; and that following the decisive verse has no such defect - do not agree with this explanation. These characteristics are found in other verses as much as in stories, and in once narrated story (like instituting the khilafah in the earth) as well as in oft -repeated ones. 
! Ambiguous is that verse which needs explanation; decisive one does not need it. This view is ascribed to Ahmad ibn Hanbal. å
! The verse containing the shari'ah need to be explained by the Prophet, although they are certainly among the decisive ones. On the other hand, the abrogated verses are among the ambiguous ones (as was described earlier), and they do not need any explanation (because they are not acted upon), even though in all other respects they are like any other verse of the shari'ah. The suggested meaning is, therefore, neither all inclusive nor exclusive. Ô
+
! Decisive is the verse that is believed in and acted upon; and ambiguous is believed in but not acted upon.

It has been attributed to Ibn Taymiyyah. Perhaps, he wanted to say that the stories and information were ambiguous, and those containing the laws were decisive. If this is the idea behind this explanation, then it could be counted as a separate view; otherwise, it could be fitted to many of the previously mentioned opinions. å
! It would mean that all verses, other than those concerning the shari'ah, would be ambiguous. In other words, it would be impossible to have knowledge of any Divine reality or any spiritual fact mentioned in the Qur'an (other than the matters of law) because there would be no decisive verse in that group to which the rest of it could be referred. On the other hand, abrogated verses are concerned with the shari'ah, but certainly they are not decisive. Apparently, he looked at the words, "... those in whose hearts there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is ambiguous", and "those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: 'We believe in it, it is all from our Lord'"; and then paraphrased it in these words that decisive verses are believed in and acted upon while ambiguous ones are believed in but not acted upon. He did not realize that this believing in and following, or only believing without following, expresses the duty of the believer 'after' he has distinguished between the decisive and ambiguous verses. In other words, it is not the criterion by which one may know the decisive verses from the ambiguous; there must be some other test to distinguish between the two categories. 
! Ambiguous are those verses which describe the attributes, whether of Allah, for example, All-knowing, Powerful, Wise and All-aware, or of His prophets, for example, the verse about 'Isa (a.s.): ...and His Word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a Spirit (proceeding) from Him... (4:171), and other verses of this type. It too has been attributed to Ibn Taymiyyah. å
! Accepted that the verses of attributes are ambiguous; but there is no evidence that ambiguous verses are confined to only those. He has written a long passage from which it appears that he takes these two terms in their literal meaning. A gist of his discourse is as follows:

"Decisive is the verse whose meaning is distinct; ambiguous is the one which has two or more possible meanings. The two concepts are relative: may be a verse is ambiguous for an ordinary man, and distinct and decisive for a more knowledgeable one. This relativity manifests itself very clearly in the verses of attributes. Most of the people fail to understand their significance. Their comprehension does not go beyond the limits of the matter. They interpret the Divine Attributes - knowledge, power, sight, hearing, pleasure, displeasure, hand, eye and other such expressions - in material terms, or in wrong ways. Thus people are misled, wrong beliefs and practices crop up and various schools of thoughts come into being. "So this is the meaning of decisive and ambiguous. Both are within the purview of human knowledge. What cannot be known is the interpretation of ambiguous verses, that is, the reality that is hidden behind such verses. Let us say that we know the meaning of the words of Allah: Most surely Allah has power over everything, and Most surely Allah knows everything. Still, we do not know the reality of His power and knowledge. The same is true about all Divine Attributes and actions. It is this final interpretation of the ambiguous verses which no one knows except Allah." We shall comment on it when discussing the subject of "interpretation".  

! Decisive is what can be reached by the understanding; ambiguous is opposite to it. å
! First, it is an opinion that is not supported by any proof. Second, it is correct that the Qur'anic verses may be divided in this way; but this division is totally different from that which groups the verses in two categories of decisive and ambiguous. The characteristics of decisive and ambiguous do not fit to the two sides of this division. Third, it is not all inclusive; the verses of the shari'ah are surely decisive, and human understanding has no way to reach them.  

! Ambiguous is a verse whose interpretation is against the apparent meaning of its words. Decisive is opposite to it; its interpretation is the same as its apparent meaning. This is the view popular among the later scholars; and they use the word at-ta'wil for an interpretation that is against the apparent meaning of the words. Perhaps, the same was meant by the scholar who said: Decisive is that verse whose interpretation is the same as its revelation, and ambiguous is the one that cannot be

comprehended except through interpretation. å
! It is a new terminology and the given characteristics of decisive and ambiguous verses do not agree with it. Ambiguous is an expression that is capable of more than one meaning; but only one of those meanings is intended. And that intended meaning is not its "interpretation". The interpretation, as explained earlier, is a common factor of all the Qur'anic verses, the decisive and the ambiguous alike. Moreover, there is not a single verse in the Qur'an whose connotation is against its apparent meaning. A few verses that give such impression, are governed by the decisive verses ± and the Qur'anic verses explain each other. Obviously, a meaning based on context and associations cannot be said to be against the apparent meaning; and especially when the Speaker Himself declares beforehand that various parts of His speech are all related to each other and should be understood with each other's help, and that no difference can be found in it if one ponders over it; Do the they not then meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy (4:82). 

! If there is unanimity about the interpretation of a verse, then it is decisive; otherwise, it is ambiguous. This opinion is ascribed to al-Asamm. Perhaps, what he says may be expressed in other words: There is no difference of opinion as to what a decisive verse means; while there is always such a difference about an ambiguous one. å
! If that be the criterion, then the whole Qur'an would become ambiguous, contrary to the division mentioned in this verse. Not a single verse is free from controversy; there is always some difference either about its word or its meaning; always some disagreement whether its apparent meaning is intended. This has led some people to say that the whole Qur'an is ambiguous; and he offers the verse: ...a Book conforming in its various parts (39: 23), as his proof. He seems oblivious of the inherent contradiction in this reasoning: This argument means that at least this verse is decisive so that it may be relied upon, while he wants to prove from it that not a single verse is decisive! Some others, believing that the whole Qur'an was ambiguous, said that the apparent meanings of the Qur'an are not a proof at all. %#

! Ambiguous is the verse that is difficult to explain, because it resembles

another verse - the difficulty may arise because of the word or because of the meaning. It is the opinion of al-Raghib. He has written in Mufradatu 'l-Qur'an: "Ambiguous verses of the Qur'an are those that are difficult to explain because of their resemblance to other verses - it is either in word or in meaning. The religious scholars have said: 'The ambiguous is the verse whose apparent meaning does not indicate its real connotation.' The fact is that the verses, when compared to each other, are of three kinds: The decisive, the ambiguous, and that which is decisive in some respects and ambiguous in others. "The ambiguous, in all, is of three kinds: ambiguous in word, ambiguous in meaning, and ambiguous in word and meaning both. "The ambiguous in word is of two kinds: Where ambiguousness is caused by one word, it is not a commonly used word, like al-abb (herbage) and yaziffun (they are hastening); or has more than one meaning, like al-yad, (hand, power) and al-'ayn (eye, sun, supervision) ± and where ambiguousness results from the structure of the sentence. This may happen in one of the three ways: when some explanatory words are omitted for the sake of brevity, for example: And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four (4:3); when some words are added into the sentence for some reason, for example: There is nothing like the likeness of Him (42:11) - it would have been easier to understand for a common man if it were said, 'there is nothing like Him'; and when a word is transferred from its usual place for rhyming or other reasons, for example: ...Who revealed the Book to His servant and did not make in it any crookedness. Rightly directing...(18:1-2) - the word, 'Rightly directing' describes the state of "the Book" and should have come soon after it; another example: «and were it not for believing men and believing women... had they been widely separated... (48:25). "And the ambiguous according to meaning are the attributes of Allah and details of the Day of Resurrection. These things are beyond the limit of our imagination - we cannot imagine a thing that is not perceived by us, or does not resemble any such perceived thing, at least. "And the ambiguous in word and meaning both is of five kinds: First, the ambiguity, because of quantity; when it is arguable whether the word is used in its general or particular meaning, for example, "kill the polytheists". Second, the

ambiguity because of quality; whether the given order is obligatory or recommended, for example, "then marry such woman as seem good to you". Third, the ambiguity because of time, when it is arguable which of the two given orders is abrogated and which one abrogated it. Forth, ambiguity because of the place and the incident about which the verse was revealed, for example: And it is not righteousness that you should enter the houses from their backs:. (2:189); and Postponing (of the sacred month) is only an addition in unbelief (9:37). It is difficult for a man who does not know the pre-Islamic Arabs' customs to understand these references. Fifth, ambiguity because of the conditions that make an action valid or void, for example, the conditions of prayer and marriage. "If you ponder on these divisions, you will see that all that the exegetes have written or said concerning the meaning of the ' ambiguous ', comes under one or the other of its headings and sub-headings; for example, the saying that ambiguous are the letter symbols, or Qataadah's opinion that the ambiguous is the abrogated verse, and the decisive is that which abrogated it, and the view of al-Asamm that there is unanimity about the interpretation of decisive verses, while there is no such unanimity about ambiguous ones. "Then all the ambiguous verses - whatever the reasons of their ambiguity - are of three categories: First, that which cannot be known by anyone in any way, like the time of resurrection, the appearance of the walker of the earth, and what that walker is, etc. Second, that which may be understood by man, like the uncommon words and complicated syntax. Third, that which may be comprehended by some of those who are firmly rooted in knowledge, and may remain hidden from others. It is this third category, about which the Prophet prayed for 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), 'O Allah! give him the knowledge of religion and teach him the "interpretation" '; and prayed like this for Ibn 'Abbas too." This was the opinion of ar-Raghib; it is the most comprehensive of all such views; and combines many of the previously mentioned opinions. å
! First, it is against the obvious meaning of the verse to say that "ambiguousness" includes such cases as the uncommon words, complicated sentence -structure, generality and particularity of expressions etc. The verse says that the ambiguous verses may be understood by referring them to the decisive ones. But the above - mentioned word problems cannot be solved by the decisive verses; there are other methods to solve them, like the grammar, dictionary etc. Moreover, the verse says that those who follow the ambiguous verses do so to

misguide and to interpret them in their own ways. But nobody follows a general word without knowing its particulars, or an uncommon word without ascertaining from the dictionary what it means. If anyone did so, people would not listen to him, because it would be against the universally accepted principles of language; and, as no one would listen to him, there could be no misleading and no misinterpreting. Second, his final division of the ambiguous into three categories - that which can be understood by common man, that which cannot be understood, and that which can be understood by some and not by others - shows that he thinks that "interpretation" is a peculiarity of ambiguous verses. But we have already explained that "interpretation" is common to both ambiguous and decisive ones. These were the opinions of the scholars about the meanings of the decisive and ambiguous verses. As you have seen, none of them is free from defects, nor does any conform with the clear purport of the verse. What one understands from the verse is this: An ambiguous verse is capable of more than one meaning, but the more apparent meaning is doubtful - not because of any difficulty of language or syntax (which can easily be removed with the help of well-recognized literary and linguistic methods), but because it is against the semantic value of a decisive verse. Therefore, the actually intended meaning may be ascertained only with the help of that decisive verse. Obviously, the apparent meaning of an ambiguous verse should be familiar to the common people and the simple minds would readily accept it and believe in it. Or if both meanings require some explanation, then the explanation leading to unintended meaning would be easier to understand for an uninitiated and unlearned man. Look at the innovations and wrong sectarian beliefs; study the never-ending schisms that have been shattering the Muslim community since the moment the Prophet left this world; try to find out the basic cause of their differences in matters of belief and law - and you will see that most of them have resulted from following the ambiguous verses and from interpreting them in a way not approved by Allah. Every sect proves its beliefs from the Qur'anic verses: A party finds in it evidence that Allah is a body; a group proves from it that man has no free will concerning his actions, while another faction tries to show that man is totally independent of Allah in this respect; some people argue that the prophets committed mistakes and sins, and they quote the verses in their support; a circle says and proves it from the

Qur'an, that Allah is so sublime that even "Divine Attributes" should not be attributed to Him, while another faction says, and proves it too from the Qur'an, that Allah is just like His creatures and His attributes are separate from His Person. And so on and so forth. All this is a result of following the ambiguous verses without "returning" them to the relevant decisive ones. Then look at a group saying that the laws of the shari'ah were ordained to serve as a path to reach the goal; if one finds a shorter route that leads to the same destination, it would be obligatory to walk on this new route, because the main thing is to reach there, through any easy way. Another one says that the rules of the shari'ah were promulgated to lead the man to perfection; there is no justification of burdening a man with them after he has reached that goal - therefore, one who has attained perfection is not obliged to observe the rules of the shari'ah. All the rules of the shari'ah, all the religious obligations, the complete penal code and all Islamic policies were established and enforced in the days of the Prophet, not a single item was neglected or kept in abeyance. Then, after his departure, the Muslim governments began suspending law after law. It was a continual process. Whenever a law or a penalty was discarded, those who were responsible for it argued: The religion was sent down for the good of the world and the good of the man; what we have adopted now, in place of the old outmoded law, is far more better for the people. Now, we have reached a stage where it is said: The only purpose of the shari'ah was to make the world a good place to live in; the world, nowadays, is not in a mood to accept the policies and punishments prescribed by Islam - it cannot digest it; the advanced civilization demands advanced and civilized' laws - the laws of Islam are not good for this stage. Also, it is said: The religious rites were established so, that they might purify the hearts and lead the minds to correct perception; those hearts that have been well-trained by the society and those spirits that are solely devoted to the service of mankind, do not need such purifications as ablution, obligatory bath, prayer and fast etc. Ponder over such views - and their number is beyond counting - and then study the words of Allah, "then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is ambiguous, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation", and you will have to admit that all those disorders and calamities that befell Islam and the Muslims, have emanated from only one source - following the ambiguous verses seeking to give them one's own interpretation. That is the reason - and Allah knows better - why the Qur'an has used such a tough language in this respect, most strictly forbidding the Muslims to follow the ambiguous verses seeking to mislead the people, and to interpret them according to

one's own liking; and why it has condemned the tendency of distorting the signs and words of Allah, explaining them without true knowledge, and following the footsteps of Satan. It is the usual practice of the Qur'an to put greatest emphasis on condemning those matters that were likely to destroy any fundamental part of the religion, which, in its turn, could lead to ruination of the whole structure. Look, for example, at the severest admonitions against befriending the unbelievers; about the love of the near relatives of the Prophet; for staying of the wives of the Prophet inside their houses; against the interest; and concerning the unity in the word of religion etc. What is the basic source of perversity of heart and of the tendency to mislead the people? It happens when one is inclined towards this material world, loves to remain on the earth for ever and succumbs to desires. How can the rust of perversity be removed? How can the door of misdirection be closed shut? The only way is to remember the Day of Reckoning, as Allah says: (as for) those who go astray from the path of Allah, for them surely is a severe punishment because they forgot the Day of Reckoning (38:26). That is why those who are firmly rooted in knowledge and who do not wish to interpret the Qur'an in a way their Lord does not approve, point to this fact at the end of their prayer: "Our Lord! Surely Thou art the Gatherer of - surely Allah fails men on a day about which there is no doubt, not (His) promise." "-
*
+




.
./"- 0$

 1 A group says: The decisive verses are the basis of the Book - it means that they are the foundation of the Book upon which the edifice of religion, its principles and laws, are built up; and religion is only a collection of beliefs and deeds. Therefore, such verses are believed in and acted upon. So far as the ambiguous verses are concerned, they are believed in but not acted upon, because their meanings are not distinct and their connotations are vague. å
! This meaning necessarily emanates from some of the opinions about the meaning of the decisive and ambiguous verses. If one believes that ambiguous is the verse whose interpretation is difficult to comprehend, or that its ambiguousness may be removed totally or partially with the help of reason, grammar, dictionary or other means used to solve a word- problem, then he would have to explain the "basis of the Book" in the way written above. Others say that the sentence, "Decisive verses are the basis of the Book", refers to the fact that ambiguous verses return, that is, are referred, to them. But what is the

meaning of this "return" or reference? Some people say: It means that ambiguous verses should be believed in, but when it comes to action, only the relevant decisive verse should be followed: For example, an abrogated verse should be believed in, but at the time of action it should be returned to its relevant decisive verse, that is, the one that abrogated it. å
! This explanation is not very different from the first one. There is a third explanation and it is the correct one: The decisive verses are the basis of the Book, inasmuch as they clarify and explain the ambiguous ones and remove their ambiguousness. As explained in the Commentary, "al-umm" (translated here as "basis") literary means a thing to which another thing returns. The word "basis" or foundation does not convey the full sense of this word. The first explanation interprets it merely as the foundation; but it does not explain its full import. The word al-umm points to a special kind of return - as a part returns to its whole, or a branch returns to its roots; the thing that returns is derived from, and is a part of, the thing to which it returns. This word, therefore, indicates that ambiguous verses have such meanings that branch out from, and return to, the decisive ones. And that is why the decisive ones explain and clarify the ambiguous ones. Moreover, the ambiguous is given this name because it is capable of more than one meaning; and not because it has an "interpretation" - interpretation is found in decisive verses also; the Qur'anic verses explain each other, and it is only decisive verses that can clarify the ambiguous ones. Let us repeat the example of the verse: Looking to their Lord (75:23); it is ambiguous; but when it is returned to the words of Allah: nothing is like a likeness of Him (42:11), and: Visions comprehend Him not (6:103), it becomes clear that "looking at" in this phrase means something different from the optical vision connected with the eyes. Likewise, Allah has said: The (Prophet's) heart belied not what he saw. What! do you then dispute with him as to what he saw?... Certainly he saw of the greatest signs of his Lord (53:11-18).The verse proves that the heart has a sight of its own. And this vision of heart is something different from "thinking" and "consideration". Because the thought and consideration is a process that consists of a subject and a predicate; while vision is a single action, it looks at the object without joining it to any subject or predicate. Therefore, this vision of heart is neither a material nor a mental consideration; it is the orientation of heart towards the object.

The same is the case with all other ambiguous verses. "

  ,á
 " According to some exegetes at-ta'wil (interpretation) is synonymous for exegesis, explanation or meaning of the sentence. Meanings of some parts of the Qur'an are certainly known to the people. Accordingly, the interpretation mentioned in the verse (seeking to give it their own interpretation, but none knows its interpretation except Allah) must be restricted to the meaning of the ambiguous verses. Therefore, they say that none can know, in any way, the meaning of an ambiguous verse, except Allah - or except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. Another group says that "interpretation" is the meaning that is against the apparent meaning of the word. This explanation has become so wide spread that, at present, it has become the real meaning of at-ta'wil, while originally this word meant "to return" or "the returning place". Anyhow, this explanation is popular among the later exegetes,while the first-mentioned explanation was familiar to the ancients, whether they believed that its knowledge was restricted to Allah only, or said that they too, who were firmly rooted in knowledge, knew it; for example, it has been narrated from Ibn 'Abbâs that he used to say: "I am one of those who are firmly rooted in knowledge and I know its interpretation." A third group says: "Interpretation" is that meaning of the verse which is not known except to Allah (or to Allah and the ones firmly rooted in knowledge), and which is against the apparent meaning of the word. In other words, an ambiguous verse has many meanings - one behind the other; some meanings are showing themselves just behind the words, and may be perceived by one and all; others are far behind and none knows them except Allah (or except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge). There is, within this group, a difference of opinion as to how those various meanings are related to the word. It is sure that all of them are not on the same level; otherwise, it would mean that one word is used in more than one meaning at the same time, and that is not permissible in language (as has been explained in the Fundamentals of Jurisprudence). Therefore, those meanings must be taken consecutively. Now comes the difference: Some say that one meaning is the real one; the second is its concomitant; the third is the second's concomitant and so on. Others say that the meanings are all ranked one behind the other, as an esoteric

meaning is hidden behind a manifest one. When a man speaks a word, he intends it to convey its familiar meaning, and with the same intention he aims at its esoteric meaning. You say: Give me water to drink. You ask only for drink; but that very word is also a demand to satiate your thirst; and this in its turn is a call to satisfy a need of life, and then a determination to acquire the perfection of existence. Note that you had not given four orders; you only told him to give you water to drink, but this one demand contained in itself all the unspoken but intended demands one inside the other. There is a fourth explanation: Interpretation is not a sort of a meaning intended from the word. It is a thing really existing outside imagination, upon which the talk is based. If the speech is of imperative mood - enjoining or forbidding - then its interpretation is that reason for which the said commandment is given. There is an order: Establish prayer. Its interpretation is that spiritual perfection which illuminates the soul of the one who prays, and prevents him from evil and sin. If the speech is an information - of a past event - then that event itself is its interpretation. Look, for example, at the verses narrating the stories of the prophets and their peoples. And if it is an information of a present or future happening, then it is of two kinds: (1) If the subject may be perceived by one of the senses or comprehended by mind, then its interpretation is the same subject as it exists or shall exist in reality: For example, Allah says: and among you are those who hearken for their sake (9:47); and: The Romans are vanquished, in a near land, and they, after being vanquished, shall overcome within a few years (30:2 - 4). (2) If it is a future event of unseen that cannot be perceived by worldly perceptions, nor can it be comprehended by our minds, like the affairs of the Day of Resurrection, the time of its happening, the raising of the dead and their gathering together, the questioning, the reckoning, the flying of the books of deeds etc., and like the reality of the Divine Attributes and Actions. (These latter are above the reach of time and beyond the limit of minds), then too their interpretation is the same reality that exists or shall exist outside imagination. There is a big difference between the verses that describe these last-mentioned realities (attributes and actions of Allah and the affairs related to the Day of Resurrection) and those describing other subjects. It is possible to know the interpretation of the verses that describe other subjects; but so far as the verses describing the Divine Attributes etc., are concerned, none knows their interpretation except Allah; although those who are firmly rooted in knowledge

may be given this knowledge by Allah to the extent of their mental capacities and spiritual perfection. Still, the reality, that is, the full and final interpretation, is not given to any creature at all. These are the four main opinions concerning the meaning of "interpretation". There are some other views also; they are, in fact, various branches of the first opinion although those who expressed them have not acknowledged this fact: 1. Exegesis is more general than interpretation. Exegesis is mostly used for explanation of words; interpretation is mostly used for explanation of the meanings and sentences. The term, "interpretation" is generally used only for the Divine Books; while exegesis is used for other books too. 2. Exegesis is explanation of a word that has only one meaning; interpretation is choosing, with help of some rules and reason, one meaning out of several possible ones. 3. Exegesis shows the definite meaning of the word; interpretation chooses one among many possible meanings. (It is not very different from no. 2.) 4. Exegesis shows the reason of the meaning; interpretation explains the reality of the meaning. For example, look at the verse: Most surely your Lord is on watch (89:14). Its exegesis shall be as follows: "al-Mirsad" (watching place) is on paradigm of al-mif'al from the verb rasada; yarsudu (he watched; he is watching). And its interpretation is the warning against slackening in matters of the shari'ah and thinking little of the commandments of Allah. 5. Exegesis is a description of the clear meaning of a word; interpretation is the explanation of its difficult meaning. 6. Exegesis is concerned with tradition and narration; interpretation is related to reason. 7. Exegesis is limited to following and listening (what the ancients said); interpretation is concerned with inference and reason. These seven are in fact various facets of the first opinion; and all objections leveled against that are valid about these too. Anyhow, one cannot rely on any of the four opinions or their branches.

One defect is common to all: They presume that "interpretation" is the meaning of the verse, or that it is the happening or cause to which the verse refers. But it has been explained in the Commentary that "interpretation" is not the meaning of a verse - it does not matter whether the meaning is the apparent one or is against it. Also, it has been clarified therein that although interpretation is a real event or fact, but not every event - it is that fact with which the word has the same relation as a proverb has with its purpose; or as an exterior has with its interior. The detailed comments on the four opinions are as follows: 
   ! One who believes it, must also believe that at least some of the Qur'anic verses are unintelligible; that its "interpretation", that is, exegesis cannot be understood from its words. But there is no such verse in the Qur'an; the Qur'an clearly says that it has been revealed so that an average mind may easily understand it. A man having this opinion cannot avoid this difficulty except by saying that the only ambiguous verses are the letter-symbols at the beginning of some chapters, as their meanings are not known to the people. But, there is no proof that only the letter-symbols are "ambiguous" and just because at-ta'wil means to return and attafsir (exegesis) also has a shade of this meaning in it, it does not follow that both are synonymous - a mother is the returning place for her children, but she is not their "interpretation"; a principal is the returning place of his dependants, but he is not their "interpretation". Moreover, according to the verse, one of the characteristics of the ambiguous verses is that perverted persons follow them to mislead the people. But who has ever been misled by letter-symbols? Most of the misguidance in Muslim community has occurred because of following those verses that describe the attributes of Allah and other such things. 

 $  ! It says that there are verses in the Qur'an whose intended import is against their apparent meanings, and those apparent meanings cause misguidance in religion as they are against the decisive verses. This statement boils down to this: The verses of the Qur'an are contradictory to each other and that contradiction cannot be removed unless some verses are deprived of their open meanings and given some such connotations that, in normal course, would not be understood from them. This, in its turn, would invalidate the argument contained in the words of Allah: Do they not then meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy (4:82).

If the discrepancy between two verses can be removed only by saying that one or both do not mean what their words apparently say; that they have an interpretation (i.e., a meaning against the apparent one) that is not known to anyone other than Allah, then the verse 4:82, written above, cannot prove that the Qur'an is from Allah. One can easily remove contradiction and discrepancy from any literary or academic work of any author, if one were to change the apparent meanings of contradictory statements and give them new connotations unknown to any linguist. But such removal of contradiction would not prove that that work is a Divine revelation. The fact is that every speech even one that is admittedly false or is just a jumble of words can be presented as a true fact or a serious discourse if its words were given some hitherto unknown meanings against their clear connotations. But such an absence of discrepancy would -not mean that that speech was from a Speaker Who is above the changes, Whose decrees and statements do not contradict each other, Who is not liable to forgetfulness and error, Who is Allperfect by Himself and has not acquired perfection through trial and error, experience and passage of time. The verse 4: 82, proves that the Qur'an is understandable to common minds and may be pondered and meditated upon; that no verse of it has a meaning that is against the clear dictate of Arabic language; in short, it does not contain puzzles and riddles. 
 $  ! No one who has meditated on the Qur'an would deny that the Qur'anic verses have various consecutive connotations - one behind the other. But all those connotations are, in fact, various levels of the meanings of the words - and especially so if we say that they are concomitants of the first meaning. And their understandability varies according to the intelligence levels of the readers. But this idea has no resemblance with at-tawil (interpretation). Remember what Allah has said about the "interpretation" of the Qur'an that none knows it except Allah. And note the fact that one does not need piety and spiritual purity to understand a complicated or deep philosophical discourse; what one requires is a sharp intelligence. Then you will realize that it would be inappropriate to say that only Allah knew the interpretation (in the meaning given in this opinion) of the Qur'an. (It does not mean that piety and spiritual purity do not help in comprehension of Divine knowledge and realities; but they are not the main foundation of this comprehension. This place is reserved for intelligence and scholarship.) 
   ! He is right when he says that at-tawil (interpretation) is

not restricted to the ambiguous verses, it is found in the whole Qur'an. Also, he is right in saying that interpretation is not the meaning of the word; it is a real fact on which the speech is based. But he is wrong when he says that every fact, referred to by the verse, is its interpretation, and when he says, for example, that the past events or the future happenings are the interpretations of the relevant verses. Again, he is wrong in thinking that only the verses describing the Divine Attributes and the events of the Day of Resurrection are ambiguous. Why do we say that he is wrong in these assumptions? The answer is as follows:What is the meaning of the words: "and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation, but none knows its interpretation except Allah"? Do the pronoun "it" and "its" refer to "the Book"? In other words, does the verse say that none knows the interpretation of the whole Book except Allah? If the interpretation means real events and causes mentioned in the verses, then the above statement would not be correct, because interpretations (in the meaning just described) of a great many verses are known to many other than Allah and other than those who are firmly rooted in knowledge; in fact, it may be known to even those in whose hearts there is perversity - such are the verses narrating the stories of the past nations and the current events, and even the verses dealing with laws and ethics. Everyone can acquire the knowledge of these things, and no one can fail to understand their interpretation (in this meaning). Or, do the pronouns, "it" and "its" refer to "the part of the Book that is ambiguous"? If so, then it will be correct to restrict the knowledge of its interpretation to Allah (or to Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge). And then it would be the import of the verse that none, except Allah (and those firmly rooted in knowledge) should seek to interpret the ambiguous verses; otherwise, the people would be misled and misguided. But it would be wrong in this case to say that only the verses describing the attributes and actions of Allah, and those connected with the Day of Judgment were ambiguous. Misguidance is caused by misinterpretation of other types of verses too; for example, the verses related to the shari'ah and the stories of the prophets and their nations. It has been claimed by a group that the main purpose of the law is to reform and develop the society; if the good of the society depends on a law other than the one ordained by religion, or if that ordained law is no longer suitable for this enlightened era, a new law should be adopted and the religious command should be discarded. Likewise, it has been claimed that the miracles attributed by the Qur'an to the prophets were not supernatural events; they were normal occurrences, which the Qur'an narrated in a way as to put on them a halo of

mystery; as a result of this dramatic style, it succeeded in attracting the attention of the audience and to make them submit to what they thought to be a super-power, above all powers. Such misleading explanations and interpretations are found in their hundreds in all the sects that have deviated from true Islam. And all are the result of interpreting the Qur'an according to one's own liking, seeking to mislead the people. Therefore, it is wrong to say that only those verses are ambiguous which describe the Divine Attributes and the affairs of the Day of Resurrection. Now, it should be clear that the meaning of "interpretation" given by us in the Commentary is the only true one: Interpretation is that reality to which a verse refers; it is found in all verses, the decisive and the ambiguous alike; it is not a sort of a meaning of the word; it is a real fact that is too sublime for words; Allah has dressed them with words so as to bring them a bit nearer to our minds; in this respect they are like proverbs that are used to create a picture in the mind and thus help the hearer to clearly grasp the intended idea. That is why Allah has said: (I swear) by the Book that makes manifest (the truth); surely We have made it an Arabic Qur'an, so that you may understand. And surely it is in the original of the Book with Us, truly elevated, full of wisdom (43:2 - 4). And this thing has been explicitly and implicitly mentioned in several Qur'anic verses. Moreover, you have seen in the Commentary that whenever the Qur'an uses the word, "interpretation" (and it has been used seventeen times), it intends this very meaning, described by us. *"*
 
2
 /  
- 

 -
  This issue too has caused sharp controversy among the exegetes. The main reason of the controversy is the meaning of "and", in the sentence, "and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord". Is it a conjunctive? Or, has it been used only to begin a new sentence? Some early exegetes, some Shafi'ites and most of the Shi'ites believe that it is a conjunctive; that the verse says that those too who are firmly rooted in knowledge know the interpretation of the ambiguous verses of the Qur'an. Most of the early exegetes and the Hanafites believe that with this "and" a new sentence begins; that none knows the interpretation of the ambiguous except Allah, Who has kept this knowledge to Himself. Both groups bring in their support a lot

of academic explanations and traditions; the polemics goes on, arguments are put forward, are refuted by the opposite group, then the refutations in their turn are refuted; thus it goes on and on. Both sides suffer from confusion about the issue to be decided. They have confused the interpretation of the Qur'an with returning the ambiguous verse to the decisive. Therefore, it will be a waste of time and space to quote here their arguments and counter- arguments. So far as the traditions are concerned they are against the clear meaning of the Qur'an:1. Let us look, to begin with, at the traditions that say that those who are firmly rooted in knowledge know the interpretation. These traditions use "interpretation" as synonymous for the "intended meaning of the ambiguous"; but, as mentioned repeatedly, interpretation of the Qur'an is something else. It has been narrated through the Sunni chains that the Prophet prayed for Ibn 'Abbas: "O Allah! give him knowledge of the religion and teach him the interpretation." And Ibn 'Abbas is reported as saying: "I am among those who are firmly rooted in knowledge and I know its interpretation." Also he said: "The decisive are the verses that abrogated and the ambiguous are the abrogated ones." All these traditions put together give an impression that the decisive verse is the interpretation of the ambiguous one. But we have already explained that this verse is not concerned with this sort of interpretation. 2. Now we come to those traditions that show that knowledge of the interpretation of the ambiguous verses is restricted to Allah: a) Ibn 'Abbas is reported to recite the verse in this way: and none knows its interpretation except Allah, and say those who are firmly rooted in knowledge: 'We believe in it... '" The same recitation is ascribed to Ubay ibn Ka'b. Likewise, Ibn Mas'ud is reported to recite: "And its interpretation is not except with Allah. And those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: 'We believe in it ...'" But such traditions can prove nothing: First, because such uncommon recitations are of no value at all; secondly, utmost that can be shown from them is that this verse does not prove that those who are firmly rooted in knowledge know the

interpretation; but there is a world of difference between not proving that Zayd exists and proving that he does not exist. b) It is narrated by at-Tabarani from Abu Malik al-Ash'ari that he heard the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a) saying: "I am not afraid for my ummah but from three things: that their wealth would increase, and they would envy each other and kill each other; and that the Book would be opened for them, and the believer would take it seeking to interpret it, and none knows its interpretation except Allah; and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: 'We believe in it, it is all from our Lord'; and none do mind except those having understanding; and that their knowledge would increase and they would waste and neglect it." (ad-Durru 'lmanthur) This tradition ± if we accept that it has any relation with the subject matter ± would only show that common believers did not know interpretation; but it could not be proved from it that those too who were firmly rooted in knowledge did not have its knowledge. And the controversy is about this latter group; it is not about general believers. c) Some people offer those traditions as their proof which say that the decisive verses should be followed and ambiguous ones should be only believed in. But such tradition have no relevance to the issue under dispute. d) al-Alusi has quoted in his at-Tafsir: al-Marfu [ al-Marfu is a tradition in which a narrator mentions the name/s of person/s from whom he narrates, but a later narrator omits his/their name/s. (tr.) ] tradition through Ibn Jarir from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "The Qur'an has been revealed on four words: The lawful, and the prohibited (none is excused from acquiring its knowledge); and the explanation (it is done by the scholars); and the ambiguous, none knows it except Allah, and the one who claims to know it (except Allah) is a liar." Let us have a cursory glance at this tradition: First, some names from the chain of its narrators are omitted. Secondly, it is against the previously mentioned traditions that say that the Prophet prayed for him to be given the knowledge of interpretation, and against his own claim that he had this knowledge. Thirdly, it is against the clear import of the Qur'an that interpretation is something other than the meaning of the ambiguous. What is, then, the reply to the question asked in the beginning? Does anyone, other

than Allah, know the interpretation of the Qur'an? The answer is: Yes, the Qur'an proves the possibility of the knowledge of its interpretation to someone other than Allah; although this verse does not prove it. Let us explain the second statement first. The context shows the theme of this verse: It wants to say that the Book is divided in two categories - the decisive and the ambiguous - and also the people are of two types: there is a group which, because of perversity of hearts, seeks to follow the ambiguous verses; and there is another group that is firmly rooted in knowledge and therefore follows the decisive verses and believes in the ambiguous ones. It is clear, in this light, that the phrase, "those who are firmly rooted in knowledge", is used here primarily to describe their good faith and behavior vis-a-vis the Qur'an, and to extol their virtue in contrast to those in whose hearts there is perversity. The sentence aims at nothing else. And there is no reason, so far as this verse is concerned, to join those who are firmly rooted in knowledge, with Allah, in knowledge of the Book's interpretation. The arguments put forward in this respect are defective, as we have shown above. In short, the restriction, "none knows its interpretation except Allah", remains valid, without any opposing or qualifying clause - there is no conjunction, exception or qualification in this absolute statement. Therefore, so far as this verse is concerned, the knowledge of the Qur'an's interpretation is reserved for Allah. Nevertheless, there may be other proofs to show that someone, other than Allah, may be knowing this interpretation. There are in the Qur'an instances in which an absolute restriction of one verse has been qualified by another. Take the example of the knowledge of the unseen. The Qur'an has declared in many verses that it is confined to Allah: Say: "No one in the heavens and the earth knows the unseen but Allah" (27:65). Say: "The unseen is only for Allah" (10: 20). And with Him are the keys of the unseen - none knows them but He (6:59). And after all these restricting statements, comes the following verse: The Knower of the unseen! so He does not reveal His secrets to any, except to him whom He chooses of an apostle" (72:26-27). This verse clearly says that some persons other than Allah, that is, the chosen

apostles, are given the knowledge of the unseen. Now time has come to discuss the first statement: Other verses of the Qur'an prove that it is possible for someone, other than Allah, to have the knowledge of the Qur'an's interpretation: As repeatedly explained, interpretation is a real fact existing outside imagination, and the meaning of the verse has the same relation with it as a proverb has with its purpose and purport. Interpretation is not the meaning of the verse; rather it transpires through that meaning - a special sort of transpiration. There is a proverb in Arabic used when someone intends to do a work but has already destroyed its means: ''In summer you spoiled the milk." When it is used, its literal meaning (a woman's spoiling the milk in summer) does not fit the occasion, yet it presents a clear picture before the eyes of the audience, and that picture leads to the purpose of the talk. The same is the case of the interpretation. There is a spiritual reality which is the main objective of ordaining a law, or basic aim of describing a Divine Attribute; there is an actual significance to which a Qur'anic story refers. That spiritual reality or actual significance is not seen in the words or the meaning of the verse - that order, prohibition, explanation, or narration does not mention that spiritual reality or actual significance in its words. But it transpires from that order etc., because the order etc., is founded on it. We may as well say that the order or story etc., points to that spiritual reality or significance. A man tells his servant: "Give me water to drink." This order emanates from the natural instinct of man to perfect his existence. It is this basic reality that demands preservation of self; this in its turn arranges to replace what is used up in the body; this requires replenishment with food and drink; this need is announced through hunger and thirst; thirst demands satiation, which in its turn causes the man to give that order to his servant. The interpretation of the said order, therefore, is the natural instinct of man to perfect his existence. If this reality, this natural instinct, changes for any reason, the order, "Give me water", also would change. Likewise, various societies have some recognized ethical and social norms based on what they think to be good or evil. This in its turn, depends on a set of customs and traditions that are firmly settled in the doer's mind, through heredity and environment. This compound cause is the interpretation of his action and inaction. If those social factors change for any reason, his action and inaction will also change.

A subject - whether it is an order, a story or any other topic - that has an interpretation will certainly change if that interpretation changes. Now ponder on the words of Allah: then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is ambiguous, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation, but none knows its interpretation except Allah. Note that they have been condemned because they try to give that verse their own interpretation which is not the real one; and this misinterpretation causes misguidance and makes people go astray. Had they followed its true interpretation then it could not be condemned. They would have followed truth and reality, it would have led them to the relevant decisive verses, and it would have been a praiseworthy act. Now it is clear that the interpretations of the Qur'an are the facts actually existing outside imagination; the Qur'anic verses - its spiritual realities, laws and stories are based upon them; if supposedly any of those facts changes for any reason, the relevant verses would also surely change. This fits perfectly the purport of the verse: (We swear) by the Book that makes manifest (the truth), surely We have made it an Arabic Qur'an so that you may understand. And surely it is in the original of the Book with Us, truly elevated, full of wisdom (43:2-4). This verse shows that the Qur'an, when it was with Allah, was too elevated to be comprehended by human understanding; too precise and firm to admit any break or fragmentation. But Allah, because of His mercy, made it into a Book to be recited, and clothed it with Arabic language, so that people may understand what they could not comprehend as long as it was in the original, or basis, of the Book. This original or basis of the Book has been mentioned in these verses: Allah effaces what He pleases and establishes (likewise), and with Him is the basis of the Book (13:39); Nay! it is a glorious Qur'an, in a guarded tablet (85:21-22). And in a general way the following verse also proves it: (This is) a Book, whose verses were confirmed (or, made decisive), then they were divided, from one Wise, All-aware (11:1). The confirmation and decisiveness refers to its condition when it was with Allah without any fragmentation or break, and the division refers to that state when it was made into chapters and verses and was revealed to the Prophet. This last condition (division), which is based on the first (confirmation), is mentioned in the verse: And a Qur'an which We revealed in portions so that you may read it to the people by slow degrees, and We sent it down (i.e., revealed it) in portions (17:106). It is clear that the Qur'an, in its

original, was undivided, then it was made into portions and sent down piecemeal and revealed gradually. The above statement does not mean that the whole Qur'an, when it was with Allah, was arranged in chapters and verses, a sort of a book written and bound, and then it was divided into pieces and sent to the Prophet a little bit at a time, so that he might read to the people by slow degrees, as a teacher divides a book in portions and teaches the student every day a portion, according to his mental capacity. There is a basic difference between revealing the Qur'an to the Prophet in portions and teaching a student a book, piece by piece. The verses were revealed according to the events that had a bearing on their revelation. But there is no such thing in teaching of a student. Various pieces that are to be taught to a student may be, and are, gathered and put together in a book form beforehand; then the teacher teaches a piece or a portion every day, as he thinks fit. But it cannot be said about many Qur'anic verses, such as the following: so forgive them and pass over them (5:13); fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you (9:123); Allah has surely heard the plea of her who pleads with you about her husband and complains to Allah (58:1); Take alms out of their wealth, you would cleanse them and purify them thereby (9:103); there are numerous such verses. It is not possible to ignore the reasons and occasions that resulted in their revelation; one cannot arbitrarily say that this or that verse was revealed in the earlier or later days of the Call, discarding the reasons of its revelation. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Qur'an was with Allah in chapters and verses, as we know it today. And it shows that the "Qur'an" mentioned in the verse, "And a Qur'an which We revealed in portions", refers to a Qur'an other than this one which is made of chapters and verses. What one understands from the above verses, is that there is something, beyond this Qur'an which is read and understood by us. And that "something" has the same relation with this Qur'an as the spirit has with the body, or as the significance of a proverb has with that proverb. It is that spirit of this Qur'an which is called by Allah as: the confirmed (or wise) Book (10:1). The Qur'anic teachings and meanings depend upon it. That spirit of the Qur'an is not made of words or words' meanings. The above-mentioned characteristics of the spirit of the Qur'an are the same as those of the "interpretation" of the Qur'an. The above discourse makes it even clearer; and makes us realize why it is said that the interpretation of the Qur'an cannot be even touched by common minds and unclean spirits.

Then Allah says: Most surely it is an honored Qur'an, in a Book that is hidden; none do touch it save the purified ones (56:77-79). These verses clearly say that the purified servants of Allah do touch the honored Book which is hidden and protected from any change; minds cannot reach it, because that also would be a sort of a change. Anyhow, the purified ones do touch it - the only meaning of the words - "touch" in this context is that they know it and understand it. Also, it is known that this hidden Book is the same "basis of the Book" and "original of the Book" mentioned in the verses: Allah effaces what He pleases and establishes (likewise), and with Him is the basis of the Book (13:39); and surely it is in the original of the Book with Us, truly elevated, full of wisdom (43:4). Those are the people whose heart are purified; and this purification emanates from none other than Allah, because He has attributed this purifying to Himself: Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O People of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying (33:33);... but He intends to purify you (5:6). Wherever in the Qur'an, the spiritual purification is mentioned Allah has attributed it to Himself or to His permission. What is this purity? It is removal of impurity and uncleanness from the heart. What is meant by "heart" in this context? It is the means of perception, understanding and will. The purity of heart, then, is the purity of the soul in knowledge and belief as well as in will. Thus, the heart remains firm in its true beliefs, without any doubt or confusion; and this firmness makes it steadfast in following and acting upon that true belief and knowledge, obeying the commandments of Allah, without deviating to the path of desire, without breaking the covenant of knowledge. Such a man is said to be firmly rooted in knowledge. Because the same are the characteristics, described by Allah, of those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. Allah has praised them that they are rightly guided and steadfastly firm on what they know; that there is no perversity in their hearts and they do not seek to mislead the people. These are the same characteristics as of the purified ones. It means that the purified ones are firmly rooted in knowledge. But there is a fine distinction that should not be overlooked. What has been proved above is this: The purified ones know the interpretation of the Qur'an; and it is a concomitant of their purity that they are also firmly rooted in knowledge - because that purification is attributed to Allah Who cannot fail in what He intends. But it does not mean that the knowledge of the Qur'anic interpretation is given to them because of their being firmly rooted in knowledge. In other words, the firmly rooted knowledge is not the cause of their knowledge of the Qur'anic interpretation, because the verse does not prove it; rather it may be inferred from

its context that they were not conversant with that interpretation: "(they) say: 'We believe in it, it is all from our Lord'. Moreover, Allah has praised some of the people of the Book that they were firmly rooted in knowledge, and has extolled them for their acceptance of true faith and good deeds; and still it does not show that they knew the interpretation of the Book. The relevant verse is as follows: But those firmly rooted in knowledge among them as well as the believers believe in what has been sent down to you and what has been sent down before you « (4:162). Also, it should be noted that the verse: None do touch it save the purified ones (56:79), proves only that the purified ones "touch" the hidden Book; in other words, they know the interpretation of the Qur'an to a certain extent. But it does not say that they have comprehensive knowledge of its complete interpretation, or that they are not unacquainted of any portion of its interpretation at any time. The verse is silent on this. matter. If it is to be proved, some other evidence should be brought for it. G"0
./å  
,

 One of the objections leveled against the Qur'an is the one based on the presence of the ambiguous verses in it. They say: The Muslims claim that whatever the mankind would need for its guidance up to the Day of Resurrection is in the Qur'an; that it is a decisive word that distinguishes between truth and falsehood. And then we see that every group, among the innumerable Muslim sects, relies on the Qur'an to prove the correctness of its beliefs and actions. It would not have been possible if there were no ambiguity in its verses. Had this Book been made clear and kept free from this maze of ambiguous verses, it would have served its purpose in a better way, and there would not have been any chance of controversy and perversity. The Muslims have variously replied to this objection; some of the replies are patently absurd and foolish. For example: "The presence of ambiguous verses makes it hard to get to the truth, and entails intense search and research. This makes the true believer eligible to better and greater reward!" "Had it clearly supported a certain sect, all other sects would have left it unread and unstudied. It is because of the ambiguous verses that all of them look into, and ponder on it; and thus there remains a possibility that they would see the right path

and follow it." "The ambiguous verses have made it necessary to seek support of one's views from rational arguments. Thus, these verses take the Muslims out of the darkness of blind following into the light of contemplation and research." "The presence of such verses compelled the Muslims to argue about their various interpretations; and this is in its turn led them to master various branches of knowledge, like language, conjugation, syntax, and fundamentals of jurisprudence!" Such replies do not merit any comment. There are three other replies which we append below with our comments: ! The Qur'an contains ambiguous verses, so that the hearts may be purified by believing in them. Had all the verses been distinct, decisive and clear - about which nobody could have any doubt - believing in them would have not been a meaningful and significant thing; it would have not entailed surrender to the words of Allah and submission to His apostles. å
! Submission is the reaction of a weaker person in front of a stronger force. A man surrenders before a thing, the greatness of which he comprehends; or before a thing that is beyond his comprehension, and with whose greatness he is completely overwhelmed; like the power, greatness and other Attributes of Allah when man tries to understand them, he feels stunned and bewildered. But why should he submit to a thing which, although beyond his comprehension, seems to him within his grasp? If a man mistakenly believes that he knows the interpretation of an ambiguous verse (although in fact he does not know it), he will never submit himself to it nor will he surrender before its greatness. %
 $! Ambiguous verses were revealed to motivate the minds to meditate and research. Had all the verses been distinct there would not have been any need for mental exercise and the power of understanding would have withered away. And understanding is the most precious element of human life; it must be nourished and developed for the sake of human perfection. å
! Allah has ordered the man to meditate and ponder on the signs found in the universe and in the man himself - this exhortation is sometimes phrased in general terms and often with reference to particular subjects, like the creation of

the heavens, the earth, the mountains, the trees, the animals and the human beings; the difference in colors and languages of mankind etc. He has called him to think and meditate, to walk in the earth and take lesson from the previous nations' affairs. He has forcefully urged them to apply the minds to the wonders of the world and to think hard. And He has extolled knowledge and cognition in the best terms. Was not all this enough for sharpening the mind and intensifying the intelligence? Was there any further need of sending down ambiguous verses - to trap the minds and ensnare the intellect?  $! The prophets were sent to all the people - the average ones and the above average, the intelligent and the dull, the learned and the ignorant. Some realities and ideas cannot be explained in plain language. Such subjects must necessarily be described in a language clothed with allegory and metaphor. Only the learned, intelligent and the above average persons will be able to understand it; common people must necessarily be told to believe in it and leave the matter to Allah. å
! The Book, according to the verse under discussion, contains some ambiguous verses, and some decisive ones which are the basis of the Book, and which do explain the ambiguous verses when they are returned to them (decisive ones). In other words, the ambiguous verses do not contain any ideas other than those which may be clarified by the decisive ones. And it leaves the question still unanswered: What is the use of the ambiguous verses when all their meanings are clearly described by the decisive ones? The exegete, who wrote this reply, seems a bit confused. He has divided the meanings of the Qur'an into two mutually exclusive groups: Meanings that may be understood by one and all (and they are the meanings of the decisive verses), and those that cannot be understood except by some special people (and they are the connotations of the ambiguous ones). If we accept this classification, then the ambiguous verses shall not be returned to the decisive ones - but it is against the clear declarations of the Qur'an that its verses explain each other. If no reply is free from defect, then what is the answer to the question given in the beginning? The fact is that the presence of ambiguous verses is necessary in the Qur'an, and it has resulted from the existence of the interpretation. When we use the word, "interpretation", we refer to its true connotation explained under the third heading.

Various ambiguous verses, when compared with each other, lead to the said interpretation. To understand this statement, one should first ponder on the style of the Qur'an, the factors on which the Divine teachings are based, and the ultimate aim of the revelation. We may describe it as following:1. Allah has said that there is an interpretation for His Book. All the Qur'anic realities, laws and teachings move around that interpretation. But the said interpretation is a sublime reality; minds cannot grasp it; intelligence cannot reach it; and imagination cannot perceive it. The only exception is of those purified souls from whom Allah has removed every impurity; only they can touch it. It is the ultimate that Allah demands from human beings - that they should answer His call to acquire the real knowledge of His Book. This Book has the explanation of everything, and the key to its secrets is the Divine Purification. Allah says: Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you (5:7). In other words, the ultimate aim of ordination of the shari'ah is the said Divine Purification. This human perfection, like other ideals, is not attained except by a few special persons, although the Call is addressed to all. The religious training creates purity in various degrees in various people. Some reach its highest point, some to various points in between. It is like the piety (i.e., fear of Allah) to which Islam invites: ...fear Allah as is due to Him:. (3:102). But only a handful of believers acquire perfect piety; others remain behind them, and a third band behind the second, and so on. It happens because people differ in their aptitudes and understanding. The same is the case with social norms. The society expects every member to reach the zenith of all desirable characteristics, like knowledge, industry, riches, comfort etc. - but only a few attain this goal; others remain behind at various points in the way, because of difference in their abilities. Although society never remains without some individuals who attain the highest possible rank in all perfection, not everyone reaches there. 2. The Qur'an declares that the only way by which a man can reach this destination is to know himself, by acquiring true knowledge and acting upon it. On the side of knowledge, he should be taught the realities about his beginning and end as well as about what is between these two points; then he may truly know himself, in the

context of all relevant realities. On the side of action, he should be made to follow the social rules - the rules that would make him live a good social life, and would not hinder him from the pursuit of knowledge and contemplation; then he should be told to perform rites of Divine Worship -these rites, if performed regularly, draw the soul towards the Creator, help the heart in concentrating on one's beginning and end, and bring it nearer to the spiritual perfection and purity, keeping it clean from the filth and dirt of materialism. First study the verse: To Him do ascend the good words; and the good deed lifts them up (35:10). Then add to it the following, among other such verses:Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you and that He may complete His favor on you «(5:7). O you who believe! take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right way (5:105). Allah will exalt those of you who believe and those who are given knowledge, in high degrees (58:11). Then you will clearly see what was the aim of Allah in sending down the religion and guiding the man to it, and appreciate the way He used for this guidance. Through all this, we reach to an important conclusion: The social laws of Islam are the stepping stones for the rites of Divine Worship, which in their turn lead the man to the knowledge of Allah and of His Signs. Even a minor infringement of, and change or alteration in, these social laws would disturb and deflect the commandments concerning Divine Worship; and that in its turn would disrupt the man's knowledge of Allah. It is a clear conclusion; and the experience shows its truth. If you ponder on the manner in which corruption stealthily crept into Islamic affairs, and find out how it began and where it has reached, you will see that it began with social laws, then surreptitiously it contaminated the rites of worship and ended with the rejection of the spiritual realities and man's knowledge of Allah. Also, it was described earlier that the misleading began with following the ambiguous verses, seeking to interpret them according to the people's own liking.

3. Religious guidance is based on two pillars: Prohibition of blind following, and progress of knowledge among the religionists to the furthest limit. It is in conformity with the ultimate goal of Islam, that is, the knowledge. There is not a single Divine Book, nor a single religion, that puts so much emphasis on knowledge, and so forcefully exhorts its followers to seek it to the farthest corners of the world as Islam does. That is why the Qur'an explains first, the spiritual realities, and then shows the relation of its practical laws to those realities. It tells the man that he exists because Allah has created him by His own power; and has appointed some intermediate agents for his creation and survival, like the angels, the skies, the earth, the sun, the moon, the stars, the vegetables, the animals and, in short, the time and the space. Now he is being irresistibly driven towards his returning place and time; striving hard to reach his Lord to meet Him; then he shall be recompensed for what he has done - either to the paradise or to the hell. This is the first set of the spiritual knowledge. Then the Qur'an teaches him which deeds would lead him to the felicity of the paradise, and which to the infelicity of the hell. In other words, it teaches him the rules of Divine Worship and the social laws. This is the second set of that knowledge. Then it makes him understand that these laws and commandments lead to the bliss in the next world. In other words, it tells him that the second set is related to the first; that these laws have been ordained for his own benefit, as they contain his good of this world as of the next. This is the third set. The second set is like the preliminary; the first is like its conclusion; and the, third is like the binding cord that joins the second set with the first. The verses describing all these sets are numerous and clear in their meaning; and it is not necessary to quote them here. 4. People, generally, do not comprehend what cannot be perceived by the five senses; they do not understand ideas and realities beyond the limit of matter and nature. And those who train their minds through academic exercises to understand abstract ideas and spiritual meanings, are not all on the same level -each attains a certain degree of intellectual development and cannot understand that which is beyond it. This phenomenon causes sharp divergence in their perception of spiritual and metaphysical subjects. This vast difference is a fact that none can deny.

When we want to explain to someone a certain new idea we can do so only with the help of his previously acquired knowledge. If his perception is limited to the natural phenomena, that new idea can only be explained within the framework of that limited understanding. For example, if one wants to explain the "taste" of marriage to a minor child, one could only say that it was sweet like honey. And if that person has some advanced intellectual capacity, we may explain those spiritual realities to the extent of his ability. Also, it should be understood that the religious guidance is not for a special group; it is for all the people. 5. These two factors - the difference in people's understanding and the fact that religious guidance is meant for all the people - together with the existence of the interpretation for the Qur'an, made it necessary that the spiritual realities be described in the words and phrases akin to proverbs and simile. It takes what the man already knows and uses it, because of a certain similarity, to create a picture of what he does not know. As a commodity is weighed with a stone or iron weight - there is no resemblance between the stone or iron and that commodity in form or substance, mass or volume, kind or species; the only similarity is in weight. The Qur'an has, in the verses quoted earlier (e.g., Surely We have made it an Arabic Qur'an, so that you may understand. And surely it is in the original of the Book with Us, truly elevated, full of wisdom, (43:3-4) has hinted to this fact. But it has not stopped there. It has described it clearly with the help of a parable concerning truth and falsehood; He sends down water from the heavens, then the valleys flow according to their measure, and the torrent bears along the swelling form, and from what they melt in the fire for the sake of (making) ornaments or apparatus arises a scum like it; thus does Allah compare truth and falsehood; then as for the scum, it passes away as a worthless thing; and as for that which profits the people, it remains in the earth; thus does Allah set forth parables (13:17). This parable is as much true about Allah's action as it is about His word. His action, like His word, is meant for truth; but both are accompanied by some unintended things. Those unintended things temporarily cover, and come above, the intended truth; but they soon go away; the truth remains and survives to benefit the people, and the scum is removed by another truth. The above-mentioned phenomenon is a mirror of the ambiguous verses. Such a verse contains a true meaning that is actually intended; but it is accompanied by

another unintended meaning that hides the intended one and races to the minds before it. But soon it is overcome and removed by another truth (a decisive verse) that identifies the true meaning, and erases the unintended one, although it had temporarily gained the upper hand. It is so that the truth is shown to be truth by His words, and falsehood is seen to be falsehood, even though the guilty may be averse to it. This explanation shows how the parable fits the Divine words; it may in the same manner be applied to His actions. The parable shows that the Divine realities and spiritual knowledge are like the water which Allah sends down from the heavens. At that time it is water, in the pure sense of the word, unencumbered with any other condition. Then it starts flowing in the valleys; and now it takes the shape of the watercourse - a wide river, a narrow stream and so on. These shapes and measures are established facts, they are not imaginary things. (In this respect they resemble the benefits of the rules of the shari'ah - we have said that they are the binding cord that connect those rules with the spiritual truths. This characteristic of the rules is an established fact; it does not depend on verbal description.) Those rules. in the course of their flow, are often accompanied by swelling foam that appears for a time being and then vanishes. An example may be given of an abrogated verse; in the nature of thing it should have remained in force permanently, but another verse comes along, abrogates it, and puts another rule in its place. This development also is an established fact; it does not matter whether this religious reality has been clothed with words. The spiritual realities and metaphysical ideas, inasmuch as they are placed in the containers of the words, take the shape of those containers; and are fettered with the demands of the word and the language - though originally they had no such limitation or restraint. These words are true and fact, because they were chosen by the truthful Speaker to convey His message. Yet they are like a similitude that represents the real meaning -the meaning that is unfettered by the words, unencumbered by the shapes of these containers. Therefore, the words pass through the minds of the hearers and unintended meanings surround them and ride high above them. It happens because the minds look at the words in the light of their previously acquired ideas. This mostly happens about those realities that are not familiar to common minds, like the spiritual facts, the real reason for which a certain rule was ordained and so on. But so far as the rules themselves are concerned, there occurs no change, because invariably always they talk about what

is within the sphere of man's own activities, and is, therefore, familiar to him. This discourse shows that ambiguous verses are ambiguous because they contain the spiritual realities and not the rules of religion and shariah. 6. Now we have reached the stage where we may explain why the presence of ambiguous verses was necessary in the Qur'an. The verbal expressions of the Qur'an are like similitude to the sublime Divine realities. Those realities have been brought down, in these verses, to the level of common minds. An average mind does not perceive except the natural phenomena; it cannot comprehend the abstract Divine realities unless they are put in the mould of concrete expressions. When pure spiritual facts are expressed in terms of body and matter, either of the two things may happen - both of them dangerous: a) The mind may stop at those material expressions, taking them to mean natural phenomena. It will thus fail to see the reality beyond those expressions. It will, in short, take a proverb in its literal sense, not knowing that it signifies something else; and that that something is often not shown by its letters. Thus the intended meaning will be neglected. The minds will not try to look behind the screen of the words, as it will not know that it has missed anything. b) If the mind realizes that the verse is a sort of a similitude and tries to see beyond the curtain of the words, by removing from it unwanted elements that have no bearing on its intended significance, then there is a danger that it may discard some important element or leave intact some unnecessary one. There is an Arabic proverb: "In the morning, the travelers appreciate the previous night's journey." Because we know the story behind this saying, when we hear it, we dispense with all its surrounding details, like the morning, the travelers and the previous nights' journey. What we understand from the proverb is this: A work is appreciated only when it is completed and its good results begin to appear; but so long as the man is engaged in that work and is undergoing hardships in that activity he does not like it If we did not know the story, and stopped at the literal meaning of the proverb, we would not know its significance, and the proverb would turn into a proposition or news. On the other hand, if we did not know the story but realized that it was a proverb, we would not know how much of it should be discarded and what was its true

significance. There is only one way to avoid these two dangers, and that is to express that one significance in various proverbs, molding each in a different mould - one proverb would contain some details that would be missing from the other, and the former would not have some details of the latter, and so on. In this way, those sentences would, through comparison and action and reaction, clarify each other and all together would show their true significance. First, the hearer, on hearing various expressions, would realize that they were not used in their literal sense; they were like the similitude describing an abstract idea in the moulds of various concrete expressions. Thereafter, he would be in a position to know which details were to be discarded and which to be retained - because the essential factors would be present in every sentence, while unnecessary ones would be missing from one or the other. This device to explain difficult ideas and complicated thoughts is not peculiar to the Qur'an. It is found in every language, every nation and every place. Man, by his nature, knows that if only one story, proverb or similitude is given to illustrate an abstract idea, unessential details would confuse the minds, and might convey to them a wrong meaning. Therefore, he tries to make the audience understand his idea with the help of a lot of stories and varied similitude. So that they may distinguish the true significance from the unnecessary details. It is now crystal clear that it was necessary - nay, essential - that the Qur'an should contain ambiguous verses; and that that ambiguousness should be removed with the help of other unambiguous verses. Those who object on the presence of such verses in the Qur'an do not know what they are talking about. "å  This discourse on ambiguous and decisive verses and the Qur'anic interpretation has become a bit lengthy. But through it, we have been able to clarify the following ten points:  ! The Qur'an contains two kinds of verses, the decisive and the ambiguous. If a verse, seen alone, is capable of more than one meaning, it is ambiguous; otherwise, it is decisive. %
 $! The whole Qur'an, with all its decisive and ambiguous verses, has its interpretation. That interpretation is not the connotation of its words; it is an actually existing reality; a reality that has the same relation with the knowledge,

facts and ideas mentioned in the Qur'an, as the significance of a proverb has with that proverb. All the Qur'anic knowledge is like a similitude for the Qur'anic interpretation that is with Allah.  $! The interpretation may be known to the purified servants of Allah; they are the ones who are also firmly rooted in knowledge.  ! It has been said in the second conclusion that the Qur'anic knowledge and ideas are like a similitude for the Qur'anic interpretation. Now, we come to a further lower level, that is, the Qur'anic words and expressions. These words and expressions, in their turn, are like a similitude to the above mentioned Qur'anic knowledge, facts, and ideas. ! It was as essential for the Qur'an to include some ambiguous verses, as it was to have some decisive ones. %#! The decisive verses are the basis of the Book, to which the ambiguous ones are returned, that is, the latter are explained with the help of the former. %
+
! Decisiveness and ambiguousness are relative qualities. The same verse may be decisive in one context and ambiguous in another. Also, it may be decisive in comparison to one verse and ambiguous in relation to the other. There is no absolutely ambiguous verse in the Qur'an; although there is no reason why one or more verses may not be decisive. Ô,! It is essential that the verses of the Qur'an should explain each other. ) ! The meaning of the Qur'an has various grades. They are placed vertically one behind the other. They are not ranked side by side, horizontally; otherwise, it would entail the use of one word in more than one meaning - and it is not permissible. Nor are they like real and metaphorical meanings; nor like various adjunct meanings attached to a real one. Rather, they are all various grades of the one real meaning -thus, they all are its real meanings, and the peoples' minds comprehend its various grades, according to their intellectual and spiritual capacity. This statement requires some elaboration: Allah has said: Fear Allah as is due to Him (3:102). The word, "at-taqwa" (piety,

fear of Allah), denotes abstaining from what Allah has forbidden and doing what He has ordered. As the verse shows, the highest grade of piety is the one mentioned therein: "as is due to Allah". By inference, there must be other lower grades. "Piety", or in other words, "good deeds", are therefore of various grades, one above the other. Also, He says: Is then he who follows the pleasure of Allah like him who has brought upon himself the wrath from Allah, and whose abode is hell? And it is an evil destination. They are of (diverse) grades with Allah, and Allah sees what they do (3:162-163). It shows that all deeds - good and evil alike - are of various grades and ranks. That the diverse grades mentioned in the verse refer to the deeds, is clear from the concluding sentence, "and Allah sees what they do". Two more verses are as follows: -And for all are grades according to what they did, and so that He may pay them back fully their deeds and they shall not be dealt with unjustly (46:19). And all have grades according to what they do; and your Lord is not heedless of what they do (6:132). There are many verses of this tenor, and among them are those that show that the grades of the paradise and depths of the hell are based on the grades and degrees of the good and bad deeds respectively. It is known that action, of whatever kind it may be, emanates from knowledge, that is, from the relevant conviction of the heart. That is why Allah has proved infidelity of the Jews, evil intentions of the polytheists, and duplicity of the hypocrites from their actions; as the belief and faith of the prophets and the believers has been proved from their actions. The verses having this semantic flow are very numerous and there is no need to quote them here. Every action emanates from a relevant knowledge and demonstrates it. And then that action enhances that relevant knowledge and belief and makes it firmly settled in the mind and soul. As Allah says:And (as for) those who strive hard for Us, We will most certainly guide them onto Our ways; and Allah is most surely with the doers of good (29:69).

And worship thou thy Lord until there comes to you the certainty (or, that which is certain) (15:99). Then evil was the end of those who did evil, because they rejected the signs of Allah and used to mock them (30:10). So He made hypocrisy to follow as a consequence in their hearts till the day when they shall meet Him because they failed to perform towards Allah what they had promised with Him and because they told lies (9:77). There are a lot of verses of this significance; and they show that every action good or bad - creates knowledge or ignorance (i.e., wrong knowledge) respectively. There is a verse that contains the gist of this topic about good deeds and useful knowledge: To Him do ascend the good words; and the good deed lifts them up (35:10). It clearly says that the good word, that is, true belief, ascends to Allah and brings the believers nearer to Him; and the good deeds lifts this knowledge and belief up. The ascension of knowledge and belief depends on their purity from doubt and confusion; and on undisturbed attention of the soul towards Allah. The more intense this purity, the higher the reach of that knowledge and belief. The words used in the verse hint to this fact: The good words do ascend, and the good deeds do lift them up. Ascension is opposite of dissension, and lifting up is opposite of putting down. When a thing moves from a lower to a higher level it is described in these two terms that look at the two points of the movement. It is said to be ascending, because it moves towards the higher level, coming nearer to it; and is said to be rising or lifting up, because it leaves the lower place moving away from it. The good deeds lift the man up and remove him away from this transient world and its base desires. They do not let him ensnare himself in the trinkets of this material life, or to go and get lost in the maze of the unenduring and ever-changing "knowledge". The more the good deeds lift him up, the higher his good words do ascend, and purer becomes his spiritual knowledge, farther from the impurities of confusion, doubt and imagination.

The good deeds are of diverse grades and degrees; and every grade lifts the good words and creates the knowledge of Divine realities according to its own strength and condition. The same details are true, in reverse, for the evil deeds and bad words, that is, wrong knowledge. Evil deeds sink down the man into the yawning depths of ignorance, hypocrisy and infidelity. This subject was discussed in short in the Commentary of the verse, Guide us to the straight path (1:6). Now, it is clear from above that people are of different grades and ranks, so far as their nearness or distance from Allah is concerned. It all depends on their good or evil deeds and good or evil words, that is, knowledge. It goes without saying that what people of a certain grade would understand from a Divine Speech would be quite different from what those on a higher or lower level would understand from the same. That is what we mean when we say that the Qur'an has various meanings, all ranked vertically one behind the other. Allah has mentioned in the Qur'an various categories of His servants, and has reserved for each a special kind of knowledge and cognition. For example:a) Those who are freed (from sins) - they have been given knowledge of the attributes of their Lord: Hallowed be Allah, from what they ascribe, except the servants of Allah, freed (from sins) (37:159 - 160). They have also been given some other knowledge, which we shall describe, Allah willing, in some other place. b) Those who are sure - they have the distinction. of being shown the kingdom of the heavens and the earth: And thus did We show Ibrahim the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and that he might be of those who are sure (6:75). c) Those who turn to Him again and again - they have been favored with minding: ...and none minds but he who turns (to Him) again and again (40:13). d) The learned ones - they understand the parables of the Qur'an: And these examples, We set them forth for the people, and none understand them but the learned (29:43). They are also the people of understanding who meditate on the Qur'an: Do they not then reflect on the Qur'an? Nay, on the hearts there are locks (47:24); Do they not then meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy (4:82). The three verses point to the same meaning - those who understand and meditate on the

Qur'an, know the true meaning of the ambiguous verses returning them to the decisive ones. e) The purified ones -- they have the special distinction of the knowledge of the interpretation of the Book: Most surely it is an honored Qur'an, in a Book that is hidden; none do touch it save the purified ones (56:77-79). f) The friends of Allah - they are the people submerged in the love of Allah; they are inattentive to everything other than Allah; that is why they are afraid of nothing and grieve for nothing: Now surely the friends of Allah - they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve (10:62). Likewise, there are those who are near to Allah, the chosen ones, the truthful ones, the good ones and the believers. Each of these groups has a special kind of knowledge and perception reserved to it; and we shall describe them under relevant verses. Face to face with these, are the grades of evil and falsehood, every grade having a peculiar type of misinformation and ignorance. The people of those grades are called unbelievers, sinners, unjust and so on. They are inclined to misinterpret the signs of Allah, and not to grasp the spiritual realities and their knowledge. For the sake of brevity, the verses are not given here. 
! The Qur'anic verses have the capacity to be applied wherever their meanings come true. A verse is not confined to the event or circumstances in which it was revealed. It covers all situations that are akin to the circumstances of its revelation. In this respect also they are like the proverbs that are not restricted to their original occasion, but are applied to all similar situations. The principle is called the "flow of the Qur'an", of which a short description was written in the beginning of the first volume.  $  It is written in at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashl: Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) was asked about the decisive and the ambigous verses. He said: "The decisive is that which is acted upon; and the ambiguous is that which is doubtful for the one who is ignorant of it." The author says: There is a hint in the last sentence that the knowledge of the meaning of the ambiguous verse is possible to him who is not ignorant of it.

The same book quotes the same Imam as saying: "The Qur'an is decisive and ambiguous. As for the decisive, you believe in it, act upon it and submit to it; and as for the ambiguous, you believe in it but do not act upon it. And it is the word of Allah, Mighty and Great is He: then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is ambiguous, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation, but none knows its interpretation except Allah; and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: 'We believe in it, it is all from our Lord.' And those who are firmly rooted in knowledge are the progeny of Muhammad (s.a.w.s.)." The author says: We shall discuss the last sentence later. The same book quotes Mas'adah ibn Sadaqah as saying: "I asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) dbout the abrogating (verse), and the abrogated, and the decisive and ambiguous (ones). He said: 'The abrogating is the firm (verse) that is acted upon; and the abrogated is the one that was acted upon and then came the verse that abrogated it; and the ambiguous is the one that is doubtful to him who is ignorant of it.'' In another tradition this reply is reported as follows: "The abrogating is the firm (verse); and the abrogated is the one that passed away; and the decisive is the one that is acted upon; and the ambiguous is the one whose one part resembles the other." al-Baqir (a.s.) said, inter alia, in a tradition: "So the abrogated (verses) are among the ambiguous ones." (al-Kdfi) ar-Rida (a.s.) said: "He who returned the ambiguous (part) of the Qur'an to its decisive (part), was guided to the straight path." Then he said: "Verily, there is ambiguous in our traditions, like the ambiguous of the Qur'an; therefore, return its ambiguous to its decisive, and do not follow its ambiguous, lest you go astray." ('Uyunu 'l-akhbdr) The author says: All the above-mentioned traditions explain the term "ambiguous" in nearly the same way. All of them support our earlier statement that the verses' ambiguousness may be removed by explaining them in the light of the decisive verses. Also, it was explained why the abrogated verse was counted among the ambiguous: It is because it seems to promulgate a perpetual law and then comes the abrogating verse and shows that its "perpetuity" is cut short. The word of the Imam, that there was ambiguous in their traditions like the ambiguous of the Qur'an and decisive like the decisive of the Qur'an, is supported by many other traditions of Ahlulbayt (a.s.), that are nearly al-mutawdtir. Reason also supports it. Their traditions deal with the same subjects that are described in the Qur'an; and

ambiguousness is the characteristic of those subjects inasmuch as they are clothed with the words; it is not a characteristic of the word, per se. In short, ambiguousness happens because the verses are like the parables of the sublime spiritual facts. And this factor is equally present in the traditions. Therefore, like the Qur'an, the traditions also are ambiguous and decisive. And it has been narrated that the Prophet said: "We, the group of the prophets, have been ordered to talk with the people according to the capacity of their understanding." It is narrated in at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi from Ja'far ibn Muhammad from his father (peace be on them both) that a man said to Amiru '1-mu'miriin (a.s.): "Will you describe to us our Lord, so that we may love and know Him more." Hearing it, he became angry and delivered a sermon, in which he said: "You should stick, O servant of Allah: to what the Qur'an has shown you about His attributes, and the Apostle has guided you about His knowledge; and seek illumination from the light of his guidance, because it is a bounty and a wisdom that you have been given. Therefore, accept what you have been given and be of the grateful ones. And whatever task Satan imposes on you, which neither the Book has imposed upon you nor the traditions of the Apostle and the (truly) guiding Imams have ordered you (to know), then entrust its knowledge to Allah; and do not (try to) measure the greatness of Allah. And know, O servant of Allah! that those who are firmly rooted in knowledge are those whom Allah has kept above the need of crashing into the screens put before the unseen; so they took it upon themselves to acknowledge all that they were unaware of its explanation, from the unseen that is screened off, and they id: 'We believe in it, it is all from our Lord.' And Allah has praised (them for) their acknowledging their inability to get that which their knowledge had not encompassed. And when they refrained from going into what Allah had not ordered them to, search, Allah called this refraining as being firmly rooted in knowledge. Therefore, be content with this much, and do not measure the greatness of Allah with the measure of your understanding; otherwise, you would be of those who are doomed to perdition." The author says: The sentence, "And know... that those who are firmly rooted in knowledge...", throws further light on the meaning of "and" in the word of Allah, "and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say...".This tradition shows that, according to the Imam, that "and" is not a conjunctive; it starts a new sentence, as we have explained in the Commentary. What this tradition, however, shows is that this verse does not prove that those who are firmly rooted in knowledge know the interpretation of the Qur'an; not that it proves that they do not know the said interpretation. It does not deny the existence of other proofs to show'that they know this interpretation, as we have explained earlier; and some traditions of the

Imams of Ahlulbayt also support it. The words, "are those whom Allah has kept above the need of...", are the predicate of the subject, "those who are firmly rooted ..." The sermon exhorts the enquirer to hold fast to the practice of those who are firmly rooted in knowledge; to confess his ignorance of what he does not know ² in this way he would become one of them. It means that, according to the Imam, those people are firmly rooted in knowledge who hold fast to what they know and do not cross the boundary to what they do not know. "The unseen that is hidden behind the screens" is the intended meaning of the ambiguous verse that is hidden from common minds. That is why the Imam mentioned soon after that they "acknowledge all that they were unaware of its explanation from the unseen..."; note that he did not say, "unaware of its interpretation...". as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "We are those who are firmly rooted in knowledge; and we know its interpretation." (al-Kdfi) The author says: It may appear from this tradition that the Imam took the word "and", in the verse, "and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge", as a conjunctive and that, in addition to Allah, those also knew the Qur'anic interpretation who were firmly rooted in knowledge. But this apparent connotation is not in place, because of the explanation given earlier, and also because of the preceding tradition. Also, it is possible that the Imam used the word "interpretation", as a synonymous for "exegesis"; such usage was common in the early centuries. "...and we know its interpretation": A preceding tradition also had said: "And those who are firmly rooted in knowledge are the progeny of Muhammad". This statement is found in other traditions too. All this is a part of the flow of the Qur'an - applying the verses wherever they fit perfectly. It is reported in al-Kdfi from Hisham ibn al-Hakam that he said: "Abu '1-Hasan Musa ibn Ja'far (a.s.) told me: '...O Hisham! Verily, Allah quoted a good people as saying: Our Lord! Make not our hearts to deviate after Thou hast guided us (aright); and grant us from Thee mercy; surely Thou art the most liberal Giver. They were aware that the hearts could deviate and return to their blindness and perdition. Verily, he did not fear Allah who did not understand from Allah; and (as for him) who did not understand from Allah, his heart would not be resolute with a confirmed knowledge, which he could visualize and whose reality he could find in

his heart. And only that one can be like this whose word confirms his deeds, and whose private (life) is in conformity with his manifest (one); because Allah (Honoured is His name!) did not prove (one's) esoteric (and) hidden wisdom except through its manifestation and declaration.'" The author says:"Verily, he did not fear Allah who did not understand from Allah": It expresses the same idea as the words of Allah: Verily fear Allah only those of His servants who are possessed of knowledge (35:28). The sentence, "and (as for him) who did not understand from Allah, his heart would not be resolute with a confirmed knowledge...", is the best expression to explain the significance of being firmly rooted in knowledge. Unless a reality is thoroughly understood, the loopholes of doubts and confusion would not be closed, and the heart would remain perturbed and perplexed in believing it. But when the understanding is completed and the heart resolutely believes in it, it would not go against the dictates of that firm knowledge; and would not fo'low the temptations of desire. Then there would be no discrepancy between his secret and open lives; what would be in his hearv would manifest itself through his deeds; what he would say would conform with what he does. The words, "and only that one can be like this whose word confirms...", describe the characteristics of those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim and at-Tabaranl have narrated from Anas, Abu Amamah, Wathilah ibn Asqa' and Abu 'd-Darda' that the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) was asked about: those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. He said: "He whose oath is abode by, and his tongue is truthful, and his heart is steadfast, and whose stomach and genitals are chaste, then that is among those who are firmly rooted in knowledge." (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) The author says: This tradition may be explained in terms of the preceding one. al-Baqir (a.s.) said: "Verily, those who are firmly rooted in knowledge are those in whose knowledge there is no discrepancy." (al-Kaff) The author says: This explanation fits the verse perfectly. The verse shows that perversity and deviation of heart is opposite of firmly rooted knowledge. Therefore, there would be no deviation, confusion and discrepancy in the knowledge of those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ahmad, at-Tirmidhi, Ibn Jarir, at-Tabaranl and Ibn Marduwayh

have narrated from Umm Salmah: "Verily, the Apostle of Allah used to say very often in his invocations, 'O Allah, O Turner of the hearts! Keep my heart firm on thy religion. I said: 'O Apostle of Allah! and do the hearts turn?' He-said: 'Yes. Allah has not created a single human being from the progeny of Adam but that his heart is between two of the fingers of Allah; then if He wills, He keeps it straight; and if He wills, He turns it away...'' (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) The author says: This idea has been narrated through several chains from a number of companions, like Jabir, Nawwas ibn Sam'an, 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar and Abu Hurayrah. The well-known are the words of the tradition of Nawwas: "The heart of the son of Adam is between two of the fingers of the Beneficent (Allah)." And the same words have been narrated, as I think, by ash-Sharif ar-Radi in his alMajdzdtu 'n-nabawiyyah. It has been narrated from 'AH (a.s.) that he was asked: "Is there with you anything of the revelation? (i.e., Do you receive any revelation from Allah?) He replied: "No, by Him Who split the grain and created the soul! Except that Allah gives a servant understanding of His Book." The author says: It is one of the most important traditions. The least that may be proved from it is that all that astonishing knowledge that spread from him and which even today stuns the minds, was all derived from the Qur'an. as-Sadiq (a.s.) narrated from his father through his forefathers (peace be on them all) that the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) said: "O people! You are in an interim station, and you are riding on a journey, and the speed with which you are taken away is fast; and you have seen the night and the day and the sun and the moon (how) they wear out every new (thing), and bring near every distant (object), and bring out every promised (affair); therefore, prepare your outfit for the distant journey." The Imam said that at this point al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad stood up and asked: "And what is the interim station? O Apostle of Allah!" He said: "The house of communication and cessation. Therefore, when mischief come to confuse you like the segments of a dark night, then hold fast to the Qur'an; as it is the intercessor whose intercession shall be granted; and a credible advocate; and whoever keeps it before him, it will lead him to the Garden; and whoever keeps it behind, it will drive him to the Fire; and it is the guide that guides to the best path; and it is a Book in which there is explanation, particularization and recapitulation; and it is a decisive (word), and not a joke; and there is for it a manifest (meaning) and an esoteric (one); thus its apparent (meaning) is firm, and its esoteric (one) is

knowledge; its exterior is elegant and its interior deep; it has (many) boundaries, and its boundaries have (many) boundaries; its wonders shall not cease, and its (unexpected) marvels shall not be old. There are in it the lamps of guidance and the beacon of wisdom, and a guide to knov for him who knows the attributes. Therefore, one should extend his sight; and should let his eyes reach the attribute; so that one who is in perdition may get deliverance, and one who is entangled may get free; because meditation is the life of the heart of the one who sees, as the one having a light (easily) walks in the darkness; therefore, you must seek good deliverance and (that) with little waiting." (al-Kafi) The author says: al-'Ayyashi has narrated it upto the words, "therefore, one should extend his sight". It is narrated in al-Kafi and at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi from as-Sadiq (a.s.) that he said that the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) said: "The Qur'an is a guide from wilderness, an eyesight for the blind, a pardon for the sinner, and a light against darkness; a brightness from the happenings, and safety from disaster, and guidance from going astray; a clarity in the chaos, and the means to reach (safely) from this world to the next; and there is in it the perfection of your religion; and no one deviated from the Qur'an except to the Fire." The author says: There are countless such traditions narrated from the Prophet and the Imams of Ahlulbayt (peace be on them all). It is narrated in at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi from al-Fudayl ibn Yasar that he said: "I asked Abu Ja'far (a.s.) about this tradition: 'There is no verse in the Qur'an but it has an exterior and an interior, and there is no word in it but it has a boundary, and every boundary has a watching place.' (I asked him) what was the meaning of exterior and interior. The Imam said: 'Its exterior is its revelation; and its interior is its interpretation; some of it has already passed (i.e. happened) and there is some of it that has not come about yet; it runs along as run the sun and the moon, when a thing of it comes (to its appointed place and time) it happens. Allah has said: and none knows its interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge; we know it.'' The author says: "Some of it has already passed and there is some of it that has not come about yet": Apparently the pronoun "it" stands for the Qur'an ² for its revelation and interpretation both. Therefore, the sentence "it runs along as run the sun and the moon", will apply to both the revelation and the interpretation. So far

as the revelation (i.e., the revealed word) is concerned it is the same thing as applying the verse to all situations in which its import comes true; and which is termed as the flow of the Qur'an. For example, look at the verse: O you who believe! fear Allah and be with the true ones (9:119). It was addressed, initially, to the believers who were present at the time of its revelation. Now it is applied to all the believers who came afterwards and will come upto the Day of Resurrection. It is the most obvious application that is practised not only by the Muslims but by all sensible persons in every language. But there are some other ways of finer and still more finer applications. For example, when the verses of fighting are used to exhort the believers to fight against their own selves, or when the verses condemning the hypocrites are applied to the sinful believers, it is a finer application. When one proceeds further in one's spiritual journey then the above-mentioned verses of fighting and hypocrisy as well as the verses concerning the sinners are applied to those virtuous servants of Allah who for a fleeting moment turn towards unavoidable worldly affairs, thus disrupting their meditation, remembrance of, and presence before, Allah. Needless to say that it is a much more finer application than the previous ones. And its finest application comes when those most perfect, most virtuous and most beloved servants of Allah apply those verses to themselves because they, in their love of Allah, think that they have failed in discharging their duty to Allah. From the above discourse, it becomes clear that: First: The Qur'an has connotations of varying degrees, that are applied to various groups according to their spiritual perfection. Those who have described the, stages of faith in, and love of, Allah, have mentioned even more finer applications than those written above. Second: "Exterior" and "interior" are relative attributes. Every exterior is interior when seen in relation to a more exterior meaning; and every interior is exterior in comparison to a more interior one. The following tradition explicitly mentions this fact. al-'Ayyashi has narrated, in his at-Tafsir, from Jabir that he said: "I asked Abu Ja'far (a.s.) the explanation of (a verse of) the Qur'an, and he xplained it to me. Thereafter, I asked him (the same question) and he gave me a different reply. So I

told him: 'May I be your ransom! You had given me, before this day, a different reply to this very question!' Thereupon he said: 'O Jabir! verily, the Qur'an has an interior, and for its interior there is an interior; and (it has) an exterior, and for its exterior there is an exterior. O Jabir! and there is nothing farther from the understanding of the men than the explanation of the Qur'an. Verily a verse, its first (part) is about (i.e., throws light on) one subject, and its middle is about another matter, and its end is about a third thing, and (still) it is a well-connected speech, (that) revolves in various ways.'" The same book narrates a tradition from the same Imam in which he said: "If a verse is revealed about a people and those people die, that verse does not die. Otherwise, nothing would have survived of the Qur'an. But the Qur'an, its first is applied to its last, so long as the heavens and the earth will continue. And for every group there is a verse, which they recite, they are from it (i.e., it is applied to them) either from good or from evil." Humran ibn A'yan said: "I asked Abu Ja'far(a.s.) about the exterior of the Qur'an and its interior; and he said: 'Its exterior are those people about whom the Qur'an was revealed; and its interior are those who do as those had done; that which was revealed about those flows about these (i.e., is applied to the followers also).'" (Ma'ani 'l-akhbar) It is narrated in the Tafsir as-Safi that 'AH (a.s.) said: "There is no verse but it has four meanings: Manifest, and esoteric, and boundary and rising (or watching) place. So, the manifest is the recitation, and esoteric is the comprehension, and boundary is the commandments of lawful and unlawful, and rising (or watching) place is the Divine purpose, expected of the servant through this verse." The author says: "Recitation" is counted as one of the meanings; it shows that this word refers to the apparent meaning of the verse. Then "comprehension", which is given as its opposite, would mean the inner (esoteric) meaning hidden behind the apparent one; "the commandments of lawful and unlawful" refers to that Qur'anic knowledge which one acquires in its first or intermediate stages; thus it stands face to face with the "rising (or watching) place" which is the highest grade of the meaning. Probably, the boundary and the rising place are relative terms, as the manifest and the esoteric are ² thus every higher grade may be called a rising place in comparison to a lower level. "al-Matla'" (= rising place, horizon) may also be read al-muttala' (= the watching place). As the Imam has said, it refers to that Divine purpose for which the verse

was revealed and which the servant of Allah is expected to fulfill. These four meanings have also been mentioned in a famous tradition of the Prophet which is as follows: ² "Verily, the Qur'an has been revealed on seven letters: For every verse of it, there is an exterior and an interior, and for every boundary there is a rising place." In another version the last sentence is as follows: "and for each there is a boundary and a rising place ". According to the first version ("for every boundary there is a rising place"), it means that for each exterior and interior -that is, the boundary ² there is a rising place to which it ascends. This meaning is clear. And the second version ("for each there is a boundary and a rising place") may also be interpreted in the same way: each exterior and interior has a boundary, that is, its own meaning, and each has a rising place to which it ascends -in other words, it would be referring to the "interpretation". But this explanation is not in conformity with the tradition of 'Ali(a.s.) mentioned above ("There is no verse but it has four meanings..."). In the light of the above given discourse, the four terms may be explained in the following way: The exterior is the manifest meaning that is understood from the words of the verse. The interior is the esoteric meaning which is hidden behind the manifest one. It may be one or more ² one behind the other - nearer to the manifest one or distant, with or without any intermediate link. The boundary is the meaning, whether the exterior or the interior. The rising place is that meaning from which the boundary (as explained above) arises. In other words, it is the esoteric meaning that is immediately adjacent to the boundary. There is a tradition, narrated through both the Shi'ah and the Sunm chains, from the Prophet that he said: "The Qur'an has been revealed on seven letters." The author says: Although there are some minor differences in the wordings of

various versions of this tradition, it has been narrated by so many people as to make it nearly al-mutawdtir; and the narrations are nearly similar in meaning, and have come both from the Shi'ahs and the Sunnis. There is a great controversy concerning the meaning of this tradition ² some forty explanations have been given for it. But, in reality, there should not be any difficulty in understanding it, because its explanation is given in the traditions themselves; and that should be followed, instead of inventing new explanations. Some of these traditions say: The Qur'an has come down on seven letters: order, restraint, exhortion, intimidation, argument, stories and parables." Another version counts them as follows: restraint, order, lawful, unlawful, decisive, ambiguous and parables. 'Ali(a.s.) is reported as saying: "Verily Allah revealed the Qur'an on seven categories, each of which is sufficient and satisfying; and they are: order, restraint, exhortion, intimidation, argument, parables and stories." Therefore, the seven letters must be explained as seven modes of address, seven kinds of expression. They are seven; yet they are one in their aim, because all invite to Allah, and call to His straight path. It may be inferred from these traditions that all fundamental spiritual knowledge is confined within the parables; because other six categories cannot be applied to those realities, except by stretching the meanings of the words.  $   

 ,
   $ ,2
2 2   The Prophet said: "Whoever interprets (i.e. explains) the Qur'an according to his opinion, should settle himself in his seat of Fire." (as-Safi) 
 ! This matter has been narrated by both the Sunnis and the Shi'ahs. And there are many other traditions of the same import, narrated from the Prophet and the Imams of Ahlulbayt (a.s.). It is narrated in Munyatu 'l-murid that the Prophet said: "Whoever spoke about the Qur'an without knowledge, should settle himself in his seat of Fire." 
 ! Also, it has been narrated by Abu Dawud in his as-Sunan.

The Prophet said: "Whoever speaks about the Qur'an without knowledge, shall coming on the Day of Resurrection reined with a rein of fire." (Munyatu 'l-murid) The same book narrates that the Prophet said: "Whoever spoke about the Qur'an of his own opinion (even if) he was right, he committed wrong." 
 ! This tradition has also been narrated by Abu Dawud, at-Tirmidhi and an-Nisa'i. The Prophet said: "What I am afraid of, most of all, concerning my ummah after me, is the man who will take the Qur'an putting it in the wrong place (i.e. giving wrong interpretations)." (al-Munyatu 'l-murid) Abu Basir said that Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said: "Whoever interprets the Qur'an according to own opinion, if he gets to the right interpretation, he shall not be rewarded; and if he errs then he shall be farther away from the heaven. (at-Tafsir, al-Ayyashi) The same book quotes Ya'qub ibn Yazid who narrated from Yasir that ar-Ridha (a.s.) said: "Opinion in the Book of Allah is infedility." 
 ! This theme is found in other traditions written in 'Uyunu 'lakhbar, al-Khisal and at-Tafsir of al-Ayyashi among other books. The words of the Prophet: "Whoever interprets (i.e. explains) the Qur'an according to his own opinion": ar-Ra'y (opinion) means the belief reached after diligent research. It is also used for the opinion based on desire and one's own inclination. The Prophet has used the phrase, "his opinion"; it shows that what is condemned is the interpretation of a verse independently without looking at other relevant verses. It does not forbid striving hard and doing one's utmost to understand the meaning of the Qur'an; nor does it say that one should confine himself to waht has been said in the traditions of the Prophet and Ahlulbayt (a.s.) relating to the exegesis of the verses (as many traditionalists think). Otherwise, it would be diametrically opposed to the many verses which show that the Qur'an is plain Arabic and whhich exhort the people to meditate on it; also it would be against many traditions that tell to turn to the Qur'an and judge the traditions by it.

What the words, "according to his opinion", refer to is explaining the Qur'an according to one's personal views by being independent of other Qur'anic declarations. This happens when an exegete depends solely on the instruments of Arabic language and literature, which are used for understanding a human talk. When we hear a speech of a man we at once look towards the rules of the language so that we may understand what the speaker means, and in this way decide its import; we use this method everywhere, even in legal matters like testimony and acknowledgement. We use this method because human speech is based on the rules of language and rhetorics. But the Qur'an's diction is not based on this foundation, as we have explained earlier. The whole Qur'an is a speech whose sentences and verses are all related to one another; at the same time they are separate from each other; one part speaks with, and leads to the others, as 'Ali (a.s.) has said: "Obviously, it is not enough to look at a single verse in the light of the language and literature and decide what it means, unless one meditates on all the relevant verses and strives one's utmost to find out from all of them together what that particular verse means." The verse 4:82 points to this very fact, as we have explained in the topic of brevity: "Do they not then meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy." Explaining the Qur'an according to one's opinion is, thus, prohibited. And this prohibition is directed to the way of exegesis, and not to the exegesis itself. In other words, the Prophet has forbidden the people to try to understand the Divine words by the same methods which are used to understand a human speech - it is irrelevant whether they succeed in comprehending its true meaning or not. That is why he (s.a.w.) has said in another tradition: "Whoever spoke about the Qur'an of his own opinion, (even if) he was right, he committed wrong." This dictum clearly proves that the mistake lies in choosing the way; it does not matter whether that way takes one to the true destination or not. The same is the explanation of the words, narrated in the tradition of al-Ayyashi: "if he gets to the right interpretation, he shall not be rewarded". This view is supported also by the state of affairs in the days of the Prophet. The revelation of the Qur'an was not yet completed; and what was revealed was not yet

arranged; not all the Muslims had in their hands all the revealed verses - most of them had only a few chapters and verses with them. Had they been allowed to explain every piece or verse separately, without comparing that piece with other relevant verses, they would almost certainly have fallen into error. It appears from the above discourse that what the exegete has been forbidden is to interpret a verse of the Qur'an independently, relying on his own knowledge and opinion, without reference to another authority. In other words, it is necessary, when one wants to explain a Qur'anic verse, to seek help from others by referring the matter to them. Who is that other authority? It could only be either other Qur'anic verses, or the traditions. The second alternative is out of question because the prophet has ordered the Muslims to refer the traditions to the Qur'an; it cannot be the other way round. The tradition's meanings and even their authenticity is tested by the Qur'an; how can tradition decide the meaning of the Qur'an? Thus, there remains only one valid and approved way of explaining the verses of the Qur'an, and that is with the help of other relevant verses. This much is enough to show the irrelevance of numerous explanations written about the tradition of "interpreting the Qur'an by one's own opinion". The scholars have explained this tradition in not less than ten ways:  ! It means interpreting the Qur'an without expertise in those subjects which are essential for knowing its exegesis. And as-Suyuti has said in al-itqan that there are fifteen in all: Language, syntax, conjugation, etymology, styles of literature, rhetoric, elocution, recitation of the Qur'an, roots of religion, fundamentals of jurisprudence, reasons and occasions of revelations (as well as the stories mentioned in the Qur'an), abrogating and abrogated verses, law of the Shari'ah, traditions that explain the general and unspecific verses, and the gifted knowledge. This last phrase refers to a tradition of the Prophet: "Whoever acts upon what he knows, Allah gives him knowledge of what he does not know." %
 $! It refers to the attempts of finding the interpretations of the ambigious verses, which no one knows except Allah.  $! It is interpretation of the Qur'an to support a wrong belief or action. It

happens when an exegete makes his own view or belief the foundation upon which he builds the exegesis of the Qur'an; he fits the verse on his own belief in any possible way - no matter how weak or far-fetched that might be.  ! It is declaring, without any proof, that a certain explanation is the meaning really intended by Allah. ! It refers to explaining the Qur'an according to one's inclination and desire. These five explanations of the said tradition have been narrated by Ibnu 'n-Naqib, as as-Suyuti has quoted in al-itqan. There are five other explanations which we enumerate here from other books: %#! It is explaining the difficult passages of the Qur'an in a new way which was not narrated from the companions and their disciples - because such an interpretation would make the exegete liable to the displeasure of Allah. %
+
! The tradition is about explaining the Qur'an in a certain way, while the speaker knows that it is not the true explanation. These last two have been mentioned by Ibnu 'l-Anbari. Ô,! The tradition forbids talking about the Qur'an without knowledge and without making sure - it does not matter whether the speaker knows or not that another explanation is true. ) ! It forbids reliance on the apparent meaning of the Qur'an. It is the explanation of those who think that the apparent meaning of the Qur'an is not a valid authority; to understand a verse, one must look to a clear tradition narrated from a sinless authority (i.e. the Prophet, his daughter and the twelve Imams, peace be on them all). But in fact it shall not be an exegesis of the Qur'an; rather it shall be following the tradition. Anyhow, according to this group, exegesis of the Qur'an depends on the explanation of a sinless authority. 
! There were some people who believed that the Qur'an had valid apparent

meanings, but said that common people could not understand it. According to this view also relying on the apparent meaning of the Qur'an was forbidden by this tradition. One must look for clear traditions of sinless authorities to interpret the Qur'an. These are ten explanations of the said tradition - although some may in effect be identical to some others. In any case, none of these is supported by any proof. Moreover, some are obviously wrong, or their inaccuracy may be understood from what we have earlier said about this tradition. There is no reason to point it out again. There are many verses that support the traditions mentioned earlier: Do they not meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy (4:82). Those who made the Qur'an into shreds (15:91). Surely they who distort Our signs are not hidden from Us. What! is he then who is cast into the fire better or he who comes safe on the Day of Resurrection? Do what you like, surely He sees what you do (41:40). ....(there are those who) alter words from their places...(4:46). And pursue not that of which you have not the knowledge (17:36). Such verses in conjunction with the above mentioned traditions make it clear that the prohibition contained in those traditions is about the method used for the exegesis; they show that when explaining the Divine Speech, one should not adopt the same means that are used for explaining human talks. What is the difference between Divine and human speeches? It is not in the use of the words, the construction of sentences or style of elocution. The Qur'an is in plain Arabic, and all norms of eloquence have been mentioned in it. Allah Himself has said: And We did not send any apostle but with the language of his people, so

that he might explain to them clearly (14:4); ...and this is clear Arabic language (16:103); Surely We have made it an Arabic Qur'an so that you may understand (43:3). The difference between the two is about the meaning and its application. This statement needs some elaboration: We are at home in this material world, and surrounded with its natural phenomena. As a result, when we hear a word, our mind, first of all, looks at its physical connotation and application. When a fellow human being describes a thing or an affair, we apply his words to what we are accustomed to in this world; because we know that the speaker too is governed by the same forces as we are, and his comprehension and cognition is not different from ours. In this way the application of a word affects its meaning - it may particularize a general meaning or vice versa; the circumstances may manipulate a word's connotation in a lot of ways. It is what we call rational context, in contrast to textual evidence. For example, if we hear a powerful and wealthy man saying, "There is not a thing but with us are the treasures of it", first we shall look at the literal meaning of this sentence, then will come the stage of its application. At this stage, we shall say that he has many strong and well-protected buildings which have got a lot of containers of various types to store his treasures, that consist of a large quantity of gold, silver, currency notes, bonds, jewels, various commodities, ornamental items, arms and ammunition etc. We get this picture in our mind because this is what we call treasure and that is how it is kept safe and secure. But we will never imagine that he has in his treasury, the earth and the heavens, the continents and the oceans, the sun and the moon, the animals and the human beings. These too are "things", but they are not possessed, gathered and put in a treasury. Because of this rational context we do restrict the generality of the word "thing" and apply it to a few selected items only; and in those items too only a small quantity is preserved in strong, impregnable buildings to protect it from theft and other damages. And this knowledge of ours has restricted the general meaning of the words, "thing" and "treasures". But now we hear Allah revealing to His Apostle (s.a.w.a): And there is not a thing but with Us are the treasures of it (15:21). If our mind is not developed, and is still on the lowest rung of comprehension, we shall interpret this verse in exactly the

same manner. Of course, we shall not have any proof to say that the verse has been used in the same sense; yet we shall rush to that explanation, because our mind is accustomed to it. This is, then, explaining the Qur'an according to our own opinion without knowledge. Now let us say that our understanding is a bit more developed, and we know that Allah does not gather things to put them in a treasury. We think over this verse and read the next sentence: and We do not send it down but in a known measure; and then we compare it with another verse: ...and (in) what Allah sends down sustenance from the cloud, then gives life thereby to the earth after its death...there are signs for a people who understand (45:5). We shall at once say that the word "thing", in the verse under discussion, refers to the sustenance like bread and water; and that "sending it down", in the next sentence, refers to the coming down of rain. We shall give it this interpretation because we do not know of anything, except the rain, that comes down from the heavens; therefore, we shall say that accumulation of everything near Allah and then it coming down in measured quantity refers to the accumulation of rain and its coming down to the earth to produce food grains. This too shall be interpreting the Qur'an according to one's own opinion "without knowledge". What is our argument? It is that we do not know of anything, except the rain, that descends from the heaven. But "not knowing" that a certain thing exists is quite different from "knowing" that it does not exist. If our knowledge is more advanced and our mind more developed, we shall try not to say anything concerning the Qur'an without knowledge. We shall say that the words of the verse are general; they should not be restricted in any way. "Thing" includes everything, and the word, "treasures", covers every single item of everything. We shall arrive at the conclusion that the sentence describes the affairs of the creation and the creatures. Then will come the puzzling sentence, "and We do not send it down but in a known measure". Doubtlessly, human beings, animals and vegetables do not come down from the heavens; they grow from, and are born on, the earth. Faced with this difficulty, we shall say that the first sentence, "And there is not a thing but with Us are the treasures of it", is a metaphorical way of saying that everything in existence is subservient to the will of Allah; that the Divine will is like a treasure that holds every creature, and only as much issues

forth from it as is willed by Allah. But this interpretation also, like the previous two, is based on "not knowing". We "do not know" that the things descend (in the meaning known to us) from Allah, and, therefore, we explain away the sentence in an allegorical way. If you look at the Divine names, attributes and actions as described in the Qur'an, or at the Qur'anic declarations about the angels, the Divine Books, the apostles and the Day of Resurrection and its details, or at the laws of the shari'ah and their significance as given in the Qur'an, and then ponder on the way people want to interpret them in the light of rational context, you will see that all such exercises are but interpretations according to one's own liking without knowledge; that they should better be called misinterpretations. We have shown under the fifth heading (why the Book contains the ambiguous verses?) in the discourse of the decisive and ambiguous verses that the Qur'anic expressions vis-a-vis the Divine realities are like a proverb in relation to its significance; and those realities have been explained in various expressions and diverse wordings, so that all taken together may lead the hearers to their real significance. That is why the verses are said to be witnesses of each other; and that is how they explain one another. Otherwise the Divine realities could never be correctly explained; and people would have fallen in the pitfall of interpreting the Qur'an without knowledge. The above discourse shows that interpreting the Qur'an according to one's opinion is always accompanied by speaking about it without knowledge. The tradition of the Prophet points to this fact: "Whoever spoke about the Qur'an without knowledge should settle himself in his seat of Fire." It is such interpretations that make it look as though the verses of the Qur'an were contradictory to one another. Interpreting the verses by one's own opinion, without true knowledge, disturbs the semantic flow of the Qur'an. Thus the verses are misinterpreted, the words shifted from their right places and used in wrong contexts. Then it becomes necessary for these exegetes to explain some or most of the verses in a way that is against their apparent meanings; Divine words and sentences are given such meanings which linguists have never heard of. Thus we

find a group explaining away the verses of free will and choice, and their opponents misinterpreting the verses of Divine decree and measure. Most of the Muslim sects are guilty of this type of misinterpretation, especially in those verses whose apparent meanings go against their beliefs. They seek refuge in clothing such verses with meanings of their choice, and their so-called arguments boil down to this sentence: The apparent meaning of this verse is against what has already been established by rational proofs; therefore it must be given a new meaning, against the apparent one. This practice creates confusion; the logical sequence of the verses is disrupted, their semantic flow is disturbed and they seem to contradict each other. Thus both lose their validity. It is known that there is no discrepancy in the Qur'an. If a certain explanation shows that two verses are contradictory to each other, the only defect would be in that explanation. This has been termed, in many traditions, as hitting one part of the Qur'an with the other. See for example the following traditions: It is narrated in al-Kafi and at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi from as-Sadiq from his father (peace be on them both) that he said: "A man does not hit a part of the Qur'an with the other (part) but that he becomes an infidel." Ma'ani 'l-akhbar, al-Mahasin (through their chains) and at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi: as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "A man does not hit a part of the Qur'an with the other (part) but that he becomes an infidel." as-Saduq says that he asked Ibnu 'l-Walid what this tradition meant. He replied: "It is replying to a man concerning the exegesis of one verse, with the exegesis of another one." 
 ! This reply of Ibnu 'l-Walid is somewhat vague. If by this expression he means the above-mentioned mix-up - as the polemicists argue by offering one verse "against" another, adhering to the one and explaining away the

other - then he is correct. But if he wants to disallow explaining one verse with the help of the other and bringing the one as evidence for the other, then it is wrong, as may be seen from the following two traditions too: It is narrated in at-Tafsir of al-Nu'mani, through his chains to Isma'il ibn Jabir that he said: "I heard Abu 'Abdillah Ja'far ibn Muhammad as-Sadiq (peace be on them both) saying: 'Verily, Allah - Benevolent and High is He - sent Muhammad and ended with him (the chain of) the prophets; thus there is no prophet after him; and He sent down to him a Book, and ended with it (the chain of) the Books; thus there is no (Divine) book after it. He allowed in it the lawful (things) and prohibited in it the unlawful; so its lawful is lawful up to the Day of Resurrection, and its unlawful is unlawful up to the Day of Resurrection; there is in it your shari'ah, and the information of the people (who passed away) before you and (who are to come) after you; and the Prophet (may Allah have mercy on him and his progeny!) appointed it as a standard (that will remain) for ever in his successors. But the people left them (those successors) although they were witnesses over the people of all times; and they (i.e. the people) deviated from them, then they killed them, and followed others and gave those others their unalloyed obedience. (This continued) till they extended their enmity to him who showed his love of those invested with authority (from Allah) and who sought their knowledge. Allah has said: ...and (they) have forgotten a part of what they were admonished with, and you will not cease to be informed of deceit from among them (5:14). And it is because they hit a part of the Qur'an with the other; and they argued with the abrogated (verse) thinking that it was the abrogating one, and debated with the help of the ambiguous thinking that it was the decisive; and offered a particularized verse for their argument assuming that it was a general one; and stuck at the beginning of a verse leaving aside the reason of its interpretation; and they did not see what was beginning of the speech and what was its end; and they did not know its arrival or its departure, because they did not take it from its people; thus they went astray and misled others. " 'And know, may Allah have mercy on you! that he who does not distinguish in the Book of Allah the abrogating verse from the abrogated one, and a specific from a general one, and a decisive from an ambiguous; and does not differentiate between permission and an obligation, and does not recognize a verse of Meccan

period from a Medinite one, and does not know the reasons of revelation; and does not understand the difficult words of the Qur'an (whether simple or compound); and does not comprehend (what has been hidden in it of) the knowledge of (Divine) decree and measure; and is ignorant of advancing and delaying (in its verses); and does not distinguish the clear from the deep, nor the manifest from the esoteric, nor the beginning from the termination; and is unaware of the question and the answer, the disjoining and the joining, and the exceptions and the allinclusive, and is ignorant of an adjective of a preceding (noun) that explains, the subsequent one; and is unaware of the emphasized subject and the detailed one, the obligatory laws and the permissions, the places of the duties and rules, and the meaning of the lawful and the unlawful (in which the unbelievers have perished); and does not know the joined words, and the words that are related to those coming before them, or after them - then such a man does not know the Qur'an; nor is he among the people of the Qur'an; And if someone claims knowledge of these variations, without proof, then he is a liar, a doubting (person), and a fabricator of lies against Allah and His Apostle, and his resting place is the hell, and what an evil destination it is!'" It is written in Nahju 'l-balaghah and al-Ihtijaj that 'Ali (a.s.) said in a sermon: "When a legal problem is put before one of them he passes judgment on it according to his opinion. Then exactly the same problem comes before another of them and he gives the opposite verdict. Then these judges bring this matter to their leader who had appointed them and he confirms all their (contradictory) verdicts, although their Allah is one and their Prophet is one and their Book is one. Is it because Allah had ordered them to differ and they obeyed Him? Or He had prohibited them from it but they disobeyed Him? Or is it that Allah had sent an incomplete religion and sought their help to complete it? Or, they are His partners, so that it is their right to say and it is His duty to agree? Or is it that Allah sent a complete religion but the Prophet (s.a.w.) fell short of conveying it and handing it over (to the ummah)? And Allah, the Glorified, says: We have not neglected anything in the Book (6:38); and that in it is the clarification of everything; and He has said that one part of the Book confirms the other and that there is no discrepancy in it; And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy (4:82). And verily, the exterior of the Qur'an is elegant and its esoteric (meaning) is deep. Its wonders cannot be enumerated, and its

marvels will not cease; and the darkness cannot be removed except by it." 
 ! This narration clearly shows that every religious opinion and view must be based on the Qur'an. The sentence, "in it is the clarification of everything", paraphrases a Qur'anic verse, (... and We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything [16:89]). Ibn Sa'd, Ibnu 'd-Durays (in his al-Fada'il) and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated from 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather: "The Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) appeared before a group who were bandying arguments about the Qur'an, and he was very angry and said: 'This is how the nations before you went astray they disputed with their prophets and hit one part of the book with the other.'Then he said: 'And verily the Qur'an has not been revealed so that its parts would contradict each other; rather, it has been revealed so that its part would confirm each other. Therefore, follow what you know (of it) and believe in what is ambiguous to you (from it)."' (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) Ahmad has narrated in another way from'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather that the Messenger of'All5h (s.a.w.) heard some people disputing with one another. So, he said: "That is how those who were before you had perished; they hit one part of the Book of Allah over the other. And the Book of Allah has been revealed (and) its one part confirms the other; therefore, do not (try to) refute its one part with the other part. What you know of it, you should believe in it, and what you do not know of it, you should leave it to him who knows it." (ad-Durru'lmanthur) 
 ! As you see, these traditions count "hitting one part of the Qur'an with the other" as opposite to "confirming some of its parts with the others". In other words, this "hitting" refers to confusing the meanings of the verses, disturbing their aims and objects, mistaking, for example, the decisive verses for the ambiguous ones and vice versa. It means that speaking in the Qur'an according to one's own opinion, and explaining the verses without knowledge (described in earlier quoted traditions) and hitting some parts of the Qur'an with the others (mentioned in the above traditions) refer to one and the same thing, that is, explaining the Qur'an with the help of other than the Qur'an.


 ! No doubt, the Qur'an was revealed so, that the people may comprehend and understand it. See, for example, these two verses: Surely We have revealed to you the Book with the truth for the sake of men... (39:41). This is a clear statement for men (3:138). Also there is no doubt that it was the Prophet who had the authority to explain it. As Allah says: ...and We have revealed to you the Reminder that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to them... (16:44). And surely he explained it to his companions, who transmitted it to their disciples. What has come to us from the companions and their disciples is doubtlessly the explanation given by the Prophet, and we cannot disregard it, as the Qur'an tells us to follow what is given to us by the Prophet. As for those explanations which the companions gave us without ascribing them to the Prophet, it is true that they cannot have the same authority as the Prophet's declarations-, yet we feel more at ease with them (instead of looking for them on our own). Why? Because either they had heard it from the Prophet, or they were led to it by their expertise in religion - the expertise they had acquired from the Prophet's instruction and exposition. The same applies to their disciples and the disciples' disciples. Surely the meaning of the Qur'an could not be hidden from them they had deep rooted knowledge of Arabic language; they were keen on learning the Qur'anic interpretation from the Prophet himself; and they strived their utmost to acquire the knowledge of religion. All this may be seen in biographical details of the early scholars of religion. Looking at the above-mentioned details, we come to the conclusion that deviating from their method and tradition, going out of their company or explaining any verse in a way that is not found in their opinions and sayings, is an innovation; and that one must remain silent where they have not given any opinion. What the companions and their direct and indirect disciples have said is enough for the purpose of understanding the Qur'an. There are thousands of traditions on exegesis, and as-Suyuti has counted some seventeen thousand traditions on this

subject, narrated from the Prophet and his companions and their disciples. [
! Its reply may be inferred from what we have written earlier. There are numerous verses which invite the public in general, the believers as well as the unbelievers, those who were present at the time of revelation as well as those who came later or shall come in future, to understand the Qur'an and meditate and ponder on it. For example, see the verse 4: 8 2 which has been quoted repeatedly: Do they not then meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy. It clearly shows that the Qur'anic knowledge may be acquired through meditation and contemplation; and that by this process the apparent discrepancy between the verses disappears completely. Remember that this verse puts a challenge to unbelievers that they would not find any discrepancy in the Qur'an if they pondered on it. And in this context they could not be advised to go to the companions and their disciples if they wanted to understand its meaning; nay, even the advice to refer to the Prophet would have been irrelevant: If the Prophet's explanation were in conformity with the apparent meaning of the verse, then people would understand that meaning from the verse itself on meditation and contemplation - and there would be no need to refer to the Prophet. And if his explanation were against the apparent meaning of the Qur'an - a meaning that an average man would not understand from the words - then the challenge would be futile and the argument of the verse 4:82 would not stand. Of course, so far as the details of various Qur'anic laws are -concerned, they cannot be known without the Prophet's explanation, as the Qur'an itself says: ...and whatever the Apostle gives you, take it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back... (59:7). Also, the details of the Qur'anic stories and of the Day of Judgment depend on his exposition. It shows that the Prophet's responsibility, in this respect, was of teaching only. A teacher guides and helps his student in understanding what would be difficult to comprehend without his help. The teaching brings the meaning nearer to the mind; it does not create a meaning. The teacher arranges the subject matter to make it easier to comprehend, so that the student is not obliged to waste his time and energy in self- education - a proposition that carries with it a risk of wrong deductions. This aspect of the Prophet's responsibilities is mentioned in many

verses. For example, ...and We have revealed to you the Reminder that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to them, and that haply they may reflect (16:44) ...And teaches them the Book and the Wisdom... (62:2). The Prophet, therefore, teaches the people what the Qur'an itself says and the Divine Speech itself shows, and which the people themselves may understand even if it requires some meditation. It is not the Prophet's function to bestow on the verses such meanings as cannot be normally understood from those words. Such an explanation would not conform with the following Qur'anic declarations:A Book of which the verses are made plain, an Arabic Qur'an for a people who know (41:3). ...and this is clear Arabic language (16:103). Then there are the traditions of the Prophet exhorting the Muslims to hold fast to the Qur'an and to verify with its help the traditions attributed to him. It necessarily follows that all what the Prophet has said may be known from the Qur'an. Otherwise, he could not tell us to check with it all the sayings attributed to him. Now, if we say that understanding of the Qur'an depends on the Prophet's explanation, it would be a vicious circle. The Qur'an would be understood only if explained by the traditions, but the authenticity of the tradition could be established only if one understands the Qur'an. Now we come to the traditions narrated from the companions. First, we are faced with the problems concerning the chains of the narrators, because not all of them are free from one or the other defect. Second, the companions have differed a great deal with one another in their expositions of the Qur'an. Third, in many cases, divergent views have been ascribed to a single companion, as anyone may find out by looking in the books of traditions and exegesis. What is one supposed to do when faced with such discrepancies? We are told by these people that we should choose one of those diverse opinions and stick to it; that we should not destroy the "composite unanimity" of the companions, nor should we go outside their circle. But the trouble is that the companions themselves were not averse to differ from each other; then why should we not differ from them? They themselves never

claimed that their opinions were vested with an authority which others were duty bound to accept; nor did they ever say that, although they differed from one another, others should not differ from them. If we were stuck up with the Qur'anic exegesis narrated from the companions and their disciples, the forward march of knowledge would be arrested and academic research negated. Look at the explanations transmitted to us from the early scholars, and study the books of exegesis written in early centuries. You will find that they contain only simple word meanings, and are devoid of deep thoughts and fine ideas. If we stop at those explanations, where we can find the vast and deep knowledge mentioned in the verse: ...and We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything... (16:89). Then it is said that it is unthinkable that the companions did not know the meaning of the Qur'an, in spite of their keen interest in religious knowledge and their understanding and serious efforts in this way. But the very discrepancy in their various explanations belies this argument. Discrepancy and difference could not occur unless the truth was hidden from their eyes, and unless they were confused. The truth is that the highway to the understanding of the Qur'an is wide open; and the Divine Speech itself leads one to its own understanding; it does not depend, for this purpose, on any other guide. It is a Book introduced by Allah as the guidance, the light and the clear explanation of everything. It cannot be said to need another guide, to seek illumination from another light or to depend on an outside factor for its own explanation. 
 ! The correct traditions say that the Prophet said in his last sermon: "Certainly I am leaving among you two weighty things: The bigger one and the smaller one. As for the bigger one, it is the Book of Allah; and as for the smaller one, it is my progeny, the people of my house. Therefore, keep me in mind about these two things; because you shall never go astray so long as you hold fast to them." This tradition has been narrated by both sects from a great many companions of the Apostle of Allah (s. a. w. a.); it has come to us through so many chains that one can entertain no doubt about its authenticity. The traditionalists have counted that it has been narrated by thirty-five companions. Some narrations

contain the sentence: "They shall not separate from one another till they come to me on the reservoir (i.e., Kawthar)." This tradition proves that the words of Ahlulbayt (a.s.) on the Qur'an are a binding authority and that one must adhere to what has come down to us from them concerning the exegesis. Otherwise, one would be guilty of separating the Qur'an from the Ahlulbayt (a.s.). [
! What was said earlier regarding the explanation of the Prophet applies here too. The tradition quoted in the question is not intended to negate the authority of the apparent meaning of the Qur'an, nor does it say that the exegesis given by the Ahlulbayt (a.s.) is the only authoritative explanation. The Prophet has used the words, "they shall not separate from one another". It means that authority belongs to the Qur'5n and the Ahlulbayt (a.s.) together; the Qur'an explains its meaning and makes manifest the Divine realities, and the Ahlulbayt (a.s.) guide to the true path and direct the people to the Qur'5nic aims and goals. Moreover, like the Prophet, the Ahlulbayt (a.s.) too have directed the Muslims to hold fast to the Qur'an, to meditate on it and to verify from it the traditions attributed to them. Furthermore, a considerable number of the exegetical traditions of the Ahlulbayt (a.s.) themselves have used the method of explaining a verse with the help of the other. This method can be meaningful only if the Qur'anic verses may be understandable to an average man - provided the correct direction is followed. Apart from these rational arguments, some traditions of the Ahlulbayt (a.s.) explicitly mention this fact. al-Barqi has narrated through his chains from Abu Labid that Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said in a tradition: "Whoever thought that the Book of Allah was vague, fell in perdition and destroyed others." Another tradition has been narrated in the same book as well as in al-Ihtijaj that AbuJa'far (a.s.) said: "When I narrate to you anything, you should ask me where it was in the Book of Allah ..." The above discourse makes it clear that there is no conflict between those traditions which say that the Qur'anic knowledge is not unintelligible and that it may be understood with the help of the Qur'anic verses themselves, and those

which are apparently against it. For example, it is narrated in at-Tafsir of al'Ayyashi from Jabir that he said: "Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said: 'Verily, the Qur'an has an interior, and for its interior there is an exterior.' Then he said: 'O Jabir! and there is nothing farther from the understanding of the men than it (i.e., the Qur'an). Verily, a verse, its first (part) is revealed about one subject and its middle (part) about another thing, and its end about something else; and yet it is a wellconnected speech, (that) revolves in various ways.'" This theme has been given in various other traditions. In some of them, the sentence, "and there is nothing farther from the understanding of the men ...", has been ascribed to the Prophet. Also, 'Ali (a.s.) is reported as saying: "Verily, the Qur'an may be explained in many ways; it has many faces. It is clear that what has been allowed, nay, encouraged, is explaining it through its own path, and what has been forbidden is explaining it through another path. The prescribed way is exegesis of the Qur'an with the help of the Qur'an itself, explaining a verse with another verse. A man can do so only when he is well versed in the traditions of the Prophet and his Ahlulbayt (a.s.); it gives him correct perspective and creates in him a discriminating taste. It is after acquiring this taste that one may explain the Qur'an with confidence. And Allah is the best Guide.

å
 
    

3 4 ϟ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ έ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ω˵ Ϯ˵ϗϭ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴ϭ˵΃ϭ˴ Ύ˱Ό˸ϴη ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Ϣ˵ϫΩ˵ ϻ˸ϭ΃˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˵΍˴Ϯ˸ϣ΃˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϋ ˴ ϲ ˴ Ϩ˶ ˸ϐΗ˵ Ϧ{10} ϝ ˶΁Ώ ˶ ˸΃Ϊ˴ ϛ˴ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴Ϙό˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϊ˵ ϳ˶Ϊη ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸ϢϬ˶ Α˶ Ϯ˵ϧά˵ Α˶ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ ά˴ Χ ˴ ΄˴ϓ˴ Ύ˴ϨΗ˶ Ύ˴ϳ΂˶Α ˸΍Ϯ˵Αά˴˷ ϛ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ Ϡ˶˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍˴ϭ ϥ ˴ ˸Ϯϋ ˴ ˸ήϓ˶ {11} ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ΒϠ˴˸ϐΘ˵ γ ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϠ˴˷ϟ˶˷ Ϟ˵ϗ Ω˵ Ύ˴ϬϤ˶ ˸ϟ΍ β ˴ ˸ΌΑ˶ ϭ˴ Ϣ˴ Ϩ˴˷Ϭ˴ Ο ˴ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήθ ˴ ˸ΤΗ˵ ϭ˴ {12} ˲Γή˴ ϓ˶ Ύ˴ϛ ϯ˴ή˸Χ΃˵ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ϴ˶Βγ ˴ ϲ˶ϓ Ϟ ˵ Η˶ Ύ˴Ϙ˵Η ˲ΔΌ˴ ϓ˶ Ύ˴ΘϘ˴ Θ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˶ ˸ϴΘ˴ Ό˴ ϓ˶ ϲ˶ϓ ˲Δϳ˴ ΁ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϟ˴ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ ˸Ϊϗ˴ ϳ˵ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϧ ˶ ˸ϴό˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϱ ˴ ˸΃έ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴˸Μϣ˶˷ Ϣ˵Ϭϧ˴ ˸ϭή˴ ϳ˴ έ˶ Ύ˴μ˸ΑϷ ˴ ΍ ϲ˶ϟϭ˵΄ϟ˶˷ Γ˱ ή˴ ˸Βό˶ ϟ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣ ϩ˶ ή˶ ˸μϨ˴ Α˶ Ϊ˵ ϳ˶˷Ά˴ {13} ΐ ˵˷ Σ ˵ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ Ϡ˶ϟ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶˷ί˵ Δ˶ ϣ˴ Ϯ˴˷ δ ˴ Ϥ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ˸ϴΨ ˴ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Δ˶ π ˴˷ ϔ˶ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ ΐ ˶ ϫ˴ ά˴˷ ϟ΍ ˴Ϧϣ˶ Γ˶ ή˴ τ ˴ Ϩ˴ϘϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ή˶ ϴ˶σΎ˴ϨϘ˴ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϨΒ˴ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ ˯Ύ˴δϨ˶˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ε ˶ ΍˴ϮϬ˴ θ ˴˷ ϟ΍˸ϟ΍˴ϭ ϡ˶ Ύ˴ό˸ϧϷ ˴ ΍˴ϭ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ Ι ˶ ˸ήΤ ˴ Ώ ˶ ΂˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˵ ˸δΣ ˵ ϩ˵ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Ύ˴ϴ˸ϧΪ˵˷ ϟ΍ Γ˶ Ύ˴ϴΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ω ˵ Ύ˴Θϣ˴ {14} ϱ˶ή˸ΠΗ˴ ˲ΕΎ˷Ϩ˴ Ο ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ Α˶˷έ˴ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ ΍˸ϮϘ˴ Η˴˷΍ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϠ˴˷ϟ˶ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ ή˳ ˸ϴΨ ˴ Α˶ Ϣ˵ϜΌ˵ Β˶˷ ϧ˴ ΅˵ ΃˴ ˸Ϟϗ˵ Ϯ˴ ˸οέ˶ ϭ˴ ˲Γή˴ Ϭ˴˷ τ ˴ ϣ˵˷ ˲Ν΍˴ϭ˸ί΃˴ϭ˴ Ύ˴Ϭϴ˶ϓ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶Ϊϟ˶Ύ˴Χ έ˵ Ύ˴Ϭ˸ϧϷ ˴ ΍ Ύ˴ϬΘ˶ ˸ΤΗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ω˶ Ύ˴Βό˶ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ˲ήϴ˶μΑ˴ Ϫ˵ ˴˷Ϡϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ ˲ϥ΍{15} Ύ˴ϨΑ˴˷έ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϟϮ˵Ϙϳ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ έ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ώ ˴ ΍˴άϋ ˴ Ύ˴Ϩϗ˶ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϨΑ˴ Ϯ˵ϧΫ˵ Ύ˴Ϩϟ˴ ˸ήϔ˶ ˸ϏΎ˴ϓ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϣ˴ ΁ Ύ˴Ϩϧ˴˷·˶{16} Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϔ˶ ˸ϐΘ˴ ˸δϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϙϔ˶ Ϩ˵Ϥ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Θϧ˶ Ύ˴Ϙ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϗΩ˶ Ύ˷μ ˴ ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήΑ˶ Ύ˷μ ˴ ϟ΍ έ˶ Ύ˴Τ˸γϷ ˴ Ύ˶Α {17} ϫ˵ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϫ˴ ϟ˴·˶ ϻ ˴ ς ˶ ˸δϘ˶ ˸ϟΎ˶Α Ύ˱Ϥ˶΋Ύ˴ϗ Ϣ˶ ˸Ϡό˶ ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟ˸ϭ΃˵ϭ˴ Δ˵ Ϝ˴ ΋˶ ϼ˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ϻ ˴˷ ˶· Ϫ˴ ϟ˴·˶ ϻ ˴ Ϫ˵ ϧ˴˷΃˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϊ˴ Ϭ˶ η ˴ Ϣ˵ ϴ˶ϜΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ΰ˵ ϳ˶ΰό˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϯ˴ {18} {10} (As for) those who disbelieve, surely neither their wealth nor their children shall avail them in the least against Allah, and these it is who are the fuel of the

fire. {11} Like the striving of the people of Firon and those before them; they rejected Our communications, so Allah destroyed them on account of their faults; and Allah is severe in requiting (evil). {12} Say to those who disbelieve: You shall be vanquished, and driven together to hell; and evil is the resting-place. {13} Indeed there was a sign for you in the two hosts (which) met together in encounter; one party fighting in the way of Allah and the other unbelieving, whom they saw twice as many as themselves with the sight of the eye and Allah strengthens with His aid whom He pleases; most surely there is a lesson in this for those who have sight. {14} The love of desires, of women and sons and hoarded treasures of gold and silver and well bred horses and cattle and tilth, is made to seem fair to men; this is the provision of the life of this world; and Allah is He with Whom is the good goal (of life). {15} Say: Shall I tell you what is better than these? For those who guard (against evil) are gardens with their Lord, beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them, and pure mates and Allah's pleasure; and Allah sees the servants. {16} Those who say: Our Lord! surely we believe, therefore forgive us our faults and save us from the chastisement of the fire. {17} The patient, and the truthful, and the obedient, and those who spend (benevolently) and those who ask forgiveness in the morning times. {18} Allah bears witness that there is no god but He, and (so do) the angels and those possessed of knowledge, maintaining His creation with justice; there is no god but He, the Mighty, the Wise. -

å
 It was described earlier that when this chapter was revealed, the Muslims were hard-pressed by internal sabotage and external hostilities. There were inside Medina the hypocrites and their informants, who listened to, and spread the evil whisperings of, the enemies of Islam to upset the Muslims' programmes and make their efforts ineffective. And almost the whole Arabia and the two most powerful neighbouring empires were bent upon their annihilation. The polytheists, the Jews and the Christians, all were united in their determination to kill Islam in its infancy with all possible means - by words or by swords. This chapter was revealed to exhort the Muslims to remain united, firm and patient. These qualities would keep their society healthy, eradicate the internal troubles and confound the external enemies. The preceding verses had mentioned the hypocrites' perversity, and exhorted the Muslims to faithfully follow what they had learned of the realities of religion, and to surrender themselves to, and believe in, what they do not understand of the Qur'an. The verses warned the Muslims not to follow the ambiguous parts of the

Qur'an, seeking to give them their own interpretation; otherwise, their wellbalanced religion would be distorted and they jthemselves would fall into perdition. In this way, they would be deprived of their felicity; their religious guidance would give way to misguidance, and their unity would turn into disunity. Now, these verses turn to the unbelievers and polytheists. These infidels will soon be vanquished; they cannot defeat the purpose of the Almighty Allah, nor can they triumph in their rebellion. What has misled them into straying is their entanglement with inordinate pleasures of this world. They think that their riches and their children can make them independent of Allah; but they are mistaken in their thinking; because Allah is predominant in His affairs. If wealth and man-power could make anyone independent of Allah, they would have saved the people of Pharaoh and other unjust nations in the past, who had acquired much more power and strength. But Allah caught them for their sins and they could do nothing. Likewise, these enemies of Divine religion would soon be vanquished. Therefore, the Muslims should remain on guard; they should not fall victim of these desires and pleasures. If they followed this guidance, they would get felicity in this world and eternal reward in the next - and, of course, the pleasure of their Lord is the greatest reward. In short, these verses are mainly concerned with the affairs of the unbelievers. (With verses coming after these begin the comment on the People of the Book). å
  ([ ) (As for) those who disbelieve, surely neither their wealth nor their children shall avail them in the least against Allah: That is, their wealth and children shall not make them independent of Allah. Man's first instinctive awareness is of his dependence on others. This instinct guides him to his Maker and Sustainer. Looking at intermediate causes he, first of all, realizes that for the development and perfection of his body he depends on food and children. Then his attention is drawn to other animal perfections like fancy attire, comfortable abode, attractive spouse and things like that. At this stage, the desire of food changes into that of wealth and property, because he thinks that wealth is the panacea of all difficulties of life. Now he believes that the felicity of his life comes from wealth and children; in other words, wealth replaces food. At this stage his short-sightedness prevents him from seeing beyond these intermediate causes; he thinks that they are independent causes and forgets his Lord. His heart becomes inseparably attached to wealth and children; and this

ignorance leads him to perdition. He fails to see the signs of his Lord and disbelieves in them. He does not realize that his lord is Allah besides Whom there is no god, the Ever-living, the Self-subsisting; nothing can ever be independent of Him; nothing can ever avail against Him. The above explanation also makes it clear why the verse has given precedence to wealth over children - man's dependence on wealth (or food, a kind of wealth) precedes his dependence on children - although at times his love for children overpowers his lust for wealth. The verse seems to have abridged a long sentence. Its full import is as follows: Those who disbelieve have rejected Our signs and they think that their wealth and their children will avail them against Allah; but they are mistaken, because nothing can ever avail anyone against Allah. ([ ) and those it is who are the fuel of the fire: "al-Waqud" is fuel; that which feeds a fire and enflames it. The verse runs on the line of the following two: ...then be on guard against the fire of which men and stones are the fuel,... (2:24). Surely you and what you worship besides Allah are the firewood of hell... (21:98). This subject has been explained to some extent in the Chapter of the Cow. This sentence has many devices that are used for restriction: It is an al-jumlatu'l-ismiyyah (nominal sentence; a sentence that begins with noun or pronoun); it begins with a demonstrative pronoun and uses a pronoun that points to a distant object; has inserted a second disjunctive personal pronoun between the subject and the predicate; and has added the words "of fire" after the word, "fuel" all these things clearly show that only the unbelievers are the fuel of the fire; they are the basic source of the chastisement; they are the fuel that keeps the hell burning; others will burn in the flames that will be fuelled with the unbelievers: The verse 8:37 points to this fact: That Allah may separate the impure from the pure, and put the impure, some of it upon the other, and pile it up together, then cast it into hell... ([ ) Like the wont of the people of Pharaoh... Allah is severe in requiting: "ad-Da'b" is continuing movement. Allah has said: And He has made subservient to you the sun and the moon pursuing their courses... (14:33). Thereupon the word

was used for habit, custom or wont, because that also is a perpetual movement. In this verse, it has been used in this latter meaning. "Like the wont..."is related to a deleted sentence which may be understood from the phrase, "shall not avail them"; "the wont" is explained by the words, "they rejected Our signs". Thus, the complete sentence would be as follows: Those who disbelieve have rejected Our signs and continued on this habit unfailingly; they think that their wealth and their children will avail them against Allah; it is like the wont of the people of Pharaoh and those before them, who also had rejected Our signs. "So Allah caught them 'bi-dhunubihim' for their sins." "bi" ( translated here as "for") apparently shows the reason; in other words, Allah caught them because of their sins. But the two verses stand face to face comparing the condition of these unbelievers with that of the people of Pharaoh and those who lived before them. It strongly suggests that "bi" here points to the instrument of this catching. The unbelievers are the fuel of the fire, which shall burn them and they shall get the punishment by their own fire. Likewise, the people of Pharaoh and those who were before them were caught by their own sins; the chastisement meted out to them was another form of their own misdeeds; it was their own evil plan which surrounded them, their own injustice and oppression that destroyed them. Allah says: ...and the evil plan does not beset any save the authors of it (35:43); ...and they did not do Us any harm, but they did harm their own selves (2:57). The above explanation makes the meaning of the next sentence clearer: "and Allah is severe in requiting (evil)". The chastisement meted out by Allah is not confined to one direction, one place or one state. When a man punishes another man, his punishment comes from only a certain direction, for example, from above or below etc., and at one place, not at the others. The man so punished may run away from that particular place, or may shield himself against that particular direction. But the Divine chastisement is all-encompassing. He catches a man by the misdeeds and sins committed by that man himself; his action is always with him, in his exterior as well as in his interior; it does never separate from him. That sin turns its doer into a fuel of the fire, a fire that surrounds not only all sides of his exterior but permeates even his inner self; he cannot save himself by running away; nor can he benefit from standing still; there is neither any shelter nor any refuge against it. That is why Allah is called "severe in requiting evil". First, the verse mentioned the Divine name in the third person (Allah), then it was changed into the first person (Our signs), again it was reverted to the original third person (Allah caught). This change in the middle of the sentence serves two purposes: It freshens the mind and puts more emphasis on the truth of the

proposition. Suppose someone says: "That man is foul-mouthed and uses obscene language; and I myself have experienced his indecent manner; therefore, you should avoid his company." The sentence, "I myself have experienced his indecent manner", confirms the preceding information of his obscenity, by turning the news into experience and into a sort of testimony. The import of the verse then would be - and Allah knows better - something like this: The people of Pharaoh had the same traits as these unbelievers have. They disbelieved and rejected Our signs. There is no doubt at all about it, as We were present there and yet they rejected Our own signs, so We caught them. When this purpose was served, the pronouns were again changed to the third person. This reversion also served two purposes: It puts the sentence on the original track and brought into focus the great and all-encompassing Divine authority and power. The name, Allah, brings to mind the fact that He has all the world's affairs in His Own hands and looks after every big and small thing. It was not difficult for Him to catch the disbelievers for their sins. And that is why the name has been repeated in the next sentence. It says, "and Allah is severe in requiting", instead of saying, "and He is severe..." The name draws attention to the fact that their disbelief and their rejection of the signs was nothing but a rebellion against Almighty Allah; and it is easy for Him to catch the offenders and give them severe punishment, because He is Allah. ([ ) Say to those who disbelieve: "You shall be vanquished... the resting place": "al-Hashr" is to force a group out from their abode. It is never used with a singular object. Allah says: ...and We will gather them and leave not any one of them behind (18:47). "al-Mihad" literally means bed. The context proves that "those who disbelieve" refers to the polytheists, because in the first verse also this phrase has been used for the same group, and not for the People of the Book. Both verses are inter-related - the previous one mentioned that they put their confidence in wealth and children and sought strength from them; and this one says that they shall surely be vanquished and shall all be driven together to the hell. ([ ) Indeed there was a sign in the two hosts (which) met together in encounter: The context shows that this verse also is addressed to "those who disbelieve"; that it is the continuation of the preceding verse which told the Prophet to tell the unbelievers that they would be vanquished. There is also another

possibility: It may have been addressed to the believers, inviting them to ponder on the grace of Allah bestowed on them on the day of Badr. He helped them with His wonderful aid by affecting the sights of the eyes in a previously unheard of way. If this explanation is accepted then this verse enlarges the circle of audience - the preceding ones were addressed to the Prophet only, but this one includes the believers too. But the first explanation is more appropriate. The verse does not name the event to which it refers; but the description fits on the battle of Badr. This chapter was revealed after the battle of Badr, or even Uhud. The style shows that the event referred to was well-known to the audience who knew it with all its particulars. It was only in the battle of Badr that Allah affected the visions of the participants. In Chapter 8, this phenomenon has been described in the following words: And when He showed them to you, when you met, as few in your eyes, and He reduced you to appear as few in their eyes, in order that Allah might bring about a matter which was to be done; and to Allah are returned all affairs (8:44). But this verse mentions reducing them to appear as few; while the verse under discussion talks about showing them as twice their number. Probably, Allah made the believers appear as few in the eyes of the polytheists, so that the enemies of Islam would feel bold to attack the believers and would not abandon the thought of fighting; then after the start of the encounter, He made them appear as twice their number, so that the enemies would flee away and be vanquished. In any case, if the verse is addressed, through the Prophet to the polytheists, it does not fit except the battle of Badr. (Some reciters have recited, "you saw them", instead of "they saw them"; this recitation also supports the above-given explanation.) What the verse says is this: O polytheists! if you have any wisdom, then what .you saw on the day of Badr should be enough to convince you that victory belongs to the truth, that Allah helps by His aid whom He wishes, and that He cannot be overpowered by wealth or children. The believers, on that day, were fighting in the way of Allah: they were a small and weak band, not even one-third of the army of the unbelievers; and their strength was not even worthy of comparison with that of the unbelievers; the Muslims were only three hundred and thirteen souls, their armament and provision amounting to a grand total of six coats of mail, eight swords and two horses. And the army of the polytheists consisted of nearly one thousand warriors, their provisions, strength, horses, camels and other preparations were beyond estimate. But Allah helped the believers, in spite of their small number and weaknesses, over His enemies; He made the Muslims appear twice their actual number, in the eyes of the polytheists; and the angels were sent to help

the believers. The polytheists, who thought that their wealth and children would make them strong and victorious, were destroyed; and their great multitude and overwhelming material strength proved totally ineffective against Allah. The wont of the people of Pharaoh and those who were before them - their rejecting the Divine signs and being caught by Allah for their sins - has been repeated twice in Chapter 8. The polytheists have been admonished and reminded of the the events of Badr. It is a hint that the victory of the Muslims mentioned in the preceding verse is the victory by killing and destroying the enemies. These verses, therefore, threaten the polytheists of fighting. ([ ) one party fighting in the way of Allah and the other unbelieving: Allah did not say, "and the other in the way of Satan", or, "in the way of false deities" etc. The talk is not concerned with comparison between the two ways; its main purport is to show that nothing can be independent of Allah; that nothing can avail against Him; and that the victory belongs to Him. The comparison is, thus, between the belief in Allah and fighting in His way on one hand and disbelieving in Allah on the other. It appears from the context that the pronouns, "them" and "their", in the phrase, "they saw them twice their number" stand for the phrase, "one party fighting in the way of Allah". In other words, it says that the unbelieving party saw the believers twice the actual number of the believers, that is, the believers appeared in their eyes as six hundred and twenty-six (instead of the three hundred and thirteen). The words do not support the idea that the two pronouns stood for the two groups separately. In other words, the verse does not say that the unbelievers saw the believers twice the number of the unbelievers themselves. Someone has mentioned another possibility: That both pronouns stood for the unbelieving party, and that the unbelievers saw themselves twice their own actual number, and instead of one thousand they saw themselves as two thousand. In this way, they saw the believers even smaller in proportion than they actually were; three hundren and thirteen is less than one-sixth of two thousand, while the believers were in fact about one-third of the enemies. It would also explain the verse 8:44 mentioned earlier: And when He showed them to you, when you met, as few in your eyes, and He reduced you to appear as few in their eyes... Without this explanation the two verses would appear contradictory to each other.

Reply: If Allah wanted to say what has been suggested above, it was necessary to say clearly, "they saw themselves twice their own number". To express this idea in the present form (they saw them twice their number) creates confusion, which is unworthy of an eloquent talk. Also, it is wrong to think that this verse appears contradictory to the verse 8:44. To show contradiction, one would have to prove that both verses refer to the same time and the same situation. But it cannot be done. Probably, Allah made each group appear, as fewer than their actual number, in the eyes of the opposite party; it made them bold to attack and start fighting. Then, after the battle waxed hot and the opposing forces raged into each other, Allah made the unbelievers see the believers twice their actual number, and they lost their heart, were demoralized and fled away. So, where is the supposed discrepancy? This case is similar to the two verses describing the affairs of the Day of Resurrection: So on that day neither man nor jinn shall be asked about his sin (55:39); And stop them, for they shall be questioned (37:24). There is no conflict here because each verse is about a different time and stage. Some other exegetes have written some other views about the two pronouns; but as all of them are against the apparent meaning of the word, there is no use of quoting them here. ([ ) and Allah aids with His aid whom He pleases; most surely there is a lesson in this for those who have sight: "at-Ta'yid"(to strengthen) is derived from al-ayd (strength)."al-Absar" is sight. Some people say that here it refers to the eyes, because the verse describes how Allah influenced their eye-sight. Others say that it means wisdom and knowledge, because it is through them that one may take lesson from some event. But this controversy is misplaced, because Allah counts him who does not take lesson from events and parables as blind; and says that eyes must see and differentiate the truth from falsehood. It is a sort of claim that the truth, to which Allah invites all His creatures, is a manifest, embodied substance which is within the perception of these physical eyes. In short, the body's eye and the mind's eye are treated as one (metaphorically, of course) so far as comprehension of spiritual knowledge is concerned, because this knowledge is open for all to see. This theme is found in many verses, some of which are as follows: For surely it is not the eyes that become blind, but blind become the hearts which are in the breasts (22:46). In other words, the eyes are in the breasts, not in the heads - «and they have eyes which they do not see with... (7:179). This verse shows astonishment at their being blind to the truth: ...and put a covering upon his eyes (45:23).

All of it shows that "sight" in this verse refers to the manifest eyes; this expression is based on an implied claim that it is these eyes that see the truth and take lesson from the past experience. It is a fine example of al-isti'aratu hi 'l-kinayah (a simile which contains neither the first or second side nor its particle - instead it mentions only a concomitant of the second side in order to hint at the allegory). Its import is to show that truth is such a manifest substance that it may be seen by these eyes. What has enhanced further the beauty of this expression is the context -- the verse describes the effect the Divine decree had had on their eyesight. Obviously, the sentence, "most surely there is a lesson in this for those who have sight", is not a part of the talk which the Prophet was to address to the unbelievers (Say to those who disbelieve ...). It is addressed to the Prophet himself. Its proof is the singular second person pronoun "ka" (thou) added as suffix in "dhalika" (this). It is an indication that the unbelievers are so blind of hearts that they cannot take lesson from past events; therefore, they are not worthy of any advice. ([ ) It has been made to seem fair...: This and the following verses elaborate the preceding ones (As for those who disbelieve surely neither their wealth nor their children shall avail them in the least against Allah...). The unbelievers erroneously thought that these things would make them independent of Allah. Now, this verse explains the reason of their mistaken idea: They have submerged their souls under the love of these worldly materials and are so overwhelmed with them that they have forgotten the life hereafter. But they are mistaken, because these things are just the provisions of this transient life, their only purpose is to pave the way for the next destination that is with Allah. These people are oblivious of the reality of this worldly provision: Allah has ingrained in human nature the love of these fair and beautiful items, so that this worldly life may attain its completion and perfection. Without this inclination, continuity of human race would be endangered. It is through this love and desire that the decree of Allah is enforced: ...and there is for you in the earth an abode and a provision for a time (2:36). Allah created in man this inclination, so that he may use it as a means to reach his final destination; so that he may take from it what would benefit him in the next life. People were not expected to treat these worldly trinkets as permanent things, or to forget what lies ahead. They are on journey, going forward to their Lord; they should not take the path as the destination. Allah says: Surely We have made whatever is on the earth an embellishment for it, so that We may try them (as to) which of them is best in deed. And most surely We will make what is on it bare ground without herbage (18:7-8).

But these simpletons thought that these apparent causes of worldly pleasure were independent of Allah, (while actually they were created by Allah to be a means to obtain the pleasure of Allah). Instead, the unbelievers thought that these things would avail them against Allah. By their behavior, they turned the bliss into misery, and changed the reward into punishment. Allah says: The likeness of this world's life is only as water which We sent down from the sky; by its mingling the herbage of the earth of which men and cattle eat grows; until when the earth puts on its golden raiment and it becomes garnished, and its people think that they have power over it, Our command comes to it, by night or by day, so We render it as reaped, as though it had not been in existence yesterday;... And on the day when We will gather them all together, then We will say to those who associated others (with Allah); Keep where you are, you and your associates; then We shall separate them widely one from another... and they shall be brought back to Allah, their true Master, and what they did fabricate shall escape from them (10:24-30). These verses show that the life and its adornments are in the hands of Allah; none but He controls them. Man, in his foolishness, is deceived by its appearance and thinks that he is in control of his own affair, and that it is he who manages it and keeps it in order. He ascribes some associates in it, like idols and things like idols (wealth and children etc.). But Allah will make him aware of his follies; the embellishments will go away, the relationship between him and his associates will be cut off, and all that man had fabricated against Allah will be lost to him. Then he will understand that what he was admonished with in this world was true. Alas! understanding at that time when he will be returned to his Lord, will not benefit him at all. Allah says: "It has been made to seem fair to men the love of desires..." The question is: Who has made it to look fair to man? The world appears before man's eyes as a beautiful and adorable thing - it shows the elegance of independence and beauty of purpose. Does Allah make it appear in this light? Reason says, No. The All-knowing Wise Lord is too great to manage a thing in such a way that it would defeat His Own purpose. He says:...surely Allah attains His purpose (65:3); and Allah is predominant over His affair (12:21). If this phenomenon is to be attributed at all, it should be attributed to Satan. Allah says: ...and Satan made what they did fair-seeming to them (6:43). And when Satan made their deeds fair-seeming to them... (8:48). Of course, it is all according to the system decreed by Allah. He has given the man freedom of will to choose his own path, and Allah does not interfere in the man's choice. This system is called "permission", it is so that the test may be conducted, and so that the spiritual training may progress in a just manner. Allah says: Do men

think that they will be left alone on saying, "We believe", and not be tried? And certainly We tried those before them, so Allah will certainly know those who are true and He will certainly know the liars. Or do they who work evil think that they will escape Us? Evil is it that they judge (29:2-4). There is a verse in which this "making fair-seeming" has been attributed to Allah: Thus have We made fair-seeming to every people their deeds (6:108). This verse may be explained by the above-mentioned system of "permission". It may also be explained in the light of the previously explained verse: Surely We have made whatever is on the earth an embellishment for it, so that We may try them (as to) which of them is best in deed (18:7). This "making fair-seeming" is of two kinds. First, world and worldly embellishments are made fair-seeming to man so that he may use it wisely - to get happiness in the next world, and to seek the pleasure of Allah in all his actions through this wealth, honour, children and self. It is a good and divinely-inspired characteristic and Allah has attributed it to Himself in the verse 18:7 (Surely We have made whatever is on the earth an embellishment...), and in other verses mentioned earlier. Also the following verse refers to this reality: Say: "Who has prohibited the embellishment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants and the good provisions?" (7:32). Second, world is made to appear lovely in the eyes of man, to ensnare his heart, so that he may forget his Creator. It is an evil plan which Allah has attributed to Satan, and admonished His servants to remain on guard against it. For example: ...and Satan made what they did fair-seeming to them... (6:43); He (Satan) said: "My Lord! because Thou hast left me to stray, I will certainly make (evil) fairseeming to them on earth, and I will certainly cause them all to go astray..."(15:39); ...the evil of their doings is made fair-seeming to them... (9:37), etc. Sometimes even this type of "making fair-seeming" is attributed to Allah, inasmuch as Satan and all other causes of good and evil do whatever they do only because Allah has given them the "permission" (as explained above). This system was necessary to attain the Divine purpose of test, in order that the doers of good may succeed because of their good intention and choice; and the sinners may be separated from them. The above explanation makes it clear that it is not Allah who has made it seem fair to men the love of various desires mentioned in the verse under discussion. No doubt, every "making fair-seeming" may be attributed to Allah, either directly, (if

it is a good adornment leading man to His worship) or indirectly, that is, by permission (if it makes one to forget one's Creator). But this verse contains some factors which cannot be attributed to Allah directly. Therefore, it was in keeping with the good manners of the Qur'an not to attribute this adornment to Allah; instead, it attributes it to some unspecified agent - it could be either Satan or the man himself. An exegete has rightly said that the implied doer of the verb, "It has been made to seem fair", is Satan, because the love of desires is not a likeable trait, nor is the love of excessive wealth; and therefore, it cannot be attributed to Allah. Allah has attributed to Himself the good things mentioned at the end of this verse and in the next one. But another commentator has said that it cannot be attributed to Satan. He says: The matters related to the human nature and its love and inclinations can never be ascribed to Satan; what may be attributed to him is evil whispering that makes evil thoughts and deeds look attractive to man. He continues his argument as follows: The Qur'an has never attributed to Satan anything except making evil deed fairseeming. Allah says: And when Satan made their deeds fair-seeming to them (8:48); ...and Satan made what they did fair-seeming to them (6:43). But the Book does not attribute the realities and natures of the things except to the Wise Creator Who has no partner. Allah says: Surely We have made whatever is on the earth an embellishment for it, so that We may try them (as to) which of them is best in deed (18:7); Thus have We made fair-seeming to every people their deeds (6:108). The verse talks about the "people", which is another way of talking about the nature of society. å
! He is right when he says that the realities and natures of things cannot be attributed to other than Allah. But he is mistaken in thinking that the verse speaks about the naure of man, or about his natural traits. This statement of ours may be understood if we look at the central theme of this chapter. The main purpose of this chapter is to describe the follow realities: Allah is Self-subsisting by Whom all subsist: He manages all affairs of all His creatures; He creates them and looks after them. He guides them to their eternal bliss. Those who indulge in hypocrisy, reject His signs or revolt against Him by differing in His Book - the hypocrites, the unbelievers, the polytheists and the People of the Book - in short, all those who obey Satan and follow their desires, cannot weaken the authority of Allah, nor can they overpower Him, nor is His all-

encompassing management affected by their misbehaviour. Everything, including the creatures' belief and disbelief, obedience and disobedience, is based on the system decreed by Allah. He has created in this world the systems of the cause and effect, and of the test and trial. He has created the nature, its properties and traits, its inclinations and actions. It has been done so that man may proceed forward to his Lord, may attain nearness to Allah and may get eternal honour in the Divine presence. It was because of this system of test that He permitted Satan and did not prevent him from whispering into men's hearts and putting evil ideas into their minds. Nor did He prevent man from obeying Satan or following his own base desires. By this "permission" the test and trial remains free and fair; those who believe are distinguished from the disbelievers and the hypocrites; and the pure hearted servants of Allah are raised in status to become witnesses of Allah. These things have been described in this chapter to give comfort to the believers. At that time they were overwhelmed by hardships and difficulties. Within their society, they had to endure the double-dealings of the hypocrites and ignorance of those with disease in their hearts. These two groups disturbed their plans and disrupted their affairs; as a result the commands given by Allah and His Apostle were not fully obeyed. On the outside, they were in constant danger from various groups. There were, within Arabia, the polytheists and the People of the Book (especially, the Jews); and the neighbouring Romans and Persians were threatening them with all their might and forces. All those disbelievers were mistaken and confused in their ideas and ideals. They were entangled in this transient world and its embellishments; they thought that it was their goal and final destination. They had forgotten that this world was only a path, and the destination was the next world. It is obvious that the chapter discusses the nature of the people, but in a wider framework that includes the purpose of their creation, and all that it entails, like the character and behaviour, the good and evil deeds, the obedience and disobedience. It declares that all this is under the management of Allah, Who can never be defeated or overpowered - neither in this world nor in the next. In this world, all things happen by His "permission", which makes the test meaningful. In the next world, all will be based on the principle of recompense - good for good and evil for evil. The verses under discussion also were revealed with the same theme. The disbelievers were given those bounties in order that they might obtain with their

help the pleasure of Allah and enter into His paradise. Instead, they rejected the signs of their Lord and changed those bounties into a source of eternal misfortune; they relied on those worldly embellishments; and thought that those things would avail them against Allah; in short, they were so enchanted by created things that they forgot the Creator. But these people cannot weaken the hold of Allah over them; they cannot overpower Him, nor can they escape from Him. Allah shall catch them for their sins, and shall help His believing servants against them. He shall gather all the disbelievers together unto hell and it is an evil abode. It is their greatest mistake to rely on that which is only a provision of this worldly life, and to forget that the best destination is with Allah. These verses too speak about the nature of the disbelievers, but in a wider context that includes their good and bad deeds. Therefore, it is wrong on the part of that exegete to think that, because the verse speaks about human nature, the verb, "It has been made to seem fair", cannot be attributed to other than Allah. Further, he has offered the verse: "Thus have We made fair-seeming to every people their deeds", as a proof that realities can only be attributed to Allah, and it is only the deeds that may be attributed to Satan. But this verse clearly proves the opposite, because it attributes the deeds to Allah. Its context further strengthens this proposition. The complete verse is as follows: And do not abuse those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest exceeding the limits they should abuse Allah out of ignorance. Thus have We made fair-seeming to every people their deeds; then to their Lord shall be their return, so He will inform them of what they did (8:108). It makes clear what we have said. Another exegete has said: This "Making fair-seeming" is of two types: Commendable and condemnable. Likewise, human actions are of two kinds: good and evil. Only that which is commendable, good and praiseworthy can be attributed to Allah; and the other type is escribed to Satan. å
! The above statement is correct to a certain extent - in so far as the direct attribution is concerned. In other word, it is valid about the direct actions of Allah. Allah does not do except good and He does not enjoin indecency and evil. But there is no reason why actions, other than the good and praiseworthy, should not be attributed to Him indirectly. In other words, Allah may "permit" His creatures to do good or evil as they like. They do whatever they do by the power given to them by Allah, and according to the system of test decreed by Him. And

in this sense, all actions may be ascribed to Allah - indirectly, of course. If one says that some actions cannot be ascribed to Allah even indirectly, it would be difficult for him to believe that Allah is the Lord of everything, Creator of everything and Owner of everything, or that He has no partner or colleague in any affair at all. Moreover, the Qur'an contains many verses in which "un-praiseworthy" actions have been ascribed to Allah: Allah makes whosoever He wills go astray (13:27); ...Allah made their hearts turn aside (61:5); Allah mocks them and leaves them alone in their inordinacy (2:15); ...We order the people of it who lead easy life, so they transgress therein (17:16); there are many verses of this kind in the Qur'an. What is the source of this erroneous ideas of people like that exegete? They looked at things and meditated on their mutual relationship, on their actions and their effects. They thought that every single thing has an independent existence, is separate from all surrounding things, and has no connection with things that have passed nor with those that are yet to appear. Allah has decreed that every event should be a result of interaction of numerous causes. But these people put every thing and every event in»a separate pigeonhole, unconnected with any other thing or event. According to their thinking, each event is related only to its immediate cause, and each action belongs only to its doer; other, distant causes have nothing to do with that event or action. Planets revolve, rivers flow, ships run, earth supports its inhabitants, vegetables grow, animals walk and man lives and strives: All these phenomena are separate from each other; there is no bond that binds them to one another; neither any metaphysical reality joins them together nor any physical force keeps them united. Going a step further, they ascribed the same separateness to human actions and affairs. Virtue and evil, felicity and infelicity, guidance and misguidance, obedience and disobedience, benevolence and malevolence, justice and injustice, nothing is related to any other thing, nothing has any connection with anything else in its existecne. These people have overlooked the most obvious reality - that the universe, with all sorts of creatures and all kinds of components, is a single entity, whose parts are finely aligned together. Not only that - its components are often interchanged: Today it is a human being, tomorrow it will change into dust and the day after tomorrow will grow as a grass; one's life is the other's death; the "new" arises from the ashes of the "old". The events happening herein are likewise all related to each other; they are the

links that are connected together to form the chain that is called the universe. An apparently insignificant alteration in the position of a small link affects the positions of all other links on both sides. A minute change in an atom causes changes in the whole system of the world, although we may not notice it. (If we do not know that a thing exists, it does not mean that it does not exist.) This universal inter-relation was known to, and described by, the ancient philosophers; and it has been fully manifested by modern sciences. And the Qur'an had explained to the Muslims this phenomenon long before they learned it from philosophers, scientists and mathematicians of other nations, and then started to do their own researches on these lines. The Divine Book tells us how the system of the heavens and the earth are interlocked, how one affects the other, how all are joined together in attaining to the purpose of creation, how the Divine decree permeates everything, how all are proceeding towards their Lord, and how the final destination is with Allah. Likewise, the characteristics and attributes of our actions are linked together. Even the opposite actions stand face to face with each other, and if one of them goes away, the other would not be recognized. It resembles the physical world where making of one thing depends on unmaking of the other, and the one's progress causes the other's retrogress. If one of the opposite is missing, the other's desired effects on the society would also disappear. The same is the case of virtue and evil as shown by the Divine religion. Obedience is a virtue because disobedience is an evil; good deeds deserve good recompense because bad deeds attract severe requital; reward is pleasant because punishment is unpleasant; and pleasure is desired because displeasure is undesirable. Man by nature gravitates towards felicity and happiness; and runs away from infelicity and unhappiness. If this natural movement stops, the existence itself would dissolve into nothingness. Obedience, then good deeds, then reward, then pleasure, then happiness - it is a chain that runs parallel to disobedience, then evil deeds, then punishment, then displeasure, then unhappiness. Each side manifests itself by hiding the other; each one gets life in the death of its opposite. How can one call to good deeds without warning against its opposite misdeeds? We can see in this light that in the Divine wisdom it was necessary for the universe to contain the opposites - virtue and evil, obedience and disobedience. At this stage, there appears an important difference: Creation and destruction, making and unmaking in all things, except human actions, are attributed to Allah, because the creation and all its affairs are in His hands, He has no partner or colleague. So far

as the actions are concerned, if they are good and virtuous, they too are directly attributed to Allah, because He has guided the man to them. But evil deeds and affairs, like whispering of Satan, overpowering of man by desires or rule of a tyrant over a nation, may be indirectly attributed to Allah, inasmuch as He withdraws His help from the doers of such deeds and leaves them free to go astray. It is this factor that is called "permission". It is correct to say that Allah has permitted Satan to misguide human beings with his whisperings and deceptions; that He does not prevent man from following his base desires; and that He does not hinder an unjust person from his oppression. He has decreed this system because felicity and infelicity are based on freedom of choice; if a man succeeds, it shall be by his own free choice; and if he fails, it too shall be by his own free choice. Otherwise, the proof of Allah could not be completed against His servants, and the intended test would be irrelevant. What prevented the said exegete and Others like him from letting the Qur'anic arguments and expressions progress to their logical result, was their reluctance to accept what seemed to them a wrong conclusion. Those who believed that everything is done by Allah and that there is no cause other than Allah were disinclined to accept that things were linked together in a chain of cause and effect, because, according to their thinking, it implied a reduction in the all pervasive power of Allah. Others thought that if deeds of all types could be attributed to Allah - directly or indirectly - it would absolve the man from responsibility of his action, as it would mean that he was not free in his action; rather he was a helpless tool in the hands of Allah. Once it was accepted, the system of test, reward and punishment would be negated; and there would be no justification for ordaining the Divine law and religion. But they should have meditated on the words of Allah revealed in the Qur'an: ...and Allah is predominant over His affairs (12:21); ...surely His is the creation and the command (7:54); Now surely of Allah is what is in the heavens and the earth... (10:55). There are many similar verses that prove what we have explained above; and a short description of this topic was given under the verse: Surely Allah is not ashamed to set forth any parable - (that of) a gnat or anything above that (2:26). Now we return to our original topic: Apparently the doer of the verb, "It has been made to seem fair", is something other than Allah - it is either Satan or the man's soul itself. There are four reasons to support this view of ours: ! The verse condemns the disbelievers because they are inclined to these

embellishments of the world - wealth and children -- and think that these things may avail them against Allah. It is an adornment that turns one away from remembrance of Allah, and it is not proper to ascribe such a "making fair-seeming" to Allah. %
 $! If this "making fair-seeming" is attributed to Allah, it would point to the natural inclination, ingrained in human creation. In that case, it was more appropriate to use the word, "al-insan" (human being, man) or "children of Adam"; because Allah uses such words on such occasions: Certainly We created man (alinsan) in the best make. Then We rendered him the lowest of the low (95:4-5); And surely We have honoured the children of Adam, and We carry them in the land and the sea, and We have given them of the good things, and We have made them to excel by an appropriate excellence over most of those whom We have created (17:70). But in the verse under discussion Allah has used the word, "an-nas" (men, people) which more often than not has been used in the Qur'an to show worthlessness of the people referred to, to show their immaturity and narrowmindedness. For example,... but most men do not consent to aught but denying (17:89); O you people! surely We have created you of a male and a female... (49:13), etc.  $! The items of desires enumerated in this verse do not fit properly the inclinations ingrained in human nature. If the Qur'an wanted to refer to the natural desires, then it would have been more appropriate to change the words, "women and sons and hoarded treasures of gold and silver" with the words, "spouses, and children and wealth". After all the natural inclination towards the opposite sex is found in women as much as in men; and the parents love their daughters as much as their sons; and man loves wealth in general and not only the hoarded treasures of gold and silver. Those who say that the doer of the verb, "It has been made to seem fair" is Allah, have had to say that the word, "women", refers to matrimony in general; the "sons" means children of both sexes; and the phrase, "hoarded treasures of gold and silver" stands for wealth in general. They say that the words used in the verse have been given just as the most popular examples of every item. But it is stretching the meanings too far.  ! To say that it is Allah Who has made these items fair-seeming to men is not in conformity with the end of the verse: "this is the provision of the life of this world; and Allah is He with Whom is the best destination. Say: 'Shall I tell you of what is better than these?'" Obviously these words have been used to divert their

attention from these worldly desires, and create in them love of the things that are with Allah - paradise, pure mates and pleasure of Allah. The natural desire of worldly embellishments has been created by Allah, in order that man may use them to reach his spiritual destination - the same paradise and pleasure of Allah. That natural desire is the means to obtain that result. If Allah admonished men to forget these worldly desires and yet told them to reach the intended goal it would be selfcontradictory. Who would want to satiate his hunger and yet abstain from food? 
 ! This verse in its theme is not different from the verse, Say: "Who has prohibited the embellishment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants and the good provisions?" Say: "These are for the believers in the life of this world, purely (theirs) on the Resurrection Day..." (7:32). In this verse the embellishment is ascribed to Allah; likewise, the doer of this "making fairseeming" in the verse under discussion should be Allah. [
! There is a clear difference in the import of the two verses. The verse under discussion condemns these desires; because they divert the attention of men from Allah and from what is with Allah. It exhorts them to turn aside from these worldly entanglements and to look forward to what is with Allah. The theme of the verse of Chapter 7 is quite different. It says that these embellishments have been created for the benefit of human beings; the believers enjoy them in this world together with the others; and it will be reserved for the believers only in the next world. It should be noted that this verse uses the word "His servants", instead of the "men" and it counts the embellishment as "the good provisions". 
 ! What has been made fair-seeming is "the love of desires", not the desires themselves. The fact that love seems fair to man and attracts him is a natural reality. The expression, that love has been made fair-seeming to men, means that it has been made effective in their hearts; in other words, love has been created in their hearts; and creation cannot be attributed to other than Allah. Therefore, He is the doer of this verb. [
! The context (to which we have referred) shows that adornment of love means that love has been given a power that attracts people to it and prevents them from looking at other things. Adornment is an attractive thing that is used or worn by another thing; it attracts the people primarily to itself and then transfers that attraction to the wearer or user. A woman uses cosmetics and ornaments, in order to attract her man to herself - by way of those embellishments. Primarily the man is attracted by those embellishments, but the real objective of the woman is to attract him to herself. In this background, the semantic flow of the word, "It has been

made fair-seeming... the love of desires..." is that primarily the love attracts the men to itself but the real objective is to enchant the people and let them sink in inordinate desire of the named trinkets of the world. In short, the effect of love is not the true objective; and therefore the argument mentioned in the question is out of place. The real goal (which has been condemned) is the desire, as may be seen in the verse: But there followed after them an evil generation, who neglected prayer and followed the sensual desires, so they shall soon meet (the result of their)sin (19:59). This meaning is supported by the given list of the desired things. Moreover, the word "desire", although used here for desired things, has a shade of inordinate passion in its meaning. ([ ) of women and sons and hoarded treasures of gold and silver and wellbred horses and cattle and tilth: "an-Nisa" (women) is plural, it has no singular from this root; "al-banin" (sons) is plural of al-ibn male offspring, direct or indirect); "al-qanatir" is plural of al-qintar (a waterskin full of gold, a filled waterskin); "al-mu-qantarah" is passive participle (object-noun) of al-qintar although the latter is an inflexible noun. In Arabic language, they often ascribe to an inflexible noun a shade of meaning that makes it resemble an infinitive verb, and then make various words from it, for example, al-baqil, at-tamir and al-'attar for seller of al-baql (vegetable), at-tamr (date) and al-'itr (perfume) respectively. It qualifies the word al-qanatir (treasures) with an adjective al-muqantarah (treasured, hoarded) which is derived from the same word. This device doubly confirms the meaning of the qualified words, for example, dananir mudanarah (coined dinars), dawawin mudawwanah (recorded register), hijaab mahjub (veiled curtain) and sitr mastur (concealed screen). "al-Khayl" (horses); "almusawwamah" has two meanings: left free to pasture or branded. "al-An'am" is plural of an-na'am which means camel, cow, buffalo, goat and sheep; al-bahimah is more general than that and is used for all quadrupeds and excludes carnivora, birds and insects. "al-Harth" (tilth) has a meaning of earning in it; it means farming (or cultivated plant) for a livelihood. The list of desired things given here does not mean that every man has so many loves of desires, as some exegetes have thought; they took the verse to refer to the natural love of spouse, children and wealth. But then they had to explain why human being has been referred to as "men" or people, why "children" has been changed to "sons" and why "wealth" has been described as "hoarded treasures". The fact, however, is that the verse only says that people, in their inordinate love of worldly desires, are of various types: There ,are some lecherous persons whose

only aim in life is lusting after women; it brings in its train numerous sins and social ills, like using musical instruments, singing, drinking liquor and many other evils. Such debauchery is found mostly in men; women as a rule are free from it (except, in rare cases). Then there are those who ardently love their sons and want their number to increase in order to become a strong and powerful clan; this tendency is more prominent in nomadic tribes, and it especially concerns the sons, not the daughters. A third category is of those greedy avaricious persons who live only for the purpose of hoarding treasures and riches; this madness manifests itself especially in filling their coffers with gold and silver, or similar things like currency notes and bonds, other items are not valued very much by such people. This covetousness is predominent in inhabitants of villages and towns, and is seldom seen in nomads. Finally, come those who want to own a string of pedigreed horses. (It is those who are fond of horsemanship or horse-race); some others love to have cattle; yet others eagerly desire for agricultural farm. The last named three types of desire are sometimes found together. People usually are overwhelmed by one of the above-mentioned desires primarily, and the rest is given a secondary place. One seldom (or, never) finds a man whose love of all these items is of equal degree. Other desired "things", like power, position, prestige, presidency, ministry etc., are only imaginary things, that have no existence outside imagination. Man desires them not for their own sake, but only because they give him a chance to acquire wealth. And, in any case, it is not the purport of the verse to enumerate all the desires. It proves what we mentioned earlier that the "love of desires" means inordinate attachment to these things (and it is ascribed to Satan); it does not refer to the natural love that has been ingrained in human psyche (and which is attributed to Allah). ([ ) this is the provision... best destination: These desires are such as may be useful, to manage the affairs of this life; but this life itself, like its provisions, is a transient thing; it will soon cease to exist. The good life and the best destination is only with Allah. ([ ) Say: "Shall I tell you... and Allah's pleasure: It elaborates the preceding sentence, "and Allah is He with Whom is the best destination". It puts, in place of the above-mentioned transient and misleading desires, other things that are best for the man, because they shall remain forever and are really good, without any shade

of imperfection. Although these good enjoyments are similar to those evil desires, but they are free from all evil and bad effects, and they do not divert the man's attention from sublime Divine realities. The three good enjoyments are the paradise, the pure mates and the pleasure of Allah. Among the blessings of the paradise are the pure mates. The verse has already mentioned the paradise. Then what was the need of mentioning the "pure mates" separately. It is because sexual intercourse is the greatest physical pleasure of a human being. It was for the same reason that the preceding verse mentioned "women" before "sons" and "hoarded treasures". "ar-Ridwan" is also read as ar-rudwan; it means pleasure, when a reality is agreeable to one's heart; as-sukht (displeasure) is its opposite. The Qur'an repeatedly mentions the pleasure of Allah. Allah is pleased with a servant if he obeys His command; also He is pleased if the servant acquires such attributes and qualities which are good and praiseworthy. But in most - nay, all places where it has been mentioned in the Qur'an, it is related to the obedience. That is why sometimes it is described side by side with the pleasure of the servant. Allah is pleased with His servant because of his obedience; the servant is pleased with his Master because of the good reward given to him. Allah says: Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him (98:8); O tranquilled soul (that art at rest) / Return to thy Lord, well pleased (with Him), well pleasing (to Him) (89:27-28); And (as for) the foremost, the first of the Emigrants and the Helpers, and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him (9:100). Pleasure of Allah has been counted here as one of those things that are better for men than the desires of this world's life. It shows that this pleasure itself is one of the things that man should desire - or, it accompanies such things that should be desired by him. That is why it has been joined in this verse with the gardens and the pure wives. In other verses, it has been jointly mentioned with grace, forgiveness and mercy of Allah: ...seeking the grace from their Lord and (His) pleasure... (5:2); and forgiveness from Allah and (His) pleasure... (57:20); ...mercy from Himself and (His) pleasure... (9:21). The verse under discussion implies a sublime reality that one may comprehend on meditating on the verses mentioned above, for example, Allah is well pleased with them... (98:8) and: well pleased with Him, well pleasing (to Him) (89:28). The verses say that Allah is well pleased with them; it is different from saying that He

is well pleased with their deeds. It proves that Allah shall never reject any of their prayers; He shall never disappoint them in whatever they ask Him for. It leads to us to the verse: They have therein what they wish and with Us is more yet (50:35). In short, when Allah is pleased with a man, that man shall be granted all his wishes without any reservation. Now we may realize the true significance of the verses. Man thinks that if he acquires the worldly objects mentioned in the preceding verse - and especially the hoarded treasures - it will give him freedom of action; he will be able to do whatever he wishes and he will get unlimited power; but he is grossly mistaken in it. Such unlimited power comes only from the pleasure of Allah, Who has every affair in His own hands. ([ )! and Allah sees the servants: The two verses showed that Allah has created for man in both worlds many bounties and pleasant things which he is wont to enjoy, for example, sexual pleasure, food, drink, property and things like that. These items are found in both worlds, with one difference - the pleasures of this world are available to both the believers and the non-believers; but the bounties of the next world are reserved for the believers only; non-believers will have no share in it. A question could be asked: Why this difference? Why only the believers will be given the pleasant things of the next world? The sentence, "Allah sees the servants", answers this unasked question. This difference between the believer and non-believer is based on a basic difference between their conditions, and Allah sees them and knows the difference between them. The dividing factor is piety and fear of Allah, which is found in the believer only. That attribute of piety and fear of Allah has been elaborated in the next two verses: "Those who say .. forgiveness before dawn". The pious believers declare that they depend on their Lord in all their affairs; and they confirm that declaration with good deeds. The unbeliever, on the other hand, thinks that he is independent of Allah; he remains entangled in worldly desires, forgets the next world and his ultimate destination. Therefore, he shall be denied the pleasures of that world. Now read again the verses, "this is the provision of the life of this world; and Allah is He with Whom is the best destination. Say: 'Shall I tell you of what is better than these?' For those who guard (against evil) are gardens with their Lord, beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them, and pure mates..." Also, look at other verses of the same theme, for example, Say: "Who has prohibited the embellishment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servantsand the good provisions? Say: "These

are for the believers in the life of this world, purely (theirs) on the Resurrection Day; thus do We make the signs clear for a people who know" (7:32). If you ponder on such verses, you will easily grasp the reality of the bounties of the paradise; also you will know how baseless is the following objection directed against them by many writers: 25
 ! Look at any worldly thing; all its actions and reactions emanate from various organs and faculties which are found in its system. Allah has equipped it with those organs and faculties to protect and preserve its existence. After all, existence is not a matter of chance, nor does it happen at random or without a purpose. Here is the man; his whole body is equipped with the most efficient and most mind-boggling systems, all geared to one aim - to ingest and digest the food he takes. The digested food replaces the burnt up cells, tissues and other parts of the body; through this ever-continuing process, man remains alive, his body recoups its losses and even grows. Likewise, he has been given the most intricate reproductory systems - male and female complementing each other in the most awe-inspiring manner. And the purpose behind it is to preserve and propagate the human species. What has been said about the man, is equally true for the animal and the vegetables. The nature very cunningly put delicious taste and irresistible pleasure in these actions, compelling the creatures, and especially the man and the animal, to do it again and again in-pursuit of pleasure. Immersed in the pleasure of food and sexual intercourse, man is seldom aware that the nature is using him for its own goal, that is, preservation of human race. If the food and sexual intercourse were devoid of pleasure, no man would have indulged in them - even if he was told that the survival of his race depended on it. But in the present setup man gladly endures whatever hardships come in his way and obtains those pleasures. When he gets his desire, he feels happy and even proud of his achievement. But it is the nature that should really be proud of its planning: It wanted to keep the individual alive - and it was done through eating; and it wanted the species to survive - and this goal was attained through copulation. And what was left for the self-satisfied man? Nothing except the memory of a transient pleasure. These worldly pleasures are ingrained in our system but for a limited and transitory purpose. There is no reason why they should be transplanted from this world to the next where that purpose cannot be attained. The pleasure of food, drink and other such things is meant to protect the body from weakness, sickness and death. The

pleasure of sexual intercourse and other related things is meant for the continuity and survival of the human race. If a man is taken out of this world and given an everlasting existence which is immune from death and annihilation; a life that is free from every hardship and difficulty, and every sorrow and grief, then there is no reason why he should be encumbered with these worldly organs and faculties. Why should he be burdened with various systems of the body and a myriad of organs like stomach, kidneys, bladder, spleen, liver, etc.? After all, they were needed only in the worldly life which was transitory; what purpose would they serve in the eternal life? [
! Allah has created these pleasures as well as the bounties from which they spring forth, as an embellishment of this world's life. The aim is to attract the man initially to them - and through them to the life itself. Allah has said: Surely We have made whatever is on the earth an embellishment for it... (18:7). Wealth and children are an adornment of the life of this world... (18:46). ...coveting the (transitory) goods of this world's life... (4:94). And do not stretch your eyes after that with which We have provided different classes of them, (of) the splendour of this world's life, that We may thereby try them; and the sustenance (given) by your Lord is better and more abiding (20:131). Note: This verse covers all aspects of the subject under discussion. And whatever things you have been given are only a provision of this world's life and its adornment, and whatever is with Allah is better and more lasting; do you not then understand? (28:60). There are many verses of the same import. They make it clear that all the bounties of this world have been created to make this life pleasant - this life which is so short and finite. If there were no life, these bounties and their pleasures would not have been created. This is a fact and upto this point we totally agree with our adversaries. Now comes the important reality which has been overlooked by the said objector. When he says that the man is given an everlasting existence in the next world, what meaning does he assign to the word "man"? Man has no other identity except this existence which he perfects in various stages. He is a combination of a spirit and a body - the body which is made of various organs, faculties, powers and senses. Remove these organs and faculties etc., and there will remain neither any

person nor his existence - nothing will survive. Negation of body and its various systems and organs is not just a negation of man's continued existence, it is negation of the man himself. Man, in fact, is a being who procreates, eats, drinks and copulates; he manages the things given them to, and receiving them from, others; he feels, thinks and understands; he feels happiness and is overcome by sorrow. All these actions and reactions form his personality - we may say that he is the sum total of these faculties and systems. Then Allah transfers him from this transitory world to the everlasting abode and makes him an eternal being - either enjoying everlasting reward or undergoing abiding punishment. But Allah does not do so by nullifying man's entity and giving him another one; He only bestows on his present entity the quality of eternity, removing from it the defects of changes and death. Whatever bounties he is awarded, they must be similar to those he had enjoyed in this world; otherwise, he would not enjoy it at all. And what are the pleasures he is familiar with? There is nothing except sexual intercourse, food, drink, clothes, house, friends, and other such enjoyments. Of course, there will be one difference: While the pleasure of this world is transitory, that of the next will be eternal. Likewise, the punishments given to him should be similar to the hardships and afflictions of this world, with the same difference - while the calamities of this world are transitory, those of the next will be everlasting. In short, man in the next world will remain the same man; there too he will need and require the same things which he needed and required here. The difference between the pleasures and displeasures of this world and those of the next is that the latter will be eternal and everlasting. This reality manifests itself in the words of Allah, where He describes the creation of man: And certainly We created man of an extract of clay; then We made him a small life-germ in a firm resting-place, then We made the life-germ a clot, then We made the clot a lump of flesh, then We made (in) the lump of flesh bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh; then We caused it to grow into another creation; so blessed be Allah, the best of the creators. Then after that you will most surely die. Then surely on the Day of Resurrection you shall be raised (23:12-16). Note the verbs in the beginning, "We created", and "We made"; the Arabic verbs are derived from al-khalq which implies collection, combination and re-arrangement. Then comes the verb "ansha'nahu" (We caused it to grow into); it implies a change in the mode of creation. (Obviously, it refers to the relation of the soul with the body.) Lastly, comes the declaration, "Then surely on the Day of Resurrection you shall be raised". The sentence addresses the same person who was given a body

and then was caused to grow into another creation. It is that combination of body and soul that will be raised on the Day of Resurrection. Likewise, He says: He (also) said: "Therein shall you live, and therein shall you die, and from it shall you be raised" (7:25). In other words, the man's life is the earthly one, made of its joys and its sorrows. We have explained it to a certain extent under the verse: Mankind was but one people... (2:213). Allah says about the bounties of this world: this is the provision of the life of this world (3:14); and then He says: and this world's life is nothing in the hereafter but (only some) provision (13:26). The very life of this world is a provision in the hereafter; it is a means of enjoyment in the next life. It is a very unique expression; and it opens a thousand doors of knowledge for those who may ponder on it. The verse confirms the tradition of the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.): "As you live, so you shall die: and as you die, so you shall be raised." To sum it up, the life of man is made up of the worldly existence together with the good or evil he may have earned. It is this very life which shall be his provision in the hereafter, where he shall reap the reward or punishment according to what he thinks to be his success and prosperity, or failure and loss. He will be awarded his pleasures and enjoyments and will thus get eternal happiness; on the other hand, if he were deprived of those pleasures and enjoyments, he would remain in eternal sorrow. And this is meant by the bounties of the Garden and the torment of the Fire. Let us explain it further. Man has a felicity according to his nature, and an infelicity according to the same. The felicity and infelicity are related to his survival as an individual and as a species. This survival depends on his various physical actions, like eating, drinking, copulation etc. Allah has made these actions attractive to him by investing them with pleasure and satisfaction. Thus, the man proceeds on the path of perfection and begins working consciously according to his senses and will. At this stage, his perfection becomes inextricably interlocked with his senses and will. He does not recognize any perfection unless he desires it and feels it, even if it is perfection in the eyes of the nature. For example, we do not draw any pleasure from that which we do not actively feel, even if it is a natural source of pleasure, like the health, wealth and child. On the other hand, we get pleasure from what we actively feel to be pleasant, even if it is not so in reality, like a patient who believes himself to be in good health. At this stage, these preliminary pleasures become real perfection for the man, although according to the nature they were but preliminary ones. When Allah bestows eternity on such a man, his happiness will depend on only those pleasures which he would himself wish for and desire. And his unhappiness will emanate

from that which he would not desire. Felicity of a man having perception and will emanates from that which he knows and desires; and his infelicity from that which he knows but does not desire. The man would be happy in the hereafter only if he got the pleasures which he used to desire in the life of this world,, like the food, the drink and the spouses and even more; and this is the paradise. And he would be unhappy if he did not get that; and this is the hell. Allah says: they shall have in them what they please (16:13). ([ )! Those who say: "Our Lord! surely we believe, therefore forgive us our sins and save us from the chastisement of the fire": The pronoun, "those", refers to "those who guard (against evil)", mentioned in the preceding verse. They call upon Allah and say, "Our Lord!" By declaring His lordship, they confess their own servitude and seek His Mercy to grant them what they are asking for. "surely we believe": The sentence is not an attempt to lay God under their obligation, because it is Allah Who lays the believers under His obligation by helping them to believe. Allah says: ...rather Allah lays you under an obligation by guiding you to the faith... (49:17). Rather it is a plea to Allah to fulfill for them the promise of forgiveness made with the believers: ...and believe in Him, He will forgive you of your faults... (46:31). That is why the next clause begins with "therefore", (therefore forgive us our sins), showing that this prayer is based on the preceding clause. The assertive particle "inna" (surely) emphasizes their truth, showing that they are firm in their belief. The forgiveness of sins, per se, does not necessarily mean release from punishment. Saving a sinner from punishment is a grace which Allah bestows on him who believes in Him and worships Him. It is not a right of the servant that Allah should save him from the chastisement of the Fire, or that He should admit him into the Garden. Even the servant's belief and obedience are from the grace of Allah; obviously they cannot give the servant any right upon Allah. Of course, sometimes Allah in His mercy establishes some rights for the servants on Himself; and one of those rights is the promise given to them that He would forgive their sins and save them from the chastisement of the Fire provided they believed in Him: ...and believe in Him, He will forgive you of your faults and protect you from a painful punishment (46:31). Nevertheless, it may be inferred from some Qur'anic verses that the protection from the punishment of the Fire is one and same with the forgiveness and the Garden. Allah says: O you who believe! shall I lead you to a merchandise which

may deliver you from a painful chastisement? You shall believe in Allah and His Apostle, and struggle hard in Allah's way with your properties and your lives, that is better for you, did you but know. He will forgive you your faults and cause you to enter into gardens beneath which rivers flow, and goodly dwellings in gardens of perpetuity; that is the mighty achievement (61:10-12). The last sentences (saying that the believers' faults shall be forgiven and they shall enter into gardens) explain in detail what the first sentence had said in a general way: "shall I lead you to a merchandise which may deliver you from a painful chastisement?" Thus, deliverance from chastisement means forgiveness of sins and entry into the garden. It is a very subtle idea, and we shall explain it in a more appropriate place, God willing. ([ )! The patient, and the truthful, and the devout (ones) and those who spend (benevolently) and those who ask for forgiveness before dawn: The five attributes refer to "those who guard (against evil)"; these are the virtues which are essential for piety, for guarding against evil. î

! This virtue has been mentioned first and without any condition. It, therefore, covers all three kinds of patience: Patience (i.e., steadfastness) in obedience of Allah; patience (i.e., abstaining) from the disobedience; and patience (i.e., forbearance) in face of a calamity.  ! The final analysis of truth means conformity of a man's exterior - his word and deed - with his inner-self. In this sense, it covers all the other virtues mentioned here, like patience and devoutness etc. Obviously, such a meaning would not fit the context. We have, therefore, to interpret it as the truth in words only. And Allah knows better. *
+
! It means humility before Allah; and covers all the acts of worship and obedience. %
$ ,

+
! It is giving money to him who deserves it. As for asking for forgiveness before dawn, it makes it necessary for the servant to pray in the last hours of night in order that he may ask for forgiveness in that prayer. Traditions say that it refers to the non-obligatory prayer after midnight, and to the asking for forgiveness in al-qunut (the special invocation before bowing down in the salat) of al-watr (the last, that is, eleventh rak'ah of the prayer after midnight; it is performed as an independent unit, with a qunut before bowing

down). Allah has pointed to it as a way that leads man to his Lord. Vide Chapters 73 and 74, where mentioning the prayer after midnight. Allah says: Surely this is a reminder, so whoever pleases takes to his Lord a way (73:19; 76:29). ([ )! Allah bears witness that there is no god but He, and (so do)the angels and those possessed of knowledge, maintaining (His creation) with justice: The verbal noun, "ash-shahadah" originally meant "to look at", "to see"; one got knowledge of a thing or an event by being present at the -time and place of occurrence and looking at it. Then it was used for describing it to others and bearing witness to the knowledge thus gained. Thereafter, the word was concurrently used for both meanings, both being treated as its real meanings. After all, there was not much distance from acquiring a knowledge to describing it to others. Mostly one acquires knowledge of an event with one aim in view: to preserve the reality and truth - lest it be invalidated or falsified as a result of a dispute or because of someone's attempt to conceal the truth and usurp the right, or because one really forgets it. A witness protects the truth and reality. Acquiring the knowledge and bearing the testimony accordingly is called witnessing - protecting the truth. "al-Qist" is justice. The preceding eight verses, beginning with, "(As for) those who disbelieve" and ending at, "those who ask for forgiveness before dawn", have shown that there is no god other than Allah, and that nothing can avail one against Him; whatever the man relies on in this life, whatever he thinks may avail him against his Lord, it is but an embellishment and a provision - the Lord has given him that provision in order that he may use it for a better purpose - for his success in the hereafter. But that success cannot be attained except with piety and fear of Allah. The bounties of this world are commonly enjoyed by both the believer and the unbeliever; but the bounties of the hereafter are reserved for the believers only. Those verses have described the fundamental truth; now in this verse Allah reconfirms it bearing witness that what has been told above is pure truth without a shadow of doubt. Allah bears witness that there is no god but He. As there is no god besides Allah, nothing whatsoever can avail a man against Allah - be it his wealth or his children or any other embellishment of this life. If any of these could avail a man against Allah, it would have become a god itself; or at least it would be relying on some other god. But there is no god except Allah. He bears this witness while He stands with justice in His actions, looks after His

creation with equity. He manages the affairs of the universe through a system of cause and effect. This system has been created by Him; and ultimately everything the cause, the effect and their mutual relationship - returns to Him. He has placed in this highway of progress countless bounties in order that the man may enjoy and use them in this world, and then get their benefit in the hereafter. It is a provision for the road; man should make its use as a temporary measure. He should not settle permanently on the roadside. Allah bears witness to these facts, and He is a Just Witness. Here we should point to a very fine point: The justice of Allah is a witness for itself as well as for His Oneness. In other words, His justice is a self-sustaining reality and also proves that Allah is One. When we hear a testimony, we insist that the witness must be a just one, of approved probity; he must be proceeding on the straight path of nature, and should not deviate from it - neither to the right nor to the left. In short, he should put everything in its right place, and should do every work at its proper time and place in a proper way. Such a man is called just and his testimony shall be accepted because it should be free from lie and falsehood. The man becomes just by adhering to the path of nature. When conformity with that path and system bestows justice on a man, how can there be any doubt about the justice of that system itself. It is a pure justice - and it is the work of Allah. When we feel waxed on account of an event occuring in the nature, or when we find it taking place against our inclination and desire, we, in our annoyance, dispute about it and object against it. (Interestingly we depend, in that disputation too, on the same natural system.) Then on further investigation we come to understand the reason of that event, and find that our objection had no leg to stand upon. Or may be we failed in our search and could not find any reason for it; so what have we got in our hand? Only the ignorance of the reason. But the absence of the knowledge of reason is not the same as the knowledge of the absence of reason. To make a long story short, the system found in the universe (and it is the handiwork of Allah) is pure justice. And if there were any other god besides Allah, the whole system could not be called all-encompassing justice; the work of each god would have been "just" only within the sphere of his own activity, only in his own jurisdiction. Thus, the justice of the system of creation proves the Oneness of the Creator. Allah bears witness - and He is the Just Witness - that there is no god but He. He

testifies in clear words and says: "Allah bears witness that there is no god but He". The verse contains the testimony of Allah for His Oneness; in this respect, it resembles the verse 4:166 which says: But Allah bears witness by what He has revealed to you that He has revealed it with His knowledge (also); and Allah is sufficient as a witness. The angels bear witness that there is no god but He. Allah informs us in the verses of Meccan period, revealed long before this one, that the angels are His honoured servants, who act according to His commandment and declare His glory in His praise: Nay! they are honoured servants; they do not precede Him in speech and (only) according to His commandment do they act (21:26 - 27); ...and the angels declare His glory in the praise of their Lord... (42:5). And their declaration of His glory includes the testimony that there is no god besides Him. Those possessed of knowledge bear witness that there is no god but He. They look at and ponder on His signs in the universe and in their own selves; and those signs have overwhelmed their perception and taken deep root in their minds. The foregoing discourse makes it clear that:  ! The witness, mentioned here, is the testimony in words, as the verse manifestly shows. It does not refer to bearing witness by actions - although the Divine actions too are evidence of His Oneness. There is an intricate system permeating the creation right from the smallest particle to the whole universe; and this oneness of system bears witness to the Oneness of the Creator. Nevertheless, this verse refers to the verbal testimony only. %
 $! The clause, "maintaining (His creation) with justice", is a circumstantial one, referring to the subject, "Allah" and governed by the verb, "bear witness". In other words, His "maintaining (His creation) with justice" is not witnessed for, neither by Allah nor by the angels or those possessed of knowledge; rather it means that Allah, maintaining (His creation) with justice, bears witness that there is no god but He; and the angels and those possessed of knowledge bear witness to His Oneness. This meaning is obvious from the position of this clause, "there is no god but He", is the reality that has been witnessed for; and the clause, "maintaining (His creation) with justice" has been separated from it by the words, "and (so do) the angels and those possessed of knowledge". If this clause were a part of the testimony, it should have been joined to the former clause and written thus: 'that

there is no god but He, maintaining (His creation) with justice, and (so do) the angels...' Some exegetes have written that the clause may be explained in both ways; but the above explanation shows that it is not so. Someone has offered a very absurd explanation. He thinks that the testimony mentioned in this verse is not verbal, is not given in words. According to him, if the testimony were a verbal one, the belief in Oneness of God would depend on someone's words, and not on rational reasoning. But acceptance of that word and testimony depends on the belief in God. A vicious circle! He goes on to say: That is why some exegetes have said that the verb, "bears witness", has been used here in a metaphorical sense. The creation, with all its interwoven, interdependent and intricate systems, proves that the whole universe has been created by One Creator. It is as though Allah Himself, through this practical demonstration, is speaking and testifying for His Oneness. Likewise, the angels worship Him and act according to His commandment, and the knowledgeable people look at the signs pointing to His Oneness - and their attitude and behavior are tantamount to the witness that there is no god but Allah. [
! This explanation is based on a fallacious presumption. It is true that where we can acquire knowledge ourselves through external senses or intellectual reasoning, we do not rely on other's reporting or testimony. The reason being that such a reporting or testimony does not create the firm knowledge which may be gained through intellectual reasoning or external senses. But if there is a report that create as firm a knowledge as the intellectual reasoning (or even firmer than that), then it will be as much reliable as that reasoning (if not more than that). For example, a mutawatir report is far more effective and creates a much more surer knowledge than an intellectual reasoning based on logic or analogy, although the latter too creates certainty. Now, suppose there is a witness who, we know, cannot tell lies - because his truth and veracity has been proved by clear proofs - then his testimony would create as much certainty as a rational argument. And we know that Allah can never utter a falsehood, because nothing can be further from His sublime presence than a defect or a falsehood. His witness about His Oneness is, therefore, a true witness. Likewise, His report, that the angels and those possessed of knowledge bear witness for His Oneness, firmly proves that they really bear this witness.

Moreover, the polytheists, who ascribe to Allah some partners like idols and other deities, only believe those idols or deities to be intercessors, the links between Allah and His creation; Allah quotes them as saying: We do not worship them save that they may make us nearer to Allah (39:3). Likewise, those who are guilty of the hidden polytheism, that is, those who while believing in Allah do good deeds for the sake of worldly things (e.g., to satisfy their own desire, to please some other persons, or to gain some wealth or prestige, and so on), they too believe that these things are created and given their power by Allah. In other words, whoever ascribes a partner to Allah, does so with a belief that Allah has taken that partner to Himself; no one says that the putative partner got that partnership on its own. In this background, when Allah bears witness that He has not taken any partner to Himself, it is enough to refute the claim of those who ascribe any partner to Him. Accordingly, the verse will have the same connotation as the verse: And they worship beside Allah what can neither harm them nor profit them, and they say: "These are our intercessors with Allah. Say: "Do you (presume to) inform Allah of what He knows not in the heavens and the earth?" Glory be to Him and supremely exalted is He above what they set up (with Him) (11:18). It is a rebuttal of the claim that He has got any partner. How can it be when He Himself does not know of any such partner, neither in the heaven nor in the earth? And He knows every thing; nothing is hidden from Him. The fact is that the verse under discussion is a proposition like other informations that have come to us from His sublime presence, for example, the final clause in the verse 11:18 mentioned just above, "Glory be to Him and supremely exalted is He above what they set up (with Him)". But as this proposition is in fact a claim and as the speaker is not only just but also the source of every justice, it was put before the audience in the form of a testimony, for the sake of variety in style. According to this interpretation, the meaning of the verse would be as follows: Had there been any deities other than Allah, having some say in the creation and management of the universe, in their capacity as partners with, or intercessors before Allah, undoubtedly Allah would have known them and testified for them; but He says that He does not know of any partner for Himself; it surely means that He has no partner at all. Also, the angels are the intermediaries who carry out His commandment in respect of creation and management. Had there been any such partner, they would have known of him and admitted his presence. But they too bear witness that there is no god except Allah. Finally, the knowledgeable persons would have known of such a partner and noticed the hallmarks of his creation or management. But the only signs they see are those pointing to the One and only God, and therefore they too bear witness that He has no partner or colleague.

This argument is similar to the following one: If there were in a certain country a king, other than the king who is known to us, this king would certainly have known of him; it would have been impossible for him not to know of someone supposed to be his partner. Likewise, the officials of the government would have known of him; how could they be oblivious of his existence when they were supposed to take orders from him and enforce his dicta among the subjects? And in the same way, the knowledgeable persons among the populace would have known of his presence; after all, they are supposed to live in his kingdom and obey his laws. But the king rebuts the existence of any such partner in his kingdom, and the government officials do not know of any such person, and the knowledgeable class of the subjects have not seen anything to prove his existence. All this together makes us absolutely sure that no such man exists. ([ )! there is no god but He; the Mighty, the Wise: It is a sort of a parenthetical sentence, having no connection to the main argument, yet complying with the demands of the Divine sublimity. It is a set practice of the Qur'an to declare the glory of Allah and pay respect to Him, whenever something unworthy of His sublime name is mentioned. For example: They say: "Allah has taken a son (to Himself)!" Glory be to Him (11:68). The phrase, "Glory be to Him", pays respect to Allah because the preceding sentence had quoted a saying that was unworthy of Allah's attributes. Another verse: And the Jews say: "The hand of Allah is tied up!" Their hands shall be shackled and they shall be cursed for what they say (5:64). Now, in the verse under discussion, the first part mentioned the testimony of Allah, the angels and those possessed of knowledge that Allah had no partner or colleague. Therefore, it was a right of Allah on the reporter of that testimony (who, incidentally, is Allah Himself) as well as on the hearers to declare that He is really One, and has no partner; everyone, on hearing that testimony, should reiterate, "there is no god but He". There is another verse which gives a similar lesson; it admonishes the believers who heard a lie spoken against a wife of the Prophet: And why did you not, when you heard it, say: "It does not beseem us that we should talk of it; glory be to Thee! this is a great calumny" (24:16). It is a right of Allah, when we hear a calumny and want to declare the innocence of the person slandered, to glorify Allah before that. This sentence, "there is no god but He, the Mighty, the Wise", is a sort of a praise for Allah, to give Him His due respect; that is why it ends with the adjectives, "the Mighty, the Wise". In other words, it is not an offshoot of the preceding witness; otherwise, it would have ended with the adjectives showing His Oneness and Justice.

Allah has a right that His oneness should be declared whenever the said witness is mentioned; He alone is the Mighty One, His might and power is absolute, there is no partner in His godhead to dilute His might; He alone is the Wise One, His wisdom does not allow anyone to interfere in the creation or the management of the affairs. The above paragraphs show why the phrase, "there is no god but He", has been repeated, and why it has been ended with the adjectives, "the Mighty, the Wise". And Allah knows better.  $  Muhammad ibn Ishaq has narrated through his chain of narrators: "When the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) defeated the Quraysh at Badr and returned to Medina, he gathered the Jews at the market of Qinaqa', and said: 'O Jewish people! Be on your guard against Allah, lest comes to you similar to that which has afflicted the Quraysh at Badr; and accept Islam before descends Upon you that which has descended upon them. And you know that I am a prophet, sent (by Allah), you find it (written) in your books.' They said: 'O Muhammad! Don't be deluded if you fought against an inexperienced people who knew nothing of the (tactics of) war and thus you got a chance to afflict them. As for us, by Allah, if we fought against you, you will know that we are indeed the (real) people.' Then Allah revealed the verse: Say to those who disbelieve: 'You shall be vanquished.'" (Majmau'l-bayan) 
 ! The above tradition has also been narrated in ad-Durru'lmanthur, qouting Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir and al-Bayhaqi (in his ad-Dala'il), from Ibn'Abbas. The Shi'ah exegete. al-Qummi, too has a nearly similar tradition in his at-Tafsir. Bui as would have been clear from the foregoing commentary, this tradition is not in perfect harmony with the context of the verses. It seems more likely that these verses were revealed after the battle of Uhud. And Allah knows better. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "People do not enjoy, in this world or in the hereafter, any pleasure greater than the pleasure of women and that is the word of Allah: It has been made to seem fair to men, the love of desires of women and sons... Then he said "And certainly the people of the garden shall not savour of anything of the

garden more delicious to them than the sexual intercourse - neither food nor drink." (al-Kafi; al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! It has been inferred from the sequence of the desired things in the verse, as the women have been placed before everything else. Then it has been said that it is only a provision of the life of this world, and the pleasures of the paradise are better than that. When the Imam said that sexual intercourse was the most delicious of all the pleasures, he was comparing it with the pleasures related to the body. He was not speaking about spiritual pleasure, for example, the delight a man gets from his own existence, or the joy a friend of Allah feels from being nearer to Him, seeing His great signs and receiving His pleasure and blessings. Rational arguments prove that the pleasure a man gets from his existence is the greatest; other proofs show that the pleasure he feels from the existence of his Lord is even greater than that; and there are numerous traditions saying that the bliss a servant enjoys from being nearer to Allah is the greatest of all pleasures. It has been narrated in al-Kafi from al-Baqir (a.s.) that he said: "'Ali ibn al-Husayn (a.s.) used to say: 'It makes my soul agreeable to early death and murder which beset us that Allah has said: Do they not see that We come into the land, curtailing it of its sides? (13:41); and it refers to the departure of the learned people (from this world).'" Other such traditions will be given in other relevant places. al-Baqir and as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about the word of Allah, and hoarded treasures: "al-Qintar is gold that could fill the hide of an ox." (Majmau'l-bayan) The Imam said: "al-Khaylu'l-musawwamah (translated here as well-bred horses) means the horses which are put on pasture." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "Whoever recites seventy times while he is in standing pasture, in his prayer of al-watr, 'I seek forgiveness from Allah and return to Him', and continues to do so regularly for (at least) a year, Allah writes him among those who ask for forgiveness before dawn, and he is bound to get forgiveness from Allah, the High." (Man la yahduru'l-faqih; al-Khisal)


 ! This meaning is given also in other traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahlulbayt (a.s.); and it is one of the sunnah of the Prophet. A similar tradition has been reported in ad-Durru'l-manthur through Ibn Jarir from Ja'far ibn Muhammad as-Sadiq (a.s.) that he said: "Whoever prays a part of the night, then asks for forgiveness at the end of the night, he will be written among those who ask for forgiveness." The statement of the Imam.- "and he is bound to get forgiveness from Allah", is based on their prayer mentioned in the preceding verse: "Our Lord! surely we believe, therefore, forgive us our sins..." Allah has quoted their prayer without any comment; it implies that He has granted the prayer.

å
 
    

' G ˸Ϡό˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ ˯˴ Ύ˴Ο Ύ˴ϣ Ϊ˶ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ηϭ˵΃ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϒ ˴ Ϡ˴Θ˴ ˸Χ΍ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ϡ˵ ϼ˸γϹ ˶ ΍ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˷Ϊ˶ ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳ΂˶Α ˸ήϔ˵ ˸Ϝϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ Ϩ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ Ύ˱ϴ˸ϐΑ˴ Ϣ˵ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ Έ˶ϓ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴δΤ ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϊ˵ ϳ˶ήγ ˴ {19} Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ηϭ˵΃ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϠ˴˷ϟ˶˷ Ϟ˵ϗϭ˴ Ϧ ˶ ό˴ Β˴ Η˴˷΍ Ϧ ˶ ϣ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ˶ ϲ ˴ Ϭ˶ ˸Οϭ˴ Ζ ˵ ˸ϤϠ˴˸γ΃˴ ˸ϞϘ˵ ϓ˴ ϙ ˴ Ϯ˷Ο ˵ Ύ˴Σ ˸ϥΈ˶˴ϓ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ύ ˵ ϼ˴Β˸ϟ΍ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ Ύ˴Ϥϧ˴˷Έ˶ϓ˴ ΍˸Ϯϟ˴˷Ϯ˴ Η˴ ϥ˶·ϭ˴˷ ΍˸ϭΪ˴ Θ˴ ˸ϫ΍ Ϊ˶ Ϙ˴ ϓ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴˸γ΃˴ ˸ϥΈ˶ϓ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ˸ϤϠ˴˸γ΃˴΃˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˷ϴ˶ ϣ˶˷ Ϸ ˵ ΍˴ϭ Ω˶ Ύ˴Βό˶ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ˲ήϴ˶μΑ˴ {20} Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ς ˶ ˸δϘ˶ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϣ˵ ˸΄ϳ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠΘ˵ ˸Ϙϳ˴ ϭ˴ ϖ ˳˷ Σ ˴ ή˶ ˸ϴϐ˴ Α˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˷ϴ˶ Β˶ Ϩ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠΘ˵ ˸Ϙϳ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳ΂˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϔ˵ ˸Ϝϳ˴ Ϣ˳ ϴ˶ϟ΃˴ Ώ ˳ ΍˴άό˴ Α˶ Ϣ˵ϫ˸ήθ ˶˷ ˴Βϓ˴ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ {21} ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˵Ύ˴Ϥ˸ϋ΃˴ ˸Ζτ ˴ Β˶ Σ ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴˸ϭ΃˵ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήλ ˶ Ύ˷ϧ˴ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϣ˵Ϭϟ˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Γ˶ ή˴ Χ ˶ ϵ΍˴ϭ Ύ˴ϴ˸ϧΪ˵˷ ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ{22} ˸΍Ϯ˵Ηϭ˵΃ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ή˴ Η˴ ˸Ϣϟ˴΃˴ ϣ˵˷ Ϣ˵ϫϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶˷ ˲ϖϳ˶ήϓ˴ ϰ˷ϟ˴Ϯ˴ Θ˴ ϳ˴ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ ˸ϢϬ˵ Ϩ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ Ϣ˴ Ϝ˵ ˸Τϴ˴ ϟ˶ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴Θϛ˶ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ϥ ˴ ˸Ϯϋ ˴ ˸Ϊϳ˵ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Ύ˱Βϴ˶μϧ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵οή˶ ˸ό{23} Ϭ˵ ϧ˴˷΄˴Α˶ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶˴Ϋ ˸Ϣ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήΘ˴ ˸ϔϳ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧΎ˴ϛ Ύ˷ϣ˴ Ϣ˶ϬϨ˶ ϳ˶Ω ϲ˶ϓ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ή˴˷ Ϗ ˴ ϭ˴ Ε ˳ ΍˴Ωϭ˵Ϊ˸όϣ˴˷ Ύ˱ϣΎ˷ϳ˴ ΃˴ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ έ˵ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ύ˴Ϩδ ˴˷ Ϥ˴ Η˴ Ϧ˴ϟ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ{24} ϻ ˴˷ ϡ˳ ˸Ϯϴ˴ ϟ˶ ˸Ϣϫ˵ Ύ˴Ϩ˸όϤ˴ Ο ˴ ΍˴Ϋ·˶ ϒ ˴ ˸ϴϜ˴ ϓ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴˸ψϳ˵ ϻ ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϭ˴ ˸ΖΒ˴ δ ˴ ϛ˴ Ύ˷ϣ˴ β ˳ ˸ϔϧ˴ Ϟ ˵˷ ϛ˵ ˸Ζϴ˴ ϓ˶˷ ϭ˵ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ ϴ˶ϓ ΐ ˴ ˸ϳέ˴ {25} {19} Surely the religion with Allah is Islam; and those to whom the Book had been given did not differ but after knowledge had come to them, out of envy among themselves; and whoever disbelieves in the signs of Allah then surely Allah is quick of reckoning. {20} But if they dispute with you, say: "I have submitted myself (entirely) to Allah and (so has) everyone who follows me. "And say to those who have been given the Book and the unlearned people: "Do you submit yourselves?" So if they submit then indeed they follow the right way; and if they turn back, then upon you is only the delivery of the message; and Allah sees the servants. {21} Surely (as for) those who disbelieve in the signs of Allah and slay the prophets unjustly and .slay those among men who enjoin justice, announce to them a painful chastisement. {22} Those are they whose works shall become null in this world as well as the hereafter, and they shall have no helpers. {23} Have you not considered those who are given a portion of the Book? They are invited to the Book of Allah that it might decide between them, then a part of them turn back

and they withdraw. {24} This is because they say: "The fire shall not touch us but for a counted number of days", and what they have forged deceives them in the matter of their religion. {25} Then how (will it be) when We shall gather them together on a day about which there is no doubt, and every soul shall be fully paid what it has earned, and they shall not be dealt with unjustly?. å
  The verses refer to the People of the Book. They are the last - and most important of the three groups commented upon in this chapter. It was about the- People of the Book - the Jews and the Christians - that a major part of this chapter was revealed. ([ )! Surely the religion with Allah is Islam: We have already described the literal meaning of "al-Islam" (to submit, to surrender oneself to Allah). Apparently this is the meaning intended here, because it is followed by description of the difference of the People of the Book - the difference which they created after knowing the truth, because of envy among themselves. The explanation of the verse, therefore, would be as follows: The religion with Allah is only one; there is no difference or discrepancy in it; He has commanded His servants to follow only this religion; it was this religion which was described in the Books revealed to His prophets, and to which the Divine signs pointed. It is the Islam that is, surrender to the truth, with correct belief and sincere deeds; Islam is to accept willingly all the knowledge and commandments sent down by Allah. Admittedly, the commandments varied in quality and quantity in various laws brought by various prophets - and Allah Himself mentions this fact in His Book but in reality there was only one religion. The difference between various laws was in the degree of perfection, it was not because of any discrepancy or contradiction. All were one inasmuch as all called the people to surrender and submit themselves to the will of Allah, to His commandments sent through His prophets. It is this religion which Allah expects His servants to follow, which He has sent down for them. It necessarily follows that man should accept all the knowledge which has been clearly explained to him, and should stop at doubtful matters submitting himself to the will of Allah, without trying to interpret it according to his desire and thinking.

As for the difference of the People of the Book, (the Jews and the Christians) in the matter of religion, it was not because they did not know the truth; they certainly knew it; they were aware that the religion was only one, because Allah had revealed the Book which clearly explained that religion to them. Nevertheless, they differed among themselves because they were envious and unjust. Although they continued to believe in Allah, their envy and injustice made them disbelieve in the signs of Allah, in the Book of Allah, which had clearly explained to them the reality of religion. And whoever disbelieves in the signs of Allah then surely Allah is quick of reckoning; He will quickly call them to account in this world as well as in the hereafter. They shall be recompensed in this life with disgrace and ignominy, and in the hereafter with painful chastisement of the Fire. Why do we say that the reckoning spans both lives? It is because Allah says after two verses: "Those are they whose works shall become null and void in this world as well as the hereafter". The above explanation makes two things clear:  ! The clause, "the religion with Allah", refers to religion in the meaning of shari'ah; the verse says: There is only one religion ordained by Allah, the difference between various prophets' shari'ah being in the quality only; and the quality differed because of the capabilities of the various nations for which those rules were made. In this verse, religion does not refer to the system of creation. In other words, it does not say that all people were created with a natural instinct to believe in God. %
 $: The word "al-ayat" (signs) refers to the verses of the Divine Books, sent to the prophets; it does not refer to the signs in the creation which lead one to the belief in one God. The verse contains a threat to the People of the Book: They shall surely be punished for their envy and rebellion. It is similar to the threat addressed earlier to the polytheists and disbelievers: Say to those who disbelieve: "You shall be vanquished and gathered together to hell..." (3:11). Probably, that is the reason why the next verse joins the People of the Book and the polytheists together and says: "And say to those who have been given the Book and the unlearned people: 'Do you submit yourselves?'" There is a threat implied by the tone of this question too.

([ )! But if they dispute with you, say: "I have submitted myself (entirely) to Allah and (so has) everyone who follows me": Obviously, the pronoun "they" refers to the People of the Book. The disputation points to their arguments about the difference. They would say: "Our difference does not emanate from any envy of injustice; we have tried our best to acquire the knowledge of the realities of religion; nevertheless, in this endeavor each one's thinking process and wisdom has led him to a different conclusion. It does not mean that we have become arrogant or rebellious, nor that we are not submissive to Allah. Even what you call us to, O Muhammad! similarly emanates from a different process of thinking. You too have differed from us in the same way " Allah demolishes such disputations in the next two sentences: "...say: 'I have submitted myself (entirely) to Allah ...'" and "...say to those who have been given the Book and the unlearned people: 'Do you submit yourselves?'" These sentences are not an attempt to avoid the issue; they contain the clear rebuttal of the disputations of the People of the Book. The connotation of the verse, read in conjunction with the preceding one, is as follows:The religion with Allah is submission to Allah; the Books sent by Allah are unanimous on this point, and the untainted wisdom accepts it. Nobody can, therefore, blame you, O Muhammad! for submitting to the will and command of Allah. You are a Muslim. If the People of the Book dispute with you about the religion, then you should tell them clearly that you have submitted yourself entirely to Allah and so have done all your followers. This is the real religion and no argument can be brought against this reality. Then you should ask them whether they too would submit themselves to Allah. If they did so, then they would indeed proceed on the right path, they would accept what had been revealed to you and to those prophets who came before you; there would be no argument against them and your mutual difference would come to an end. On the other hand, if they turned back, then do not enter into any disputation or argument with them. It is a self-evident truth that religion is total surrender to Allah, and there is no point in laboring to prove a self-evident reality. You should just convey the Divine message to them and that is all. Allah has joined the People of the Book and the unlearned polytheists' together in this verse: "And say to those who have been given the Book and the unlearned people: 'Do you submit yourselves?'" It is because both believed in religion and in Allah, although they differed because of their respective belie in of monotheism and polytheism.

The phrase, translated here as "I have submitted my sell (entirely) to Allah", literally means, I have submitted my face to Allah. "al-Wajh" (face, front). Most of the senses and organs of perception are concentrated in the face; therefore, submitting one's face to Allah signifies total submission to Allah's will, willing obedience to His commandments. The clause, "and (so has) everyone who follows me", shows the excellence of the Prophet, and also enhances the rank of the followers by joining them to him (s.a.w.). ([ )! And say to those who have been given the Book and the unlearned people...: "the unlearned people" refers to the polytheists; it shows the contrast between them and the People of the Book; also the People of the Book used to call them unlearned, as Allah quotes them as saying: There is not upon us in the matter of the unlearned people any way (to reproach) (3:75). "al-Ummiyy " (one who does not read or write). The clauses "and if they turn back, then upon you is only the delivery of the message; and Allah sees the servants" signify three things:  ! Undesirability of unnecessary disputations; entering into arguments with someone who denies a self-evident truth would inevitably lead to obstinacy and obtrusiveness. %
 $! The total authority concerning the people and their affairs is of Allah; the Prophet is an Apostle and a conveyer of the Divine message, he is not a guard to watch over men. Allah says: You have no concern in the affair (3:128); You are not a watcher over them (88:22).  $! The clauses contain a threat to the People of the Book and the polytheists; the connotation cannot be lost to one who reads the clauses. The verses, in their theme and the threat, are similar to the verses: Say: "We believe in Allah... and to Him do we submit". If then they believe as you believe, they are indeed on the right course, and if they turn back, then they are only in great opposition; so Allah will suffice you against them, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing (2:136-137). According to this verse if the People of the Book turn back, then it means that they are obstinate in their opposition and heedless to the truth; then it comforts the Prophet in a way that contains a threat to his adversaries. Likewise, the verse under discussion tells the Prophet, "and if they turn back, then upon you is only the delivery of the message "; it is a hint that the Prophet should leave them to their

Lord Who sees His servants and Who would deal with them in a suitable way, and punish them as they deserve. Some exegetes have written that the verse gives the people freedom of religious belief and that there is no compulsion in religion. But the explanation given above manifestly shows that it implies the opposite of freedom; it threatens the disbelievers with chastisements if they did not submit themselves to Allah. "Allah sees the servants": It could have been, phrased as "Allah sees the men "'or "Allah sees them"; instead Allah chose the epithet, "the servants", to remind them that they are His servants and slaves; His order against them will certainly be carried out in its entirety, because they are totally dependent on Him whether they consciously submitted to Him or not; they can never escape His judgment. ([ )! Surely (as for) those who disbelieve in the signs of Allah... and they .shall have no 'helpers: The verse deals with another aspect of the subject; nevertheless, it has a threatening overtone, not unlike the last parts of the preceding verse. This verse too speaks about the People of the Book, especially the Jews. "Those who disbelieve... and slay the prophets... and slay those among men who enjoin justice.": The verbal form used in these sentences implies persistence and continuity. It conveys the idea that it was their ingrained habit, a characteristic trait, to disbelieve in divinely sent communications, to reject the revealed truth out of envy and arrogance, to murder the prophets - and such a slaying was undoubtedly against justice - and to kill those of their compatriots who called them to justice and tried to keep them away from injustice and rebellion. And the history of the Jews confirms that these things were a part of their national character; they had murdered a multitude of their prophets and good believers who enjoined the good and forbade the evil. The Christians too followed in their footsteps and killed countless good Christians. "announce to them a painful chastisement"; It announces that the wrath of Allah had descended upon them. The chastisement was not confined to the hereafter only; they were to be punished in this life too. Read for the proof the next "Those are they whose works shall become null in this world as well as the hereafter". In the hereafter they shall have to endure the painful chastisement of the Fire; in this world, they were punished with mass murders, dispersion, loss of lives and properties, and Allah has inflicted them with enmity and hatred among themselves which is to continue upto the Day of Resurrection, as the Qur'anic verses have said (e.g.,5:14).

This verse (3:22), moreover, proves two things:  ! If a man killed someone just because the latter used to enjoin the good and forbid the evil, the killer's good deeds would become null and void, would be forfeited. %
 $! On the Day of Resurrection, intercession shall not avail such a killer, because Allah says: "and they shall have no helpers". ([ )! Have you not considered... and they withdraw: II further shows how steeped the People of the Book are in their envy and rebellion. They rebel against Allah by creating disputes and frictions in religion. When they are invited to the Book of Allah in order that it might decide between them they do not agree to it, they turn away and withdraw from it. This tendency of theirs emanates from their self-delusion that the Fire shall not touch them but for a few days; they are deceived by their own forgery! The words, "those who are given a portion of the Book" refer to the People of the Book. This changed phrasing points to a well-known historical fact: The Jews and the Christians do not have in their hands the complete Books; what they have got is only some portions of the revealed Scriptures. They have altered, changed and edited the Books so extensively that the major part of the original has been lost for ever. The last sentence too alludes to this fact: "and what they have forged deceives them in the matter of their religion". The verse, in short, says - and Allah knows better - that the Jews and the Christians turn back from the judgment of the Book of Allah, being deceived by their own claim, and misled by what they have themselves forged; they demonstrate, by their behaviour, that they do not need the Book of Allah. ([ )! This is because... matter of their religion: Its meaning is quite clear. Usually a man is not deceived by his own deception; then how did those people fall prey to their own forgery? It was because the deceived people had not forged it themselves; it was forged by a past generation. Then why did the Qur'an ascribe that deception and forgery to those Jews and Christians who were contemporaries of the Prophet? It was because they were one nation - the later generations were (and are) pleased with what their ancestors had done. Moreover, it was not improbable for the People of the Book, and especially the

Jews, to be carried away by their own delusion - knowing well that it was a delusion - or to boast of their exploits in this field. Allah has described their involvement in an even more astonishing deception: And when they meet those who believe they say: "We believe"; and when they are alone one with another they say: "Do you talk to them of what Allah has disclosed to you that they may argue with you by this before your Lord? Do you not then understand?" What! Do they not know that Allah knows what they conceal and what they proclaim. (2:76-77) Also, man's actions emanate for the most part from the traits ingrained in his psyche; he always returns to the things which his psychological build up has made attractive to him. When he is attracted by that pull, knowledge is left behind, and becomes ineffective. For example, the drug addicts, the chain-smokers and the people like them use those things although they know that they are extremely harmful and ruinous to their health, and they are fully aware that such things must be avoided. But the ingrained habit becomes the second nature, and the addict is irresistibly pulled to those "pleasures", without giving his knowledge or thinking power any chance to influence his decision. Likewise, the People of the Book, as a result of their perennial indiscipline, had acquired the traits of arrogance, envy and rebellion, and were overcome by the irresistible urge to base desires. This had become a second nature to them. And under its influence they forged many things - the forgeries that were disastrous to their religion. And they repeated those forgeries - knowing fully well that they were lies - so often and so long that they themselves began believing in them, and the repeated falsehood replaced the truth in their mind; they fell prey to their own devices. Psychologists know that such phenomenon does occur from time to time. The continuously repeated and diligently taught forgeries got hold of the whole nations to such an extent that they became deceived in the matters of their religion, and refused to submit themselves to Allah and accept the truth revealed in His Book. ([ )! Then how (will it be) when... shall not be dealt with unjustly: The phrase governed by the interrogative "how" was omitted because it could be understood from the context; it could be something like, how will it be, or, how will they fare. The verse continues the threatening mode of the preceding verses. It shows that those, who turn back and withdraw when called to the Book of Allah, cannot defeat the Divine judgment. The Day of Reckoning is approaching fast; how will they behave on that Day about which there is no doubt? Then they will be quite

submissive, in clear contrast with their arrogance and haughtiness of this world! It was to show this contrast that Allah used the word, "We shall gather them together", and did not say, We shall raise them, or, We shall make them alive. The meaning of the verses is as follows - and Allah knows better: When the People of the Book are invited to the Book of Allah in order that it might decide between them, then a part of them turn back and withdraw; it is because they are deceived by what they have forged in the matter of their religion, and also because they arrogantly refuse to submit to the truth. Well, what will they do when We shall gather them together on the day about which there is no doubt, the day when the judgment will be decisively, truthfully and justly pronounced, and every soul shall be fully paid what it had earned, and they shall not be dealt with unjustly, because the judgments will be based on justice? As they know this fact, it is necessary for them not to turn away from the Book of Allah, not to withdraw from it, as though they could defeat the purpose of Allah or could overrule His decrees! Do not they know that every power belongs to Allah, and that this life is but a trial?  $  Muhammad ibn Muslim said: "I asked the Imam about the word of Allah, Surely the religion with Allah is Islam. And he said: 'that (Islam) which contains (true) belief". (al-'Ayyashi) Ibn Shahrashub narrates from al-Baqir (a.s.) about the word of Allah: Surely the religion with Allah is Islam, that he said: "Submitting to 'Ali ibn Abi Talib in (his) mastership." 
 ! The explanation is based on the principle of the "flow" of the Qur'an. And probably the preceding tradition too has the same connotation. The same narrator reports that 'Ali (a.s.) said: "I shall define Islam as no one has defined before me, and no one shall do after me. Islam is submission, and submission is conviction, and conviction is affirmation, and affirmation is acknowledgement, and acknowledgement is discharge (of obligation), and discharge (of obligation) is action. The believer has taken his religion from his Lord. Certainly, the belief of a believer is recognized in his deed, and the disbelief of an unbeliever is recognized in his denial. O people! (look alter) your religion,

(look after) your religion, because a sin in it is better than a good (deed) in other (religions); the sin (committed while believing) in this (religion) will be forgiven, and the good (deed) in other (religions) will not be accepted." 
 ! The words of the Imam, "I shall define Islam": "an-Nisbah" (literally, relation, to relate) here means to define; Chapter 112 (the Unity) has been named in some traditions as the chapter of an-nisbah of Allah. The Imam has defined all the terms with the help of their concomitants, except the first word, "al-Islam" (submission) which has been explained with its more clearly understood synonym "at-taslim" (submission). We may also possibly take the word, Islam, to signify the religion brought by Muhammad (s.a.w.); in that case the first phrase too (Islam is submission) would be a definition with a concomitant. However, the Imam means to say: This religion known as Islam entails submission of man, in his person and his action, to Allah; he surrenders his soul and all his activities to Allah's command and will; it is called at-taslim (submission); at-taslim in its turn entails firm conviction and certainty about Allah, in a way as not to allow any doubt whatsoever about Him; conviction entails affirmation of the religion's truth; and affirmation entails acknowledgement of its firmness, that is, the fact that religion is firmly rooted and unshakable; and this acknowledgement leads the believer to discharge all his obligations accordingly, and the discharge of obligations necessitates acting according to the dictates of religion. "and the good (deed) in other (religions) will not be accepted", that is, the doer will not be given its reward in the hereafter. Or it may mean: It will not create any good impression with Allah either in this world or in the hereafter. As we have explained the sentence, it is not in conflict with other traditions which say that the unbelievers are rewarded for their good deeds with the good provisions of this world. Allah has said: So he who has done an atom's weight of good shall see it (99:7). Abu'Ubaydah al-Jarrah said: "I said: 'O Apostle of Allah! which people shall suffer the severest punishment on the Day of Resurrection?' He said: 'A man who killed a prophet or (murdered) a man who enjoined good and forbade evil.' Then he recited:

'(those" who) slay the prophets unjustly and slay those among men who enjoin justice...' Then he said: 'O Abu 'Ubaydah! the Israelites killed forty-three prophets in one hour. Then stood up one hundred and twelve persons from among the devout Israelites and enjoined those killers to do good and forbade them (to do any) evil. Thereupon, they killed all those (devout persons) by the end of the same day. And it is this (massacre) which Allah has mentioned (in this verse).'" (Majma'u'l-baydn) 
 ! The same explanation has been narrated in ad-Durru'l-manthur, through Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abl Hatim, from Abu'Ubaydah. It is reported in ad-Durru'l-manthur: Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir, Ibnu'1-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Hatim have narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "The Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) went to a group of the Jews in (their) house of midrash, and invited them to Allah. al-Nu'man ibn 'Amr and Harth ibn Zayd asked him: 'On which religion are you? O Muhammad!' He said: "On the faith and religion of Ibrahim.' They said: 'But Ibrahim was a Jew!' Thereupon the Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) told them: 'Then bring to me the Torah; it is (the judge) between you and us.' They rejected his (proposal). Then Allah revealed: Have you not considered those who are given a portion of the Book?... deceived them in the matter of their religion." 
 ! Some people have narrated that the verse, "Have you not considered...", was revealed in connection with the episode of stoning. We shall give its detail under the verse: O People of the Book! indeed has come to you Our Apostle making clear to you much of what you concealed of the Book... (5:15). However, these two traditions are from ahaad, and are not so strong.

å
 
    

 & ϝ ˵˷ ά˶ Η˵ ϭ˴ ˯Ύ˴θΗ˴ Ϧ˴ϣ ΰ˵˷ ό˶ Η˵ ϭ˴ ˯Ύ˴θΗ˴ Ϧ˷Ϥ˴ ϣ˶ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϠϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ω ˵ ΰ˶ Ϩ˴Ηϭ˴ ˯Ύ˴θΗ˴ Ϧ˴ϣ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϠϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ϲ˶Η˸ΆΗ˵ Ϛ ˶ ˸ϠϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ύ˴ϣ Ϣ˴˷ Ϭ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ϗ˵ ή˵ ˸ϴΨ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϙ ˴ Ϊ˶ ϴ˴ Α˶ ˯Ύ˴θΗ˴ Ϧ˴ϣ ˲ήϳ˶Ϊϗ˴ ˯˳ ˸ϲη ˴ Ϟ ˶˷ ϛ˵ ϰ ˴ Ϡ˴ϋ ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϧ˴˷·˶{26} Ν ˵ ή˶ ˸ΨΗ˵ ϭ˴ Ζ ˶ ϴ˶˷Ϥ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϲ ˴˷ Τ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ν ˵ ή˶ ˸ΨΗ˵ ϭ˴ Ϟ ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴˷ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ˴έΎ˴ϬϨ˴˷ϟ΍ Ξ ˵ ϟ˶Ϯ˵Ηϭ˴ έ˶ Ύ˴ϬϨ˴˷ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ Ϟ ˴ ˸ϴϠ˴˷ϟ΍ Ξ ˵ ϟ˶Ϯ˵Η Ώ ˳ Ύ˴δΣ ˶ ή˶ ˸ϴϐ˴ Α˶ ˯Ύ˴θΗ˴ Ϧ˴ϣ ϕ ˵ ί˵ ˸ήΗ˴ ϭ˴ ϲ ˶˷ Τ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ζ ˴ ϴ˶˷Ϥ˴ ˸ϟ΍{27}

{26} Say: O Allah, Master of the Kingdom! Thou givest the Kingdom to whomsoever Thou pleasest and takest away the Kingdom from whomsoever Thou pleasest, and Thou exaltest whom Thou pleasest and abasest whom Thou pleasest; in Thine hand is the good; surely, Thou hast power over all things. {27} Thou makest the night to enter into the day and Thou makest the day to enter into the night, and Thou bringest forth the living from the dead and Thou bringest forth the dead from the living, and Thou givest sustenance to whom Thou pleasest, without measure. å
  The two verses do have a sort of connection with the preceding talk about the People of the Book, and especially the Jews. They were earlier threatened with the chastisements of this world and the hereafter. It was a part of that chastisement that Allah deprived them of their kingdom, and they were inflicted by abasement and humiliation up to the Day of Resurrection; also they lost so many lives and their rule was shorn of sovereignty. Apart from that, the main theme of the chapter, as was mentioned in the beginning, is to show that the creation and all its affairs are totally in the hands of Allah; He is the Master of the Kingdom, He gives Kingdom, honor and good to whomsoever He pleases; and takes away the Kingdom, honor and good from whomsoever He pleases. The verses are, thus, in total conformity with the theme of the chapter. ([ )! Say: 0 Allah, Master of the Kingdom! The verse advises the believer to seek refuge with Allah - in Whose hand is all the good and all the power - in order that he may remain unaffected by baseless ideas of the hypocrites, the polytheists and the People of the Book, the groups who were under the illusion that they had the kingdom and honors in their hands and that in this way they were independent of Allah! Such thoughts were their undoing; they were totally lost and ruined because of this illusion. The believer should steer clear of such ideas and should present himself with humility before Allah Who bestows good and gives sustenance without measure to whomsoever He pleases. The meaning of "al-milk" (property, possession) is known to, and understood by, all; and we recognize it as a lawful concept and reality. "Possession" is of two kinds:

1. Real Possession: It is the ability inherent in a creature, for example, man, to dispose, manage and manipulate another thing in any way he likes. For example, a man may use or not use his eyesight, depending on his choice; he may use his hand in getting hold of a thing or letting it go; and so on. There exists between such a possessor and such a property a real, unchangeable and non-transferable relationship; a relationship that makes the property dependent on the possessor for its very existence - it cannot be separated from the possessor without being destroyed. In the above example, the eye or the hand cannot be removed from the man without losing its usefulness and even its existence in the process. In this category comes the possession and ownership, which belongs to Allah, of this universe with all its big and small components, as well as of all its affairs. He has the right, authority and power to do with it, and in it, as He pleases. 2. Conventional Possession: It is the possession based on man-made convention; the ability of, let us say, a man to dispose and manage a thing, as he likes - the authority based on the convention laid down by wise men to achieve the society's aims. They looked at the plane of creation and found it replete with real possession and its effects; so they invented a similar institution for the plane of civilization and laid down the system of the conventional possession for the society. Their goal was to obtain benefits from the world's provisions similar to those a real owner gets from his real possession. This relationship between a conventional owner and his property is not a real thing; it is just an abstract idea based on society's convention; and that is why such an ownership, unlike the real one, may be transferred to another person through trade, gift, inheritance etc. "al-Mulk" (kingdom) too is a sort of "al-milk" (possession) inasmuch as the king or ruler owns what the people of a country do own; he manages and disposes what the people have in their possession, without there occurring any clash between their management and his, between their will and his. It is in fact an ownership over ownership - the king's ownership being vertically above the public's; in the same way as, for example, a master owns his slave and also all that is owned by the slave. The kingdom too, being a sort of possession, is divided into two categories: the real and the conventional. Allah is the absolute Owner of every thing; His is the absolute Lordship and absolute management; He is the Creator of every thing and God of every thing. He

says: That is Allah, your Lord, the Creator of every thing; there is no god but He (40:62); whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is His (2: 255). There are numerous verses showing that whatever is called a "thing" exists because of Allah, is dependent in its quiddity and existence on Him; it cannot stand without Him. Nothing can prevent Allah from disposing and managing a thing in any way He pleases; and as we explained earlier, it is the real possession. And He is also the absolute King of the creation, because lie is its absolute Owner. There is a system of ownership pervading the universe - the causes own their effects; everything owns its active faculties and powers; those faculties and powers own their activities. For example, man owns all his limbs, organs and faculties like the eyes and ears; and the eyes and ears own their faculties of sight and hearing. As mentioned above, Allah owns everything; therefore, He owns every owner as well as all his (or its) possessions; and this is what is called the Kingship. He is therefore the absolute King of all the creation. He has said: to Him belongs the Kingdom, and to Him is due (all) praise (64:1); ...with a most Powerful King (54:55); there are numerous such verses. Needless to say, it is the real possession and kingships. As for the conventional possession and kingship, this too actually belongs to Allah. Allah is the conventional Owner too, because it is He Who bestows the ownership to everything which owns anything. He could not do so unless He Himself did own that thing; otherwise it would have looked as if He was bestowing a thing He did not own to someone who could not own! Allah says: and give them of the wealth of Allah which He has given to you... (24:33). Also, He is the conventional King, because He is the Law-giver and the Ruler, Who regulates, by His order, all the things which the people own, just as the kings regulate the financial affairs of their subjects. Allah says: Say: "I seek refuge in the Lord of men, the King of men "(114:1-2); And He gives you all that you ask Him; and if you count Allah's bounties, you will not be able to compute them (14:34); and spend out of what He has made you to be successors of (57:7); And what reason have you that you should not spend in Allah's way? And Allah's is the inheritance of the heavens and the earth (57:10); To whom belongs the kingdom this day? To Allah, the One, the Subduer (of all) (40:16). The verses show that Allah owned all that is in our hands before it came in our possession, and He continues to own it even when it belongs to us, and He will remain its owner (or let us say, Inheritor) when we are gone. His Kingship and ownership remains unaffected throughout. It appears from the above that the words, "O Allah, Master of the Kingdom", point to the following three themes:

 ! To Allah belongs every kingdom; He is the Owner of the Kingdom. In other words, He is the King of the kings; He gives every king his kingdom, every ruler his rule; He says: ...because Allah had given him the kingdom (2:258); and We have given them a grand kingdom (4:54). %
 $! The Divine name "Allah", precedes the epithet, "Master of the Kingdom"; this arrangement explains the basis of His Kingship; He is the Master of the Kingdom becuse He is Allah, Great is His Majesty!  $! "The Kingdom" here refers to its both kinds - the real and the conventional. (And Allah knows better!) The matters mentioned in the first verse (Thou givest the Kingdom to whomsoever Thou pleasest and takest away the Kingdom from whomsoever Thou pleasest, and Thou exaltest whom Thou pleasest and abasest whom Thou pleasest) refer to various aspects of the conventional kinship; while the next verse refers to the affairs of the real kingship. Allah is, therefore, the absolute Master of the Kingdom. ([ )! Thou givest the Kingdom to whomsoever Thou pleasest and takest away the Kingdom from whomsoever Thou pleasest: The statement is unrestricted and thus covers every kingdom, no matter whether it is obtained legally or illegally, nor whether it is based on justice or injustice. (We have explained this subject under the verse 2:258; ...because Allah has given him the kingdom) The kingdom, per se, is one of the bounties of Allah; it has the potential of doing good in, and improving, the human society. Man, by his very nature, loves to rule and dominate over others. A kingship, which falls into the hands of an undeserving person, is disliked and condemned, not because it is a kingship, but because it has been captured by one who has no right to it, (e.g., when someone usurps it through coup d'etat), or because of his bad character, injustice and oppression. This second reason is, in a way, another facet of the first. To sum it up, if the king or the ruler is good, able and just, then the kingdom is a bounty of Allah for him. On the other hand, if he is undeserving and undesirable, then for him it is an affliction and trial. In either case, it is attributed to Allah, and is a means of trial, by which Allah tests His servants - the ruler and the ruled. We have described earlier somewhere that when the Qur'an attaches the proviso of "Allah's pleasure", as in this verse, it does not mean that Allah's actions are done without a reason or without an aim. This proviso is a reiteration that Allah's power

and His will are supreme; that Allah is not under any compulsion to do or not to do any particular work; nobody can oblige Him in any way; whatever He does, it is done according to His absolute will and power, and not because someone compels Him to do so. Nevertheless, all His actions are done and all His decrees issued for one purpose: the good and well-being of His servants. ([ )! and Thou exaltest whom Thou pleasest and abasest whom Thou pleasest: "al-'Izz" (to be hard to get; to be difficult to obtain). We say for a rare book or thing that it is 'azizu'l-wujud); a man having a high prestige in his tribe, country or nation 'is called 'azizu'l-qawm, because it is difficult to subdue or overpower him. Then it was used for all types of difficulties; it is said ya'izzu 'alayya kadha (it is hard for me to; it grieves me to). Allah says: ...grievous to him is your falling into distress... (9:128). Also, it is used for overpowering. There is a proverb: man 'azza bazza (he who vanquishes, takes the booty)'. Allah says: ...and he has prevailed against me in discourse (38:23). But the basic meaning in all these usages is the same. Opposite to it is "al-dhull" (to be easy to get or subdue - by real or supposed overpowering). Allah says: And abasement and humiliation were brought down over them (2:61); and lower unto them the wing of humility out of compassion (17: 24); ...humble before the believers... (5:54). The words translated as "abasement", "humility" and "humble" are various derivatives of "al-dhull". al-'Izzah (=exaltation; might; honour) is an inseparable attribute of the absolute Kingship of Allah. Whoever, other than Allah, possesses anything he gets it is because Allah has given him its ownership; whoever gets kingship, it is because Allah gives him that kingdom. Therefore, real honour and exaltation belong only to Allah; whatever honour is enjoyed by others, it is but a gift bestowed by Allah. He says: Do they seek honour from them? Then surely all honour is for Allah (4:139); ...and to Allah belongs the might and to His Apostle and to the believers... (63:8). This is the true honour, real might. What others have got is only abasement in the guise of might, humiliation behind the mask of honour. Allah says: Nay! those who disbelieve are in (self-) exaltation and opposition (38:2). Then to show that that self-exaltation is just an allusion, Allah immediately reminds them: How many did We destroy before them of the generations, then they cried while the time of escaping had passed away (38:3). Abasement and dishonour, being the opposite of might and honour, are governed by the opposite factors. Everything, other than Allah, by itself is abased and without any honour - except him who is exalted by Allah; "and Thou exaltest

whom Thou pleasest and abasest whom Thou pleasest". ([ )! in Thine hand is the good; surely Thou hast power over all things: "alKhayr" (the good) basically connotes 'selection'. We call a thing 'khayr' (good) when we compare it with another thing and choose it - thus it is 'khayr' (good) because it is the chosen one, the selected on. And why did we select it? Because it was more suitable for the purpose we had in mind. In other words, this thing is good because it is a means to obtain the ultimate good, that is, the purpose aimed at. The real "good" is that which is desired for itself. It is called good because it is chosen when compared with other things. The word "good´ carries a connotation of favourable comparison with other things. This, has given rise to a misunderstanding that it is an adjective of comparative degrees, and that originally it was akhyar. But it is not so; it is not in comparative degree, although its root meaning carries a comparative value, and therefore it is often used as a substitute for "better", "more exalted" etc. We say: Zayd is afdal (more exalted) than 'Amr; the same meaning is conveyed when we say: Zayd is khayrun than 'Amr. We may say: Zayd afdaluhuma, or we may change it to Zayd khayruhuma both sentences will convey the same meaning: Zayd is the better of the two. But this interchangeability of the two words does not make al-khayr an adjective of comparative degree; otherwise, it would have been conjugated on the paradigm of comparative degree, i.e., on the paradigm of "afdal, afadil, fudla, fudlayat" But ³khayr´ is not conjugated like that. Instead we say: khayr, akhyar, khayrah, khayrat, like shaykh, ashyakh, shaykhah, shaykhat (old man, old men, old woman, old women). Therefore, it is a as-sifatu'l-mushabbahah (adjective denoting an inseparable attribute). Moreover, khayr is also used in places where the context does not allow any comparison. For example, Say: "What is with Allah is better (khayrun) than sport... (62:11). Now there is no good in the sport so that it could be said, "better than sport". What it actually means is: What is with Allah is good, and the sport is not good. (Those who think that the word al-khayr, is in comparative degree, say that in the sentences like the above, the word loses its comparative value. Such explanations need no comment!) The fact is that al-khayr gives a connotation of selection and choosing, and generally, but not necessarily, the thing which is not selected also has some good in it. The above discourse shows that Allah is "good" absolutely and without any reservation or condition, because He it is Who is the ultimate goal and destination of everything. Yet, the Qur'an has never used this word as a Divine name, although

it has been used as an adjective referring to Allah: and Allah is better and more abiding (20:73); are sundry lords better or Allah the One, the Supreme? (12:39). Of course, the word, khayrun (better, best) has been used as the first construct of those Divine names which are in genitive case; for example: and Allah is the best (khayr) of sustainers (62:11); and He is the best of the judges (7:87); and He is the best of deciders (6:57); and He is the best of the helpers (3:150); and Allah is the best of planners (3:54); and Thou art the best of deciders (7:89); and Thou art the best of the forgivers (7:155); and Thou art the best of inheritors (21:89);and Thou art the 'best to cause to alight (23:29); and Thou art the best of the merciful ones (23:109). The reason for this fine distinction in usage is not difficult to understand. As the word, al-khayr, has a connotation of selection and option, it was not used as a name of God - it would not have been proper to compare Him in a general way with others, because all are subservient to Him. But there was no such difficulty in using the word as an adjective or as a relative description in a genitive case. The sentence, "in Thine hand is the good", has a semantic value of restriction: the definite article in "the good" makes it cover all and every good; and the adverbial clause of place, "in Thine hand", coming at the beginning of the sentence, puts all the good exclusively into the hand of Allah. The meaning therefore is: Every good, which anyone may ever desire, is only under Thy management and control; it is Thou Who gives it to whomsoever Thou pleasest. The sentence gives the reason of the preceding ones, which mention His giving the kingdom and honor to whomsoever He pleases and taking them away from whomsoever He pleases. It explains the particular, that is, bestowing kingdom and honor, with the help of a general attribute, "good": "good" is an all-encompassing term, which covers other bounties too. Allah controls every "good", and kingdom and honor are two of those good things; therefore, it is Allah who bestows them to whomsoever He pleases. The taking away of the kingdom and abasing are 'good' in the same way as giving the kingdom and exalting are. It is true that they are "evil"; but what is evil? It is absence of good. Taking away the kingdom is the same as not giving the kingdom; abasing is the same as not exalting. To say, Allah has the power to give it, is the same as saying, He has the power to withold it. When every good emanates from Him, then every withholding of the good must necessarily emanate from Him. What we have to be careful about is that we should never attribute to Him anything

which is beneath His sublime sanctity; for example, we cannot say that the sins, errors and improprieties of the servants emanate from Him. Nevertheless, we may say that Allah leaves the sinners to do as they wish, and that He does not help such servants. (We have explained this matter before.) Let us look at this matter from another angle: There are good and evil in the sphere of creation, like giving the kingdom and taking it away, exalting someone and abasing him and so on. The good, at this level, is a positive reality, and there is no difficulty in attributing it to Allah. And the evil, at this level, is just not giving the good to someone, and even here, there is no difficulty in attributing it to Allah; He is the only Master of every "good"; if He gives to someone from that good, then He should be thanked; if, on the other hand, He withholds it from someone, then nobody has any right to ask Him why, or to compel Him to give it. Whatever He does, is done for the general well-being of His creatures, for the good of the system which pervades every single component of the universe. Likewise, there are good and evil in the sphere of legislation - various kinds of obedience and disobedience. Man is responsible for these actions, inasmuch as they are done by his own choice and will. Certainly, such actions can never be attributed to other than the man himself. It is this relationship between man and his actions which makes it possible to say, this is good, or, that is bad. If man had no freedom of will and choice, none of his deeds could be termed as good or evil. And these deeds cannot be attributed to Allah, except in the sense that He helps (in good deeds) or withholds His help (from evil ones), according to the reasons demanding such help or its withdrawal. It shows that the good, all of it, is in the hand of Allah, and all the affairs of the universe - gain and loss; good and evil - emanate from that good. An exegete has written: There is a deleted by implied word in the sentence, "in Thine hand is the good"; according to him, it actually says, in Thine hand is the good and evil. He gives the example of another verse: and He has given you garments to preserve you from the heat (16:81), in which 'and cold', is implied. We understand me motive of the above assertion. He wanted to keep his distance from the Mu'tazilities. The Mu'tazilites do not attribute an evil to Allah, not even indirectly. Of course, their stand was wrong and we have already dealt with this topic in a previous volume. But it does not justify such strange implied additions to the speech of God; it is astonishing to see someone having the audacity to hazard such explanations in respect of the Qur'anic verses.

([ )! Thou hast power over all things: It shows why all good is in Allah's hand. He has absolute and exclusive power over everything; it follows that anyone who has got any power, gets it by the authority of Allah. If not so, then that person's power would be outside the purview of Allah's power; in that case, Allah would not have power over all things. But we know that He has absolute and allencompassing power; and therefore, every imaginable good is in His power. Consequently, all the good, that emanates from others' hands, is, in fact, bestowed by Allah. In short, the good, per se, is in His hands only. It was this exclusiveness to which the preceding sentence had referred: "in Thine hand is the good ". ([ )! Thou makest the night to enter into the day and Thou makest the day to enter into the night: al-Wuluj is to enter; its transitive is "al-ilaj" (to make enter, to insert). Apparently, the above sentences refer to the continuously changing lengths of days and nights, throughout the year, depending on the latitude of a region and the position of the earth vis-à-vis the sun. In the northern hemisphere, from mid-winter to mid-summer, days become longer and longer and nights shorter and shorter - it is the entering of the day into the night. And from mid-summer to mid-winter, nights become longer and longer and days shorter and shorter - and it is the entering of the night into the day. The position in the southern hemisphere is just opposite. When the nights are longer in one hemisphere, they are shorter in the other; the same happens with the days. In this way, Allah is always making the day to enter into the night, and the night to enter into the day. As for the two imaginary points of the north and the south poles, and the imaginary latitude of the equator, it seems that the days and the nights remain equal throughout the year. But in reality changes occur at those points too. ([ )! and Thou bringest forth the living from the dead and Thou bringest forth the dead from the living: That is, Allah brings forth a believer from the loin of an unbeliever, and an unbeliever from the loin of a believer. Allah has named belief as life and light, and He calls disbelief as death and darkness. For example, He says: Is he who was dead then We raised him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people, like him whose likeness is that of one in utter darkness whence he cannot come forth (6:122). The sentences may also be explained in a general way: Allah creates living organism, like vegetable and animal, from the earth which has no sense or feeling;

and then gives death to the living things returning them to the earth. The Qur'anic verses almost clearly say that He changes the living into dead and the dead into living. He says: ...then We caused it to grow into another creation; so blessed be Allah, the best of creators. Then after that you will most surely die (23:14-15). There are other verses having the same connotation. Some scientists say: The life emanated from some germs, evolving from one germ into another, and from that into a third and so on; that it did not spring up from senseless matter. The reason for this hypothesis lay in their belief that the universe came into being by itself, it was not created. But experiments show that the living germs too are overcome by death. Thus the life changes into death, establishing a correlation between the two. (We shall further explain this subject somewhere else.) However, this verse, "Thou makest the night... bringest forth the dead from the living", describes Allah's management of His real possession; as the preceding verse, "Thou givest the Kingdom... abasest whom Thou pleasest", shows His management of His conventional possession. The two verses run parallel to each other: One describing four aspects of His management which stand face to face with the other four described by the other. The former mentions giving the kingdom and taking it away; the latter subtends it with the description of making the night to enter into the day and making the day to enter into the night. Then the former talks about exalting and abasing; and the latter speaks of bringing forth the living from the dead and vice versa. This juxtaposition provides a refreshing insight into the Qur'anic eloquence. To give a kingdom to someone is to let him impose his authority over his compatriots; thus, to a certain extent, the freedom of the people is lost into the authority of the ruler. It is not dissimilar to making the night dominate over the day; the night (comparable to subjugation) takes away certain portions of the day (comparable to the freedom of the people). The opposite is true for taking away the kingdom vis-a-vis making the day to enter into the night. To exalt someone is similar to giving him a new life; he would have remained unknown and unrecognized, if Allah had not bestowed honor upon him. That is why it has been put parallel to bringing forth the living from the dead.

Likewise, abasing and bringing forth the dead from the living stand face to face. Honor is life; and dishonor, death. Also, Allah, in His Book, describes the day as having a manifest sign, and the night as having one blotted away; He says: ...then We have made the sign of the night blotted away and We have made the sign of the day manifest... (17:12). Looking at human society from this point of view, establishment of a kingdom and its downfall are mirrors of the manifestation of the day and the effacement of the night respectively. In the same way, He counts life as the fountainhead of knowledge and power; and death deprives man of these faculties; He says: Dead (are they), not living, and they know not when they shall be raised (16:21). And he has exclusively reserved the honor and might to Himself, and to His Apostle and the believers: and to Allah belongs the might and to His Apostle and to the believers (63:8). And it is these who, according to the Qur'an, are alive. Consequently, might and respect is the mirror of life, and humiliation and abasement represents death. It is now clear how giving of kingdom and taking it away as well as exalting and abasing (of the former verse) run parallel to making the night to enter into the day, and making the day to enter into the night as well as bringing forth the living from the dead, and the dead from the living (in the latter) respectively. The concluding sentence of the latter verse, (and Thou givest sustenance to whom Thou pleasest, without measure) likewise stands face to face with the concluding sentence of the former (in Thine hand is good . . .), as the following paragraph makes it clear. ([ )! and Thou givest sustenance to whom Thou pleasest without measure: Apparently it gives the reason for the foregoing factors; the conjunctive, "and", is, therefore, for explanation; and it explains the aforementioned particular actions in term of a general faculty. The meaning: Allah manages His creatures in the foregoing way because He is the Sustainer, Who gives sustenance to whom He pleases, without measure. That is why we said earlier that it stands face to face with the concluding sentence of the former verse; because, "in Thine hand is the good; surely, Thou has power over all things" also explains the reason of the actions mentioned therein. %
 
 
  

ar-Rizq, usually translated as sustenance, maintenance, or means of livelihood, is a well-known concept. A glance at its various usages shows that the word has a connotation of bestowal by someone to someone else, for example, the sustenance given by the king to the soldiers. Originally, it was used for only the foodstuff. For example, Allah says: and their maintenance and their clothing must be borne by the father according to usage (2:233). Mark that the clothing has not been counted as a part of the maintenance. Thereafter, the meaning was extended to include every foodstuff, even if the giver was not known - in any case, it was a bestowal of good luck. The process of generalization continued, and now it is used for every useful thing -food or something else - which comes to someone; it includes all the paraphernalia of life, like: wealth, prestige, family, supporters, beauty, knowledge and so on. Allah says: Or is it that you ask them a recompense? But the recompense of your Lord is best, and He is the best of those who provide sustenance (23: 72). Also, He quotes Shu'ayb (a.s.) as saying: O my people! have you considered if I have a clear proof from my Lord and He has given me a goodly sustenance from Himself... (11:88). Here the sustenance refers to the prophethood and the Divine knowledge etc. Allah says: Surely Allah, He is the Bestower of sustenance, the Lord of Power, the Strong (51:58). The context confines the bestowal of sustenance to Allah only. The verse leads us to the following concepts:  ! Bestowal of sustenance, in reality, cannot be ascribed to anyone other than Allah. Of course, there are some verses that attribute it to others also; for example: and Allah is the Best of sustainers (62:11). (There are many sustainers, but Allah is the Best.) Also, He gives the order... and maintain them out of it, and clothe them (4:5). But such usages do not give them any independent status; 'the only Sustainer is Allah, others are just a means of conveying Allah's gift to His servants. It is not different from the Kingdom and the Might which actually belong to Allah, although others too get them by Allah's bestowal and permission. %
 $! Whatever good the people get and which they make use of, and derive benefit from, in their existence, is their sustenance; and it is Allah Who bestows it to them. There is a large number of the verses of sustenance to prove this fact. In addition, there are numerous verses on the theme of creation, management, decree, possession, will, and good, which prove that all these things belong exclusively to Allah - and giving sustenance is interwoven with these factors.

 $! Suppose a man takes advantage of a certain thing to obtain an unlawful benefit. Inasmuch as it was the cause or means of a sin, it would not be attributed to Allah. Allah has clearly said that on the level of legislation, He does not sanction any sin or evil. He says: And when they commit an indecency they say: "We found our fathers doing this, and Allah has enjoined it on us." Say: "Surely Allah does not enjoin indecency; do you say against Allah what you do not know?" (7:28). Also, He says: Surely Allah enjoins the doing of justice and the doing of good (to others) and the giving to the kindred, and He forbids indecency and evil and rebellion... (16:90). It is just unimaginable that He would forbid a thing and then, at the same time, would allow it; or that He would declare something unlawful and then confine a servant's sustenance to it! And unlawful benefit is not "sustenance" on the level of legislation. Nevertheless, it is "sustenance" on the level of creation. The religious responsibility does not reach up to the level of creation and there is nothing bad on that level. When the Qur'an says that Allah gives sustenance to everybody, it looks at this subject from the level of creation. A Divine talk cannot be reduced to the level of the simpletons' understanding; in other words, it cannot overlook the deep Divine realities just because they are beyond the mental capacity of common man. The Holy Book contains what is a healing for the believers' hearts; nobody may fall into perdition by it except the unjust: And We reveal of the Qur'an that which is a healing and a mercy to the believers, and it adds only to the perdition of the unjust (17:82). Moreover, there are verses showing that it was Allah Who gave kingdom to Namrud (Nimrod), Pharaoh and others like them, and bestowed wealth and treasures to Qarun and his like. They got all these things not without the permission of Allah; He gave them the kingdom and wealth as a means of trial, to test their spiritual condition, and to complete His proof against them; it was as though Allah left them to go astray if they so wished, and gave them enough rope to hang themselves. It should be noted here that, in the above examples, we took those cases to the level of legislation and yet found good explanations for them that would satisfy the reason and were not against the sublime Divine Justice. If such things are unobjectionable at the level of legislation, certainly there can be no objection in providing sustenance, at the level of creation - even if it be "unlawful" for legislation's point of view. Allah has said that everything has been created by Him, is sent down by Him from His treasures of mercy: And there is not a thing but with Us are the treasures of it,

and We do not send it down but in a known measure (15:21). Further, He has said: and whatever is with Allah is better... (28:60). These two (and other similar) verses read together prove that whatever a man gets in this life, it comes from Allah and is good and beneficial for him. This theme may also be inferred from the verse: Who made good everything that He has created... (32:7), read in conjunction with the verse: That is Allah, your Lord, the Creator of everything; there is no god but He (40:62). Yet there is no denying that some Divine gifts appear to be evil and harmful to the recipient. But its evil and harm is just relative; it may be so for this particular person, while it brings good and benefit to a great many people; in other words, that personal hardship may be good, in the wider context of the world-system. Or it could have been misused by the man himself. Allah points to this factor when He says: and whatever misfortune befalls you, it is from yourself (4:79). However, we have already dealt with this subject in a previous volume. In short, whatever good Allah bestows on His creatures (and all that He bestows is good and beneficial), it is called sustenance, in its literal sense: it is a gift that benefits the recipient. Probably, it is this theme that the verse 20:131 points at: and the sustenance (given) by your Lord is better ... The above discourse shows that, for almost all practical purposes, the three concepts - sustenance, good and creation - are one and the same. Every sustenance is good and created; and every creation is a sustenance and good. Nevertheless, there is a fine difference between sustenance and good on one side and creation on the other. Sustenance presupposes the existence of something to be sustained, to whom the sustenance would be given. Food is sustenance for the digestive system because it needs that food; the digestive system is sustenance for the man as he needs it; that man is sustenance for his parents because they benefit from him; likewise, the existence is a sustenance for the man, per se. Allah says: ...Who gave to everything its creation... (20:50). Likewise, good presupposes a selector who would choose what he wants from among a lot of things. Food is good for the digestive system because it needs it, and opts for it when given a choice; the digestive system is, in the same way, good for the man, and similarly the existence is good for him. But as for creation, it does not require any actual or imaginary pre-existing thing.

Food, digestive system, man, everything is created in its own right; it by itself is the object of creation; it does not need any other object. Every sustenance belongs to Allah; every good belongs to Allah. Whatever sustenance comes from Him, whatever good is given by Him, it is given gratis, not in exchange of or return for anything. Suppose you wanted to give to Allah something as price of the sustenance; well, what could you give Him? Whatever you may think of, it already belongs to Allah; you have no right whatsoever on any thing. It is just a mercy of Allah that He has undertaken to give sustenance to every one, and has made it obligatory for Himself to sustain all the creatures; He says: And there is no animal in the earth but on Allah is the sustenance of it (11:6); and in the heaven is your sustenance and what you are threatened with. And by the Lord of the heavens and the earth! it is most surely the truth, just as you do speak (51:22 - 23). It shows that although sustenance is a right on Allah - because He Himself has undertaken to give sustenance to everyone - yet it is in fact a free gift from Him, because no creature is in his own right entitled to get it. The above talk makes one thing clear: Even if a man obtains his sustenance unlawfully, originally he was alloted a lawful sustenance. It is unimaginable that Allah would undertake to give sustenance to a man, then compel him to get it through unlawful means; and then would tell him not to use it, and punish him if he disobeyed. Let us explain it in another way: Sustenance is a Divine gift containing good; as such it is a Divine mercy for all the creatures. We have already mentioned that there are two kinds of mercy: There is a general mercy which covers all the servants, believers and unbelievers, pious ones and sinners alike; and it is not confined to the human beings, it encompasses other creatures too. And there is a special mercy, the one that is reserved for the walkers on the path of felicity and righteousness, for example, true belief, piety and ultimately the paradise. Likewise, there are two kinds of sustenance: A general sustenance which is provided to every thing for its protection and survival; and a special sustenance which remains within the limits of legality. The general mercy as well as the general sustenance is foreordained and measured; Allah says: and Who created every thing, then ordained for it a measure (25:2). Likewise, the special mercy and the special sustenance are foreordained and measured. For example, guidance is a special mercy; and on the level of legislation

it is foreordained and decreed for every man, be he a believer or an unbeliever. That is why Allah raised the prophets and sent down the books. He says: And I did not create the jinn and the human beings except that they should worship Me, I do not desire from them any sustenance and I do not desire that they should feed Me. Surely Allah, He is the Bestower of sustenance, the Lord of power, the Strong (51:56 - 58). Also, He says: And your Lord has commanded (decreed) that you shall not worship (any) but Him... (17:23). It means that worship (which depends on guidance and is one of its concomitants) is a decreed measure -on the level of legislation. And so is the special sustenance (which is obtained lawfully), on the same level. Allah says: They are lost indeed who kill their children foolishly without knowledge, and forbid what Allah has given to them, forging a lie against Allah; they have indeed gone astray, and they are not the followers of the right course (6:140). Also, He says: And Allah has made some of you excel others in the means of subsistence, so those who are made to excel do not give away their sustenance to those whom their right hands possess, so that they should be equal therein... (16:71). These two verses are unconditional and general; they cover the believers as well as the unbelievers, and include the one who obtains his sustenance in lawful way as well as the one who does so unlawfully. One thing more: As was explained in the beginning, sustenance is the gift or bestowal which the sustained benefits from. It follows that only that much of it can be truly called sustenance which is used up by the sustained. A man has been given a lot of wealth, but he eats only a small portion of it; therefore, his sustenance, strictly speaking, is the portion he ate up; the remainder cannot be called his sustenance except in the sense that he was given it. In other words, when we say, Zayd has got ample (or 1ittle) sustenance, it does not necessarily mean that he has got a lot of (or little) wealth. There are some other aspects of this topic, which we shall write about under the verse: And there is no animal in the earth but on Allah is the sustenance of it, and He knows its resting place and its depository; all (things) are in a manifest book (11:6). Now we come back to the clause under discussion, that is, "and Thou givest sustenance to whom thou pleasest, without measure". The sustenance is "without measure" because Allah gives it to the creatures gratis, and they by themselves have got no right to it. Whatever they could offer in exchange, even their requests, invocations and thanks, in reality belongs to Allah, they have got nothing of their own to offer in consideration of the sustenance. Therefore, there is no measure for the sustenance given by Allah. Clearly, the clause does not imply that the given

sustenance is unlimited and unmeasured. How can it be when the verses of "measure" clearly refute it? For example, Allah says: Surely We created every thing according to a measure (54:49); and whoever fears Allah, He will make for him an outlet, and give him sustenance from whence he thinks not; and whoever trusts in Allah, He is sufficient for him; surely Allah attains His purpose; Allah indeed has made a measure for every thing (65:2-3). Sustenance, therefore, is a free gift from Allah, yet it is measured according to the pleasure of Allah. The two verses together make the following concepts clear:  ! The possession as well as the Kingdom exclusively belongs to Allah. %
 $! Every good is in His hand, and comes from Him.  $! Sustenance is a gift from Allah, without any recompense or exchange.  ! Kingdom, might, honor, and every single conventional good, occurring in the social framework, (like: wealth, prestige, power, etc.) are various aspects of the sustenance, given by Allah to His servants.  $  'Abdu'1-A'la (mawla, client of the Al [tribe of] Sam) has narrated from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.). He says: "I told him: 'Say O Allah; Master of the Kingdom! Thou givest the kingdom to whomsoever Thou pleasest and takest away the kingdom from whomsoever Thou pleasest. Is it not that Allah gave the kingdom to the Umayyads?' He said: 'It is not as you think. Surely Allah Mighty and Great is He! gave the kingdom to us, and the Umayyads usurped it; it is as though a cloth belongs to a man, and another person takes it away; yet the cloth does not belong to the man who took it away.'" (al-Kafi) 
 ! al-'Ayyashi has narrated a similar tradition through Dawud ibn Farqad from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.). We have already explained that giving the kingdom is of two kinds: (1) Giving it at the level of creation: Such a kingdom means that the king enjoys an over-riding authority over the people and they are subdued by his power - it makes no difference whether his rule is based on justice or not. For example, Allah says

referring to Nimrod: ...because Allah had given him the kingdom (2:258). The effect of such a kingdom is that the king's words are obeyed, his command carried out and his will enforced. (We shall later explain what a kingdom on the level of creation really entails.) (2) Giving it at the level of legislation, that is, decreeing that he is a king whose obedience is obligatory. For example, Allah says: Surely Allah has raised Talut to be a king over you (2:247). The effect of this type of kingdom is obligation of the people to obey the king's command and confirmation of his mastership of the people. Such a kingdom is always based on justice; and is liked and praised by Allah. Now the kingdom the Umayyads had got was of the former type, that is, the one decreed at the level of creation, with its accompanying effect of overall authority on the people. But the questioner was confused; and erroneously thought that it had the effect of the other type of kingdom - he assumed that the Umayyads were entitled to the obedience of the people, that they were the rightful masters of the ummah, and had got a lawful and praiseworthy status in the eyes of Allah. The Imam told him that such a kingdom (on the level of legislation) did not belong to the Umayyads - it belonged to the rightful successors of the Prophet, that is, the Imams, and only they were entitled to the unquestioning obedience of the ummah. In other words, the same kingdom which in the Umayyad's hands was devoid of every virtue, would have been praiseworthy if it were in the Imams' hands. In the Umayyds' hands it was totally condemnable, because they had usurped it from its rightful owners. Nevertheless, its bestowal would be attributed to Allah as a plan to give them enough rope to hang themselves, as He did in the case of Nimrod and Pharaoh. The Umayyads themselves had misunderstood the conno-lations of this verse, and thought that their kingdom was the sign of Divine approval of their rule, as may be seen in Kitab al-Irshad (of al-Mufid) where it mentions the events after the martyrdom of Imam al-Husayn (a.s.) and his companions: al-Mufid says: "When the heads (of the martyrs) were put before Yazid and among them was the head of al-Husayn (a.s.), Yazid recited: "We will split even the skull of a man we held in great respect; But they were disobedient and oppressive." Again al-Mufid says: "Then (Yazid) looked towards the people of his court and said: 'Verily, this (al-Husayn) used to boast against me and say: "My father is better than the father of Yazid, and my mother is better than his mother, and my grandfather is better than his grandfather, and I am better than him." As for his

claim that his father was better than the father of Yazid, indeed my father disputed with his father and Allah decreed in favour of my father against his father. And as for his saying that his mother was better than Yazid's mother, by my life he was right; certainly Fatimah, daughter of the Apostle of Allah was better than my mother. And as regards his saying that his grandfather was better than my grandfather, no one believing in Allah and the Last Day can say that he is better than Muhammad. And as for his saying that he was better than me, perhaps he had not read this verse: Say: "O Allah, Master of the Kingdom! Thou givest the kingdom to whomsoever Thou pleasest..." And Zaynab, daughter of 'Ali (peace be on him and her) rebutted his claims using the same explanation as as-Sadiq (a.s.) did in this tradition. as-Sayyid ibn Tawus and others have reported her reply, In which she, inter alia, said: "Do you think, O Yazid! that just because you cut us off from the regions of the earth and the horizons of the sky, so that we are being held like the captives - we are abased before Allah? Or that you are exalted before Him? Or that it has happened because of your great importance with Him? So (now) you behave arrogantly and look around hilariously and cheerfully, when you find the world in your bondage and (your) affairs well in order, and when our kingdom and our authority is totally usurped by you! Take it easy! Don't be hasty!! Have you forgotten the words of Allah: And let not those who disbelieve think that Our granting them respite is better for their souls; We grant them respite only that they may add to their sins; and they shall have a disgraceful chastisement (3:178)." It is reported in Majma'u'l-bayan about the words of Allah, and Thou bringest forth the living from the dead...: "It is said that it means: Thou bringest forth the believer from the unbeliever and Thou bringest forth the unbeliever from the believer." Further, it is written: "And this meaning has been narrated from Abu Ja'far (alBaqir) and Abu 'Abdillah (as-Sadiq), peace be on them." 
 ! A nearly similar tradition has been narrated by as-Saduq from al-'Askari (a.s.). Ibn Marduwayh has narrated through the chain of Abu 'Uthman an-Nahdi from Ibn Mas'ud or Salman from the Prophet about the words, He brings forth the living from the dead and He brings forth the dead from the living, that he said: "The believer from the unbeliever and the unbeliever from the believer." (ad-Durru'lmanthur) It is reported through the foregoing chain from Salman al-Farisi that he said: "The Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'When Allah created Adam (a.s.), He took out his

offspring, then He took a handful in His right hand and said: "These are the people of the garden; and I don't care." And He took a handful in the other (hand) and came into it every bad (person); and He said: "These are the people of the Fire; and I don't care." Then He mixed one (group) with, the other. Thus comes out an unbeliever from a believer, and a believer from an unbeliever; and that is (the meaning of) His words, Thou bringest forth the living from the dead and Thou bringest forth the dead from the living.'" (ibid.) 
 ! Several exegetes have narrated this meaning from Salman, with the chain of narrators disconnected. The tradition is one of those related to the "tiny particles" and the covenant; and, Allah willing, we shall explain them in a more suitable place. Muhammad ibn Yahya narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad and several of our companions, from Sahl ibn Ziyad, from Ibn Mahbub, from Abu Hamzah athThumali that Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said: "The Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his progeny, said in (his) last pilgrimage: 'Verily, the Trustworthy Spirit (i.e., Gabriel) has revealed to my heart that no soul was to die until it had completed its sustenance. Therefore, be on guard against (the wrath of) Allah, and act decently in seeking (the sustenance). Even if you feel that a sustenance is late in coming to you, it should not induce you to seek it through something that is a sin against Allah; for surely Allah has distributed the sustenance among His creation, with lawful means, and He has not distributed it with unlawful means. Therefore, whoever fears Allah and remains patient, his sustenance comes to him from lawful means; and whoever tears apart the curtain (put by) Allah and takes it (i.e., the sustenance) through unlawful means, his lawful sustenance is reduced (proportionately) and (also) he will be answerable for that.'" (al-Kafi) 'Ali (a.s.) said: "O son of Adam! Livelihood is of two kinds: the livelihood which you seek and the livelihood which seeks you; if you do not reach it, it will come to you. Therefore, do not impose a year's worry on your one day's worry. Whatever you get every day should be enough for you for the day. If you have a whole year of your life even then Allah, the Sublime, will give you every next day what He has destined as your share. If you do not have a year in your life then why should you worry for what is not for you. No seeker will reach your livelihood before you nor will anyone overpower you in the matter of that livelihood. Similarly, what has been destined as your share will not be delayed for you (Nahju'l-balaghah) Ibn Tarif narrated from Ibn 'Ulwan, from Ja'far (a.s.), that his father (al-Baqir - a.s.) said: "The Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his progeny, said: 'Verily,

the sustenance comes down from the heaven to the earth (abundantly) like the number of the raindrops, to every soul according to what has been allotted to it. Yet, Allah is very Munificent; so you should beseech Allah for His munificence.'" (Qurbu'l-asnad} 
 ! Numerous traditions have been narrated of the same connotation. We shall discuss, Allah willing, in the Chapter of Hud (ch. 11), the traditions of sustenance in detail.  Ô 6 ,$ $î
 %
 It has already been explained that possession and property are among those conventional but essential concepts which man cannot do without - it makes no difference whether he lives alone or in a society. Possession basically is a recognized relationship between the owner and the property. Likewise, kingdom is a conventional, nevertheless essential, concept; a subjective institution which man cannot do without. But it is as a member of society, not as an individual, that man needs this institution. No sooner do the people establish a society than they start disputing with one another; everyone wants what is in the other's hands even if it means trespassing the limits and crushing other's rights under his heels. This tendency leads to chaos and conflict. The society which was established to ensure happy and peaceful life, becomes a source of misery and disorder; the medicine turns into a poison. This anomaly cannot be removed except by creating an overall authority which could compel each member to remain within the limits - thus curbing the reckless ambitions of the oppressor and giving new hope and vigor to the oppressed. That authority, which is called kingdom or rulership, lets everyone enjoy his due rights and keeps every member in his proper place. Exploitation of weaker sections has been a constant feature of human history. In ancient times some strong persons imposed their will on the society and subdued their compatriots to accept them as their overlord or king. Although such kings and their officers themselves were mostly epitome of oppression and injustice, still their presence was of some benefit to the society. They, in their own interest, did not allow any section to oppress the others - because they did not want anyone to become strong enough to rise one day against their own authority. In this way peace reigned in the society; everyone was afraid of the autocratic king and no one had any opportunity or inclination to think about the general welfare of the society.

If an individual ruler was less oppressive, the subjects sang his praise; if he was unjust beyond their tolerance, they complained and cried. Sometime a king or ruler was killed or overpowered; and the subjects experienced chaos and disorder, to prevent which they made some strong and able man to take the rein of power in his hands, and he ascended the throne; and thus began the same story of oppression and injustice. This continued for a long time. Ultimately, society was fed up with' the autocratic and dictatorial monarchy. In order to restrain the king's hands, people devised constitutions, delineating the mutual rights and duties of the ruler and the ruled, and somehow or other forced the king to agree. The autocratic monarchy thus became a constitutional one. Yet, it was a hereditary institution. Then the public became aware of another big defect: Once a king ascended the throne, there was no way to remove him, no matter how unjust or unfit he might prove. Another defect was its hereditary nature; the first born child of a king got the kingdom, irrespective of his physical, moral and intellectual abilities. They found the answer in republic. Now they had an elected president for a fixed period instead of a hereditary king who ruled for life. Various nations invented various other system to restrain their rulers; and future might be holding various hitherto un-imagined systems in store for us. All these attempts throughout the world, to regulate the functions of the ruler, prove one thing, if nothing else. Humanity really needs the institution of rulership, no matter by what name it is called in a certain country at a certain time. One overriding authority must subdue all other people's individual ambitions and aims; otherwise, society will suffer from discord, conflict and disorder. That is why we said at the outset that kingdom is an essential concept of the society. And like all other such concepts, society is constantly trying to perfect it by removing from it the harmful elements. The institution of prophethood has played the most important part in this process. When an idea spreads in the public - especially if it is in accord with the nature, and satisfied the human expectations - it becomes the strongest bond to unit the differing groups, to unify the divergent views and to turn the individuals into a well disciplined society, which no power can defy. Prophethood since its earliest days calls the people to do justice and to abstain

from injustice; it teaches them to worship Allah and to submit only to Him; and it forbids them to follow the arrogant pharaohs and exploiting nimrods. This cry has constantly been raised generation after generation, in one nation after another, exhorting the big bosses to submit to the rule of justice, and encouraging the weaker sections to stand up for their rights. It is impossible for such a powerful factor to remain active in the society for so many centuries and not to affect the human psychology, not to mould mankind's way of thinking. The Qur'an often quotes revelations to this effect sent to the previous prophets, Nuh (a.s.) is quoted complaining before his Lord: "My Lord! surely they have disobeyed me and followed him whose wealth and children have added to him nothing but loss. And they have planned a very great plan. And they say: 'By no means leave your gods...'" (71:21 - 23). The same thing appears in his disputation with the big bosses of his people: They said: "Shall we believe in you while the meanest follow you?" He said: "And what knowledge have I of what they do? Their account is only with my Lord, if you could perceive" (26:111-113). Likewise, Hud (a.s.) admonished his people: "Do you build on every height a monument? Vain is it that you do: And you make strong fortresses that perhaps you may abide: And when you lay hands (on men) you lay hands (like) tyrants" (26:128 - 130). And Salih (a.s.) advised his people: "Therefore, guard against (the punishment of) Allah and obey me: And do not obey the bidding of the extravagant: Who make mischief in the land and do not act right" (26:150-152). In the same way Musa (a.s.) stood up against Pharaoh to oppose his tyranny and to defend and liberate the Israelites; the same stance was taken by Ibrahim (a.s.) against Nimrod; and by 'Isa (a.s.) and other Israelite prophets vis-a-vis the oppressors of their times. All of them condemned and attacked the arrogance and injustice of their kings and rulers, and called their people to throw away the yokes of tyranny and stand boldly against the exploiters and transgressors. So far as the Qur'an is concerned, it is no secret how it exhorts the people not to yield to the transgressors, not to surrender to the oppressors; it encourages the oppressed to" stand up boldly against the oppressor to safeguard his self-respect and human dignity; and it warns the arrogant of the bitter fruits of haughtiness, of the chastisement that awaits the oppression and injustice. For example: Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with 'Ad, (the people of) Iram, possessors of many columned buildings, the like of which were not created in the cities; and (with) Thamud, who hewed out the rocks in the valley; and (with) Pharaoh, the lord of stakes; who transgressed in the cities, so they made great mischief therein? Therefore your Lord let fall upon them the whip of chastisement. Most surely your

Lord is on watch (89:6-14). The Qur'anic comment, at the end of the story of Talut, is in itself enough to prove that the kingdom (or rulership) is essential lor the mankind: And were it not for Allah's repelling some men with others, the earth would certainly be in a state of disorder; but Allah is Gracious to the creatures (2:251). We have shown in its commentary how it confirms this institution in a general way. Many verses in the Qur'an talk about kingdom, guardianship and obligation of obedience etc. Some of them count the kingdom as a bounty and gift from Allah: ...and We have given them a grand Kingdom (4:54); ...and made you kings and gave you what He had not given to any other among the nations (5:20); ...and Allah grants His Kingdom to whom He pleases... (2: 247). Nevertheless, it is an honour only when it is accompanied by piety. Piety is the only basis of honour, to the exclusion of all other illusory sources of respect. Allah says: O you people! surely We have created you of a male and a female and made you nations and tribes that you may recognize each other; surely the most honourable of you with Allah is the most pious of you... (49:13). But it is only Allah Who decides the worth of a servant's piety. Consequently, no one should use his piety as a lever to hoist himself over his compatriots. Nobody should boast about anything whatsoever: If the cause of boasting is some worldly thing, then it is obviously worthless; if it concerns the next world, then it is in the hands of Allah. In any case, a Muslim, who is given this grace of Allah which we call Kingdom, has nothing to boast about, nor any reason to think himself as superior to the others. All he has got for himself is an unenviable burden of responsibilities of the state. What brightens this gloomy picture is the hope that his Lord will give him great reward in the next life if he manages the affairs of the state with justice and piety. This is the spirit which animated the whole lives of the true friends of Allah. We shall write later on, Allah willing, on this topic, looking at the lives of the Prophet and his purified progeny; we shall describe, with the help of the correct traditions, what they gained for themselves from their kingdoms: "nothing"; their only interest in the kingdom and authority was to use it to crush the tyrants, to cut the root of mischief in the earth, to bring the arrogants and transgressors back within the limits of religion. And that is the only worth of the kingdom. The Qur'an treats the kingdom as a tool which is necessary for running the affairs of society - just as education and martial power is necessary for its intellectual and

defence needs. Kingdom is an instrument of society; it is not the foundation upon which the society stands. The Qur'an does not invite the Muslims to unite to establish an empire to shame the Byzantine and Iranian empires; it calls them to unite in Islam and admonishes them not to differ in religion. This unity in religion is the foundation which the Islamic society is built upon. Allah says: And (know) that this is My path, the straight one, therefore follow it; and follow not (other) ways, for they will scatter you away from His way (6:153); Say: "O People of the Book! come to a word, common between us and you, that we shall not worship any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate anything with Him and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah"; but if they turn back, then say: "Bear witness that we are Muslims" (3:64). Clearly, the Qur'an calls the people to surrender to no one except Allah; the society which it recognizes is the one that is based on religion. It demolishes all other loyalties; a Muslim is not to submit to anyone besides Allah; he is not to bow down before any magnificent palace or grandiose castle; he is not to humiliate himself before any Ceasar or Khusraw. Consequently, the Qur'an does not recognize the artificial boundaries which have cut the earth of Allah into small pieces which they call countries, nor the resulting "nationhood" that divides the humanity into territorial segments, putting one group against the others. î* 
   6 ,$ $2
  å 
 The Creator, as the Essential Being, is the ultimate Cause of all that is there in the universe; the relationship between Him and the universe (the whole as well as its components) is that of the cause and effect. It is a proved axiom of philosophy that causality governs the existence only - the real existence of the effect emanates from the existence of its cause; other things, for example, quiddity, are outside the domain of the cause. Consequently, that which has no real existence, does not come within the system of the cause and effect; and as it is not the effect of any cause, it has no chain of causality reaching up to the ultimate Cause. Problem arises about the abstract ideas and imaginary concepts, which have no real existence outside the imagination. Being devoid of real existence, they cannot be said to be caused by the ultimate Cause, that is, Allah. But one of those imaginary concepts, is the shan'ah with its commandments and prohibitions, its rules, principles and conventions. So are the kingdom, the honour, the sustenance etc. Should not these things be attributed to Allah? If the answer is yes, then how?

[
! These concepts, although devoid of real existence, leave in their track some effects which are inseparable from them ; and these effects have real existence. As these effects can be, and are, attributed to Allah, the concepts from which they emanate can as easily be attributed to Him. Kingdom, for example, is an imaginary concept, which has no real existence outside our imagination; we have established this institution to achieve a real benefit. It is through this abstract idea of kingdom that we try to curb the unscrupulous offenders of the society, to rein the unrestrained designs of the transgressors, and to avenge the oppressed from the oppressor. These are real facts and they can, and are, attributed to Allah. As these effects of kingdom are ascribed to Allah, so can be the kingdom itself, by association. The same applies to the honour, the rules of the shari'ah and its principles etc. In short, all such abstract ideas and concepts may be attributed to Allah, by attributing their effects to Him, in a way that is in keeping with the sanctity of His name.

å
 
    

4  ˸Ϟό˴ ˸ϔϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˶ ϭ˵Ω Ϧ˶ϣ ˯Ύ˴ϴϟ˶˸ϭ΃˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϓ˶ Ύ˴Ϝ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ά˶ Ψ ˶ Θ˴˷ϳ˴ ϻ ˴˷ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩ˶ϣ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΘ˴˷Η˴ ϥ˴΃ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ ˯˳ ˸ϲη ˴ ϲ˶ϓ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ β ˴ ˸ϴϠ˴ϓ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ ή˵ ϴ˶μϤ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ δ ˴ ˸ϔϧ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϛ˵ έ˵ ά˶˷ Τ ˴ ϳ˵ ϭ˴ Γ˱ Ύ˴ϘΗ˵ {28} ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴ϣ Ϣ˵ Ϡ˴˸όϳ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϫ˵ ˸ϤϠ˴˸όϳ˴ ϩ˵ ϭ˵Ϊ˸ΒΗ˵ ˸ϭ΃˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ έ˶ ϭ˵Ϊλ ˵ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴ϣ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϔ˸Ψ˵Η ϥ˶· ˸Ϟϗ˵ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ε ˶ ΍˴ϭΎ˴Ϥδ ˴˷ ϟ΍ ˲ήϳ˶Ϊϗ˴ ˯˳ ˸ϲη ˴ Ϟ ˶˷ ϛ˵ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ Ϫ˵ ˷Ϡ˴ϟ΍˴ϭ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍ ϲ˶ϓ{29} Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ΍˱ήπ ˴ ˸Τϣ˵˷ ή˳ ˸ϴΧ ˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶ ˸ΖϠ˴Ϥ˶ ϋ ˴ Ύ˷ϣ˴ β ˳ ˸ϔϧ˴ Ϟ ˵˷ ϛ˵ Ϊ˵ Π ˶ Η˴ ϡ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ ϑ ˵ ϭ˵΅έ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˵ δ ˴ ˸ϔϧ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϛ˵ έ˵ ά˶˷ Τ ˴ ϳ˵ ϭ˴ ΍˱Ϊϴ˶όΑ˴ ΍˱Ϊϣ˴ ΃˴ Ϫ˵ Ϩ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϬϨ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ ϥ ˴˷ ΃˴ ˸Ϯϟ˴ ˵˷ΩϮ˴ Η˴ ˯˳ Ϯ˵γ Ϧ˶ϣ ˸ΖϠ˴Ϥ˶ ϋ ˴ ˸ϟΎ˶Α Ω˶ Ύ˴Βό˶ {30} ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ ϥ˶· ˸Ϟϗ˵ ˲Ϣϴ˶Σέ˴˷ ˲έϮ˵ϔϏ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˴ Ϯ˵ϧΫ˵ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϟ˴ ˸ήϔ˶ ˸ϐϳ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϝ˵ ˸ΒΒ˶ ˸Τϳ˵ ϲ˶ϧϮ˵όΒ˶ Η˴˷Ύ˴ϓ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷Β˵ Τ ˶ Η˵ {31} ϥ˶Έϓ˴ ϝ ˴ Ϯ˵γή˴˷ ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵όϴ˶σ΃˴ ˸Ϟϗ˵ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϓ˶ Ύ˴Ϝ˸ϟ΍ ΐ ˵˷ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ ϻ ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ Έ˶ϓ˴ ΍˸Ϯϟ˴˷Ϯ˴ ˴Η{32} {28} Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing (to do) with Allah, except (when) you guard yourselves against (them) for fear from them; and Allah cautions you of Himself; and to Allah is the eventual coming. {29} Say ³Whether you hide what is in your hearts or manifest it, Allah knows it; and He knows whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth; and Allah has power over all things´. {30} On the day that every soul shall find present what it has done of good and what it has done of evil; (it) shall wish that between it and that (evil) there were a long

duration of time; and Allah cautions you of Himself; and Allah is Compassionate to the servants. {31} Say: "If you love Allah,' then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you your sins; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful". {32} Say: "Obey Allah and the Apostle"; but if they turn back, then surely Allah does not love the unbelievers . å
  The verses are not disconnected with the preceding ones, which admonished the People of the Book and the polytheists. If the word "unbelievers", coming at the beginning of these verses, covers the People of the Book too, then these verses forbid the believers to befriend, and fraternize with, the polytheists and the People of the Book all together; if it refers to the polytheists only, then the verses admonish the believers not to be friendly with them; instead they should join the party of Allah, loving Him and His Apostle. ([ )! Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers: "al-Awliya" " (friends), the plural of al-waliy, is derived from alwilayah. The root word denotes authority to manage something, that is, guardianship. Guardian of a minor, insane or idiot is called his al-waliy, because he has the authority to manage their affairs and property, although the property belongs to the said ward. Then the word was used ² with increasing frequency ² in the context of love; if two people love each other, each feels free to look after the other's affairs. Love empowers the beloved to manage the affairs, and influence the life, of the lover. In this verse, taking the unbelievers for friends means establishing a psychological rapport with them. Such a friendship would taint the believer's vision, and would adversely affect his thoughts and character, encouraging him to follow his unbeliever friends in his life and manners. The clause, "rather than the believers", points to this fact. It refers to a stage when the believer prefers the unbelievers rather than the believers as the object of his love and as the model for his life; the more he moves nearer to his unbeliever friends, the more he distances himself from the believers. Many verses strictly forbid the believers to take the unbelievers, and the Jews and the Christians for friends; but in every instance, there are clauses which delineate which type of friendship is forbidden. For example, this verse contains the above-

mentioned clause, "rather than the believers"; the verse: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends (5:51), goes on to say: they are friends of each other; and the prohibition: O you who believe! do not take My enemy and your enemy for friends... (60:1), is further on explained by the words: Allah does not forbid you respecting those who have not made war against you on account of your religion and have not driven you forth from your homes... (60:8). The adjectives used in the verse under discussion point to the reason of the prohibition. The believers should not take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers. Belief and disbelief are diametrically opposed to each other; they can never reconcile. The same mutual repulsion would permeate the whole lives of the believers vis-a-vis the unbelievers. Their thoughts and deeds, their spiritual journey towards Allah, and in short their whole being would be totally different from the opposite party. Such a position is not in harmony with that of friendship; because friendship demands unity and rapport. And when such a friendship begins and grows with complete disregard to the friendship with the believers, it first spoils the fruits of the faith, then damages its branches and finally destructs its very roots. That is why Allah warned them in the next sentence, "and whoever does this, he shall have nothing (to do) with Allah". Then comes the exception of taqiyyah, because taqiyyah is only a show of love, not its reality. "rather than the believers": dun is a proposition of place, meaning: below, under (in rank, value); this side of, short of; without, with the exclusion of; leaving aside, "min dun" signifies, 'beginning from a place below that of the believers', because the believers are far above them in rank. Originally this preposition denoted nearness combined with lowness, for example, dunaka Zayd (Zayd is near you but below; he does not measure up to you). Then it was used for 'other than', 'besides', for example... two gods besides Allah... (5:116); ...and forgives what is besides that to whomsoever He pleases... (4:48). Also, it is used as a nomen verbi; in this sense, dunaka Zayd would mean: adhere to Zayd. These later usages are based on some association with the original meaning, not that the word was made for them. ([ )! and whoever does this, he shall have nothing (to do) with Allah: "does this", that is, takes the unbelievers for friends in preference to the believers. This misconduct is hated so much by the Speaker that He does not like to mention it in words, and just alludes to it; people often use pronouns to refer to indecent things. Also Allah did not say, whoever of the believer does this; it was far beneath the dignity of the believers to attribute such a misconduct to them.

The clause, "he shall have nothing (to do) with Allah", literally means, he is not from Allah in anything. Idiomatically, this expression shows that he is not of the group or party of Allah. Allah says: And whoever takes Allah and His Apostle and those who believe for a guardian, then surely the party of Allah are they that shall be triumphant (5:56). Also Ibrahim (a.s.) is quoted as saying: ...then whoever follows me, he is surely of me... (14:36). Anyhow, the sentence means: Whoever does this, he shall in no way remain with the party of Allah; his thoughts and deeds will be those of the enemies of Islam. ([ )! except (when) you guard yourselves against (them) for fear from them: "al-Ittiqa'" (to seek protection because of fear); the word is sometimes used for fear, by association; probably taqiyyah has the same connotations. The exception in this sentence is disjoined: To show attachment to someone because of his fear without loving him in reality is quite different from befriending him and having a rapport with him; love and fear are two opposite feelings and have opposite effects on the heart; how can they be found in one place? The verse clearly allows taqiyyah, as is shown by the traditions of the Imams of Ahlulbayt. Also, it is clearly proved by the verse revealed about 'Ammar, and his parents, Yasir and Sumayyah: He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed ² not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith, but he who opens (his) breast for disbelief ² on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement (16:106). The Qur'an and the sunnah both agree that taqiyyah is permissible in places. Also, reason supports it. The main purpose of the religion and the Apostle is to keep the truth alive; and sometimes this purpose can be achieved by practicing taqiyyah, by keeping good relations with the enemies of the religion, while discarding taqiyyah would serve no purpose at all. It is a reality which no reasonable man can deny. We shall further write about it under 'Traditions', and also under the verse 16:106 mentioned just now (... not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith . . .). ([ )! and Allah cautions you of Himself and to Allah is the eventual coming: "at-Tahdhir" is the transitive of al-hadhar (to beware of a frightful thing). Allah has warned His servants of His chastisement, as He says: ...surely the chastisement of your Lord is to be dreaded of (17:57). And He has warned them of the

hypocrites and the mischief of the unbelievers, as He says: ...they are the enemy, therefore beware of them (63:4); ...and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you... (5:49). But in this verse as well as in a following one He cautions them of His Own Self. The crime of befriending the unbelievers to the exclusion of the believers is so serious that no curtain or protection remains between Allah and the criminal, there is nothing to save him from Allah, there is no helper or intercessor to intercede on his behalf; he is left without any shield, to face directly the chastisement of Allah. This style puts utmost emphasis to the threat, and its repetition in a following verse further intensifies it; then it has been further highlighted by the concluding clauses, "and to Allah is the eventual coming" (in this verse) and "Allah is Compassionate to the servants" (in the other), as we shall explain later on. Look at this verse and the others obliging the Muslims not to take the unbelievers for friends. You will see that this sin is tantamount to rejecting the guardianship of Allah, going out from the band of His servants, and joining the party of His enemies ² to damage the affairs of the religion. This transgression is a dry-rot that destroys the fiber of religion; it is more damaging and harmful to Islam than the open disbelief and polytheism of the unbelievers and pagans. One can easily prepare for an open enemy and can repulse his attacks on one's fortress; but it is not so easy if the enemy is inside and poses as a friend. If a Muslim establishes fraternal bonds with the enemies of Islam, his character is gradually influenced by their manners, deeds and thoughts. A time comes when disbelief replaces the belief; the Muslims slowly discard the tenets and symbols of Islam one after the other, and before they realize it, Islam loses its hold on the society. It is death without any hope of revival, perdition without any chance of resurrection. It is "the transgression"; and his case is directly in the hands of Allah: Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with 'Ad, (the people of) Iram, possessors of many columned buildings, the like of which were not created in the cities; and with Thamud, who hewed out the rocks in the valley, and (with) Pharaoh, the lord of stakes; who transgressed in the cities, so they made great mischief therein? Therefore your Lord let fall upon them the whip of chastisement. Most surely your Lord is on watch (89:6-14). The transgression leads the transgressor to a place where Allah is on watch ² and where there is no one but Allah; and He smites the guilty with the whip of His chastisement ² and there is no one to protect the transgressor from Him. It is for the same reason that those who take the unbelievers for friends have been warned of Allah Himself: Such a friendship is open transgression, a transgression

that damages and destroys the religion of Allah. The same theme has been explained in the verse: Stand fast then (in the right path) as you arc commanded, as also lie who has turned (to Allah) with you, and do not transgress (O men!), surely He sees what you do. And do not incline to those who are unjust, lest the Fire touch you, and you have no guardians besides Allah, then you shall not be helped (11:112-113). This verse, according to the traditions, is the one which, the Prophet said, had aged him. However, this verse and the one under discussion, clearly show that inclination towards the unjust and the unbelievers is a transgression which throws one into the Fire where he will not find any helper; it is the chastisement given by Allah Himself, and no one can save from it. The sentence, "and Allah cautions you of Himself", shows that the threatened punishment is a firmly-decreed affair which cannot be cancelled. What the offender has been warned of is Allah Himself; there is nothing between Allah and the culprit; and there is no protector from Allah; He has threatened to punish this offender, and what He has said is surely to happen. The same thing appears from the verse 11:113 quoted above: ...lest the Fire touch you... then you shall not be helped. "and to Allah is the eventual coming": You cannot escape from Him; nobody can stop you from this eventual return to Allah. As mentioned earlier, it re-emphasizes the threat. These verses, "Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends...", are among those which, in the form of admonition, contain a prediction of what was to happen in this ummah in the coming days; we shall explain it in detail, Allah willing, in Chapter 5 (The Table). ([ )! Say: "Whether you hide what is in your hearts or manifest it, Allah knows it": The theme is the same as in the verse: ...and whether you manifest what is in your souls or hide it, Allah will call you to account for it (2:284). Nevertheless, a fine difference in style attracts our attention, The verse 2:284 talks about calling to account, and accounting is more often than not a manifest affair; therefore in this verse manifesting comes before hiding. But the verse under discussion talks about the knowledge of Allah, and knowledge is more germane to what is hidden in the hearts; therefore this verse has reversed the order, mentioning first what is hidden in the hearts, then coming to what is manifest. Allah ordered His Apostle to convey this message to the offending servants; it is

because He did not like to address directly those who, He knew, would surely disobey His order and would befriend the unbelievers. It shows His displeasure in the same way as the words in the preceding verse: "and whoever does this..." ([ )! and He knows whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth; and Allah has power over all things: It has the same connotation as the verse 2:284, mentioned above. ([ )! On the day that every soul shall find present what it has done of good and what it has done of evil: Apparently, it is a part of the message which the Prophet was to convey. "On the day" may refer to a deleted but understood verb, "remember" or "describe" ² Remember (or Describe) the day that every soul... Alternatively this adverb of time may qualify the preceding verb, "Allah knows it" or "He knows", that is, Allah shall know on that day what is in your hearts; or He will know on that day what is in the heavens and the earth. There is no difficulty in this interpretation; it is not that He would not know these things before the Day of Judgment; what the expression means is this: We, the servants of Allah, will manifestly see the effects of His all-encompassing knowledge on that day. According to this explanation, this verse describes the manifestation of His knowledge on that day in the same way as the following verses describe manifestation of His power on that very day: (of) the day when they shall come forth; nothing concerning them shall remain hidden to Allah. To whom belongs the Kingdom this day? To Allah, the Subduer (of all) (40:16); ...there is no protector today from Allah... (11:43); ...and O that those who are unjust could see, when they see the chastisement, that the power is wholly Allah's . .. (2:165);... and the command on that day shall be entirely Allah's (82:19). Obviously, to Allah belongs all the Kingdom, power and command, always ² before and after the Day of Judgment as well as on that day. But these verses especially refer to that day in this connection, because it will be on that day that we, the servants of Allah, will clearly see His Kingdom and rule, without any doubt about His exclusive authority and power. Likewise, if the verb, "He knows", is qualified by the adverb, "that day...", it would not mean that Allah would not know the hidden secrets of His servants or their good and evil deeds before the Day of Judgment. "On the day that every soul shall find present what it has done..." The word translated here as "present" is muhdaran which literally means, presented, brought in. The choice of this word, rather than hadiran (present), points to the fact that the good and bad deeds are existent and safe from extinction, because only such a

thing may be brought in and presented which already exists (even if out of sight); Allah will bring the deeds in on the Day of Judgment. But who would be preserving them all these days, if not Allah? This too shows that His power, authority and Kingdom are not confined to the Day of Judgment. He says: and your Lord is the Preserver of all things (34:21); and with Us is a writing that preserve (50:4). "Tajid" (shall find) is derived from al-wijdan (to find); its opposite is to lose, "of good" and "of evil": "of" describes the thing that will be presented, "good" and "evil" have been used as common noun, to show its generality ² he will find there every good however trivial and every evil however insignificant. It appears from the context that the second clause, "what it has done of evil" is in conjunction with the preceding one, "what it has done of good". It is one of those verses which prove embodiment of deeds, as we have described in detail in a previous volume. ([ )! (it) shall wish that between it and that (evil) there were a long duration of time: The subject of this sentence is a deleted pronoun referring to the soul. "Law" ( if) is a conjunctive, as a rule introducing hypothetical conditional clauses; "law" followed by "anna" (if) introduces nominal clauses; this combination has frequently been used in the Qur'an; therefore, no attention should be paid to the claim of a writer that this combination was not correct. ³al-Amad´ denotes distance of time. ar-Raghib has said in his Mufradatu'l-Qur'an: al-Amad and al-abad have nearly the same meaning; but al-abad denotes the eternal duration, without an end; that is why it is never restricted by a limit, it cannot be said, to this or that al-abad. On the other hand, al-amad generally signifies a limited duration but with unknown limit; sometimes the limit is specified, for example, amada kadha (such and such period), as they say this or that time. The difference between al-amad (span of time) and az-zaman (time) is that al-amad looks at the terminus of time while azzaman looks at the whole period from beginning to end. That is why some have said that al-amad and al-mada (space of time, distance) are nearly similar in meaning." The wish of the evil-doer, that there should be between him and his deed a long duration of time, shows that the presence of that evil would cause him sorrow; it follows that the presence of good deed would make the good-doer happy.

He will only wish for a long duration of time between himself and his deed, and not for its complete disappearance. Why? He will see how Allah has preserved it from the day it was done to the Day of Judgment; he will realize that it was of no avail to wish that a thing under such Divine protection should disappear; therefore, he will only wish for the next "best" thing: Would that it had not appeared at the most awkward time, in that most difficult situation. He will wish the same for the evil companion: And whoever turns himself away from the remembrance of the Beneficent God, We appoint for him a Satan, so he becomes his associate... Until when he comes to Us, he says: "O would that between me and thee there were the distance of the East and the West", so evil is the associate! (43:36-38). ([ )! and Allah cautions you of Himself; and Allah is Compassionate to the servants: The repeated warning emphasizes the threat beyond any doubt. Also, it may be that this warning refers to the punishment of the Day of Judgment (as that is the subject of this verse), while the first warning related to the result of that offence in this life or in both lives. "and Allah is Compassionate to the servants": It reminds the servants of their relation to Allah ² they are His servants and slaves, and He is their Compassionate Master. Nevertheless, this clause makes the preceding threat doubly emphatic. Such expressions are used for warning someone in the severest term. The import of such clause will be like this: Do not do such a thing, because I have firmly decided not to forgive such offence; I warn you before hand because I have compassion for you. The meaning then will be as follows: Allah is Compassionate to the servants; that is why He has warned them before hand not to go near this evil; because if they did so, they would have to undergo the punishment; and they would find no intercessor or protector to intercede on their behalf or to save them. ([ )! Say; "If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you": When writing about the verse 2:165 (... and those who believe are stronger in love of Allah ...), we had explained the meaning of love, and said that in reality it relates to Allah, and after that it may relate to others. No doubt, Allah in His Book invites His servants to believe in Him, to worship Him with sincere devotion, and to steer clear of polytheism. He says: Now, surely, sincere religion is for Allah (alone) (39:3); And they were not enjoined anything except that they should worship Allah, being sincere to Him in religion... (97:5); Therefore call upon Allah, being sincere to Him in religion, though averse be the

unbelievers (40:14). This theme is found in many other verses. Sincerity in religion can truly be achieved only when man's heart is not attached to anything other than Allah ² be it another deity or some desired object; be it a worldly ambition or even some other worldly goal like entering the garden or protection from the fire. When the heart cuts all links with such things and attaches itself exclusively to Allah, then the man attains the sincerity of religion, and the love of Allah. Love is the only link that connects a lover to his beloved; it attracts and pulls the lover to the beloved. The lover wants to make up through the beloved the defects and imperfections that he finds in his own life. The biggest news for him is that his beloved requites his love. At this stage, both love each other; both become lovers, both become beloved. Man loves food, and gets it to make up the deficiency which shows itself in hunger; he loves the opposite sex, to satisfy a biological need; he loves his friend for genial companionship. A servant loves his master for his kind patronage. Look at the instances of love, read the stories of well-known lovers ² you will find everywhere the truth of what we have mentioned. When a sincere servant loves Allah, his only ambition is to attract the love of Allah to himself; would that Allah should love him as he loves Allah; would that Allah should become his, as he has become of Allah. This is the reality of Allah's love. Love, as mentioned above, is a link that joins one thing to the other. But Allah does not count every love as true love. True love demands that the lover ² in this case, the believer ² should love all that is related to Allah; he should devoutly accept all that comes from Him. On Allah depends everything in its existence and in all its affairs; everything seeks a medium to Him; and every big and small thing ultimately returns to Him. In this background, true love of Allah, sincerity in that love, can be achieved only through believing in the religion of monotheism, that it, Islam, and surely the religion with Allah is Islam. It is the religion which His representatives brought and which His apostles and prophets taught. It is especially true about the religion brought by Muhammad (s.a.w.); it teaches a sublime devotion, an unsurpassed sincerity; it is the natural religion which contains the last law, brought by a Law-giver with whom the chain of the prophets came to its end. All these facts may easily be inferred from the Qur'an, if one ponders on it. The Prophet introduced his path as the path of monotheism, the path of sincerity;

as he was ordered by Allah to say: Say. "This is my way: I invite (you) to Allah; with clear sight (are) / and he who follows me; and glory be to Allah; and I am not of the polytheists" (12:108). Accordingly, his way was to invite people to Allah, with clear sight, with sincerity, without ascribing; my partner to Allah. His way was the way of invitation to Allah and of sincerity about Allah. Anyone who wants to follow him, should proceed on the same highway. Then Allah said that the way of invitation and sincerity can be found only in the shan'ah brought by Muhammad (s.a. w.a.): Then We have made you follow a shan'ah in the affair, therefore follow it... (45:18); also He said that it means total submission to Him: But if they dispute with you, say: "I have submitted myself (entirely) to Allah and (so has) everyone who follows me"... (3:20); then He attributed this way to Himself and declared that it was His straight path: And (know) that this is My path, the straight one, therefore follow it (6:153). If we read all these verses together, it will be clear that Islam (i.e., the shari'ah brought by the Prophet, containing fundamental beliefs, moral teachings, practical laws, and having his own sacred life as its model) is the path of sincerity, that is based on love. It is the religion of sincerity, the religion of love. The above discourse makes clear the meaning of the verse under discussion: "Say: 'If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you'". It gives the following import ² and Allah knows better: If you want to be sincere to Allah in your servitude, truly basing it on His love, then follow this shari'ah; it is based on love, and is the embodiment of sincerity and submission; it is the straight path of Allah, whoever proceeds on it is sure to reach nearer to Allah. If you follow me in this path, then Allah will love you; reaching this stage you will get what you want. Your love will be requited. This is the general import of the verse if looked in isolation. But the context gives it some particular implications too. It comes soon after the verses forbidding the believers to befriend the unbelievers. Friendship is love between the friends. Therefore, the verse exhorts the believers to follow the Prophet if they are sincere in the claim that they love Allah and belong to His party. Love of Allah cannot be reconciled with following the unbelievers in their vain desires and unhealthy views; remember that friendship certainly makes a friend follow the other friend in thoughts and deeds. One who loves Allah should not run after the worldly trinkets found with the unbelievers, and should not set his eyes on their worldly honor and wealth. If you love Allah you should follow His Prophet in his religion, as He declares: Then We have made you follow a shari'ah in the affair, therefore follow it, and do not follow the low desires of those who do not know. Surely they shall

not avail you in the least against Allah; and surely the unjust are friends of each other, and Allah is the guardian of those who guard (against evil) (45:18 - 19). It should be noted how smoothly the verse goes from the theme of following to that of friendship, showing that both are, in fact, one and the same. In short, anyone claiming to love Allah, to belong to Allah, must follow the Prophet, in order that it may take him to the stage where Allah requites his love and loves him. The verse mentions only love of Allah, and not His guardianship because guardianship is founded on love. Also, it mentions only Allah's love, because the love of the Prophet and the believers is in reality a part of Allah's love; it has no independent existence. ([ )! and forgive you your sins; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful: Allah's mercy is all-encompassing; His grace is without limit, and His munificence without restriction; it is not confined to any individual or group. The river of His mercy is flowing; everybody is free to take from it as much as he can. Whatever restriction there is, it is not in the river, it is in the receptacle one brings with him. The servants' ability, or disability, imposes its own limitations; Allah has not put any limit to His mercy: and the bounty of your Lord is not confined (17:20). Sin is the impediment, holding one back from reaching nearer to Allah, from partaking of the bounties resulting from it, like the paradise etc. If the rust of sin is removed from a man's heart, the door of Divine bliss will automatically open for him, and he will join the chosen people in the abode of Divine honour and eternal happiness. That is why Allah added forgiveness of sins to the good news of His love. As described earlier; love attracts the lover to the beloved. When the servant loves Allah, it moves him to come nearer with sincere monotheism and unalloyed devotion and worship. When Allah loves a servant, He cdmes nearer to him and removes the curtains which hide the sublime reality. As mentioned above, there is no curtain except sin, and removing it means forgiving the sins. Once that hindrance is removed, there is no obstacle in the way; and Divine munificence will take over from there; and he can partake of the ever-lasting honour and never ending bounties as much as he likes. To understand this reality even more clearly, ponder on the verse, Nay! rather, what they used to do has become like rust upon their hearts. Nay! most surely they shall on that day be debarred from their Lord (83:14-15), in conjunction with the verse, "Allah will love you and forgive you your sins".

([ )! Say: "Obey Allah and the Apostle": The preceding verse invited the servants to "follow" the Apostle. To follow means to process behind in someone's track. The believer follows the Apostle in the way taken by the Apostle. The way the Apostle has taken is the straight path which belongs to Allah. It is the shari'ah ordained for the Apostle and conveyed through him to the mankind; and the servants are to obey the Apostle and adhere to his shari'ah. That is why the order to follow the Apostle was changed to his obedience. The Apostle's path of sincerity is the sum total of his shari'ah ² his orders' and prohibitions, his mission and his guidance. When one follows the Apostle in his tracks, He in fact obeys Allah and the Apostle in the shari'ah. Allah's name has been added with the Apostle's, to show that the obedience of Allah is one and the same with the obedience of the Apostle. The Apostle's name was necessary to mention with that of Allah because the talk is about following his tracks. Someone has written that the sentence means: Obey Allah in His Book and obey the Apostle in his sunnah. But what we have written above clearly shows the unsoundness of this explanation. It is obvious that the words, "Obey Allah and the Apostle", have been revealed as explanation of the preceding words, "If you love Allah, then follow me..." Further, this verse shows that the obedience of Allah and obedience of the Apostle are one; that is why the word "obey", has not been repeated. Had there been two different things to be followed (the Book, for Allah; the sunnah for the Apostle), it would have been appropriate to say, 'Obey Allah and obey the Apostle', as has been said in another verse: O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Apostle and the masters of the affair from among you... (4:59). Anyhow, the verse has the same general and particular aspects as the previous one. . ([ )! but if they turn back, then surely Allah does not love the unbelievers: The ending clause shows that those who disregard this order are unbelievers; the same is the import of other verses obliging the believers not to take the unbelievers as friends. This clause too shows this verse to be an explanation of the previous one. That verse described that Allah loves those believers who accept and obey the order to follow the Apostle. This one says that Allah does not love those "unbelievers" who neglect this order to obey the Apostle. These verses make the following things clear:

 ! Taqiyyah is allowed in certain circumstances. %
 $! The punishment for befriending the unbelievers will not be waived; the sin of disobeying this order will not be forgiven; it is a firmly decreed order.  $! The Divinely ordained shari'ah exemplifies the sincerity towards Allah; and that sincerity exemplifies the love of Allah. In other words, if we analyse the religion ² the sum total of Divine knowledge and faith, the ethical teachings and practical laws, with all their details ² it will resolve into sincerity (a sincere servant of Allah believes that his person, his character and his actions, all belong to Allah); and on further analysis this sincerity resolves into the love of Allah. If we reverse the process and start from the other end, then the love of Allah constitutes the main ingredient of the sincerity, and the sincerity leads to the shari'ah. Looking from another angle, religion resolves into submission, and submission into monotheism.  ! It is disbelief to take the unbelievers for friends. It is a disbelief related to the branches of religion, not to its roots. Other examples are the disbelief of the one who does not pay zakdt, arid of the one who does not pray. It may possibly be explained in another way. The one who befriends an unbeliever, has himself been called unbeliever, because that is the ultimate destination where such a friendship leads to. We have described this theme earlier, and shall further explain it in Chapter 5 (The Table).  $  It is written in ad-Durru'l-manthur, about the words of Allah: Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends...: "Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim have narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: 'al-Hajjaj ibn 'Amr was an ally of Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf and Ibn Abi '1-Haqiq and Qays ibn Zayd; and they were secretly meeting with some Helpers with a view to seduce them from their religion. (Seeing this) Rifa'ah ibn al-Mundhir, 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr and Sa'd ibn Khuthaymah told those Helpers to keep away from those Jews and to be wary of their secret talks, "lest they lead you away from your religion". But they refused (to listen). Then Allah revealed: Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends... and Allah has

power over all thing'". 
 ! Apparently this tradition has applied the verse to that story. Otherwise, the Qur'an uses the word "unbelievers", for a wider circle than the People of the Book. If any verse were revealed about that story, it would have been the one forbidding friendship with the Jews and the Christians, not these verses. The tafsir, as-Safi quotes under the words: except (when) you guard yourselves against(them)..., from al-Ihtijaj, that the Commander of the faithful (a.s.) said, inter alia, in a tradition: "and He ordered you to practice taqiyyah in your religion; because Allah says: Be careful, and be careful again, not to expose yourself to perdition, and not to neglect taqiyyah which I have ordered you (to practice); otherwise, you will cause shedding of your blood and the blood of your brethren (as well); will expose your bounties as well as theirs to ruin; and will cause their humiliation at the hands of the enemies of the religion of Allah, while Allah has ordered you to exalt them." as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "The Apostle of Allah used to say: 'He has no religion who does not have taqiyyah; then he used to say: 'Allah says: except (when) you guard yourselves against them for fear from them." (al-'Ayyashi) al-Baqir(a.s.) said: "taqiyyah is (allowed) in every matter about which a man falls in predicament; and Allah has made it lawful to him." (al-Kafi) 
 ! There are very many traditions from the Imams of Ahlulbayt (a.s.) - probably reaching the limit of mutawatir - containing the permission of taqiyyah; and you have already seen how the Qur'anic verses incontestably prove it. Sa'id ibn Yasar said: "Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) told me: 'Is religion anything other than love? Verily Allah, the Mighty, the Great, says: Say: "If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you.'"" (Ma'ani'l-akhbar) 
 ! This tradition has been narrated in al-Kafi from al-Baqir (a.s.); also al-Qummi and al-'Ayyashi have narrated it in their tafsirs from the same Imam

through al-Hadhdha; again al-'Ayyashi has narrated it in his at-Tafsir from the same Imam through Burayd and from as-Sadiq (a.s.) through Rib'i . These traditions support our explanation given in the Commentary. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "He who disobeys Allah, does not love Him." Then he quoted (the following poem): You disobey Allah and (at the same time) you manifest His love; By my life! this is a strange behavior. If your love were true, you would have obeyed Him; Verily, the lover obeys his beloved. (Ma'ani'l-akhbar) as-Sadiq (a.s.) said, inter alia, in a tradition: "And whoever likes to know that Allah loves him, his action should be in obedience to Allah and he should follow us. Has he not heard the talk of Allah, the Mighty, the Great, with His Prophet: Say ' If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you your sins...'"(al-Kafi) 
 ! We shall explain how the Imams' obedience is one and the same with the obedience of the Prophet when writing about the verse: O you who believe! obey Allah and obey the Apostle and the masters of the affairs from among you... (4:59) 'Abd ibn Hamid has narrated from al-Hasan that he said: "The Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Whoever feels an aversion to my sunnah, he is not from me.' Then he recited this verse: Say: 'If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you...' (ad-Durru'l-manthur) It has been narrated by Ibn Abi Hatim, Abu Na'im (in his Hilyatu'l-awliya') and alHakim, from 'A'ishah that she said: "The Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Polytheism is more undetectable than the crawling of an ant on a (smooth) rock in a dark night; and its least (grade) is that one should love something because of (its) injustice and should hate something because of (its) justice; and what is religion except loving and hating in the cause of Allah? Allah has said: Say: "If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you..." (ibid.) Ahmad, Abu Dawud, at-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Ibn Habban and al-Hakim have

narrated through Abu Rafi' from the Prophet that he said: "I should not find one of you, reclining on his couch, saying ² when there comes to him one of my commands, in which I have ordered or prohibited something - 'We do not understand (it); we shall follow (only) what we find in the Book of Allah.'" (ibid.)

å
 
    

 * ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϥ ˴ ΍˴ή˸Ϥϋ ˶ ϝ ˴ ΁˴ϭ Ϣ˴ ϴ˶ϫ΍˴ή˸Α·˶ ϝ ˴ ΁˴ϭ Ύ˱ΣϮ˵ϧϭ˴ ˴ϡΩ˴ ΁ ϰ˴ϔτ ˴ ˸λ΍ Ϫ˴ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ ϥ ͉ ·˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˴Ύ˴ό˸ϟ΍{33} ˲ϊϴ˶Ϥγ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ͉ϟ΍˴ϭ ξ ˳ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ύ˴Ϭπ ˵ ˸όΑ˴ Δ˱ ϳ͉έ͋ Ϋ˵ ˲Ϣϴ˶Ϡϋ ˴ {34} {33} Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendents of Ibrahim and the descendents of 'Imran above all the worlds. {34} Offspring, one of the other; and Allah is Hearing, Knowing. å
  Now begins the story of 'Isa, son of Maryam, with all the related topics, sifting the truth from the falsehoods that cover his life and personality; the chapter further offers clear arguments against the People of the Book. The two verses serve as the joining link between the coming discourse about 'Isa (a.s.) and the preceding verses regarding the People of the Book. ([ )! Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh...: It was explained under the verse 2:130 (and most certainly We chose him in this world) that "al-istifa" " means to take the choicest part of a thing; to purify a thing from all impurities. It may be translated, for all practical purposes, as selection or choosing. Comparing it with various stages of "al-wilayah" (friendship of Allah), we find that it fits perfectly the stage of "Islam", that is, total surrender of the servant to the will of his Lord, being truly happy with what the Lord decrees for him. But that "selection" is not what this verse implies. It does not say, Allah chose them from among the worlds. It says, He chose them "above all the worlds". "From among the worlds" would have implied that only they were the Muslims; that the total surrender to the will of Allah was exclusively reserved for them. Obviously, such a connotation would be wrong. The clause used in the verse, "above all the worlds", has given a new connotation to the selection, and shows that they were

chosen and given excellence and precedence over other people in some things exclusively given to them. To appreciate the difference between the two selections, look at the verse 3:42 which says: And when the angels said: "O Maryam! surely Allah has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of the worlds", Clearly the first choosing is related to her own virtues without looking at anyone else, and the second implies a sense of comparison, exalting her over all other women. First of the chosen ones was Adam (a.s.). He was the first human vicegerent of Allah appointed for this earth, as Allah says: And when your Lord said to the angels, "Verily I am going to make in the earth a vicegerent"... (2:30); was the first to open the door of repentance and Divine forgiveness, as Allah says: Then his Lord chose him, so He turned to him (i.e., with for-giveness) and guided him (20:122); and was the first of those for whom Allah ordained the religion, as He says: So if there comes to you guidance from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, he shall not go astray nor be unhappy (20:123). These virtues exclusively belong to him, and enough are they for one's excellence! Then the verse mentions Nuh (a.s.). He was the first of the five ulu'l-'azm apostles who were given a Divine Book and a new shari'ah, as we explained under the verse: Mankind was but one people, so Allah sent the prophets... (2:213). Also, he was the second father of the human race; and Allah sent peace on him in the worlds, saying: And We made his offspring the survivors. And We perpetuated to him (praise) among the later generations. Peace be on Nuh in all the worlds(37:7779). Then Allah mentions the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of 'Imran among the chosen ones. "al-Al" of a man is someone closely related to him. arRaghib says in his Mufradatu'l-Qur'an: "al-Al: It is said that it is an altered form of al-ahl; yet its diminutive, al-uhayl has got the "h" restored; but it has the peculiarity that, unlike al-ahl, it is always annexed (in genitive construction) to the proper names of rational beings, and not to common nouns, places or eras. It is said: Al of Zayd; but not aal of man, nor aal of this place or that period. Also they do not, for example, say, dl of the tailor; rather it is always annexed to a great and noble personality, for example, aal of the Sultan, aal of Allah. As for al-ahl, it is annexed to all types of words; for example, they say, ahl of Allah, ahl of the tailor; likewise they say, ahl of this era, ahl of that town etc. (On the other hand) some people say that al-aal actually means the name of a person; and that its diminutive is uwayl; and it is used for someone who is very closely and personally related to a person, either by close kinship or by love and attachment."

Accordingly, aal of Ibrahim and aal of 'Imran mean their closely related family members and those who were exclusively attached to them. (That is why we have translated the word as 'descendants'.) Obviously, aal of Ibrahim should refer to all the purified ones among his descendants, for example, Ishaq, Israel and other prophets from the house of Israel as well as Isma'il and his purified descendants, chief of whom was Muhammad (may Allah bless him and his progeny); and those who followed them to various stages of the friendship of Allah. But the verse then mentions aal of 'Imran, and it shows that aal of Ibrahim does not have such a wide connotation. The said 'Imran is either the father of Maryam or the father of Musa (a.s.), and in any case he was himself a descendant of Ibrahim (a.s.) and so were his descendants; by mentioning them separately, it has been made clear that the phrase aal Ibrahim (the descendants of Ibrahim) refers to some, and not all, of his purified descendants. Allah has said m another place in the Qur'an: Or do they envy the people for what Allah has given them of His grace? So indeed We have given to Ibrahim's children (descendants) the Book and the wisdom, and We have given them a grand kingdom (4:54). The context shows that this verse describes and condemns the envy of the Israelites which they felt against Muhammad (s.a.w.). Other verses too support this interpretation. And it makes it clear that the phrase, "descendants of Ibrahim", does not include here the Israelites; in other words it has been used for Ibrahim's descendants other than Ishaq, Ya'qub and the progeny of Ya'qub (who are generally called the Israelites). After excluding that branch, the only descendants to whom this phrase is applicable are Isma'il and his purified descendants, including the Prophet and his progeny. (Allah willing, we shall later prove that the word, "the people", used in the verse 4:54, refers to the Prophet, and that undoubtedly he is one of the "descendants of Ibrahim" mentioned therein.) Some other verses also support this connotation. For example: Most surely the nearest of people to Ibrahim are those who followed him and this Prophet and those who believe; and Allah is the guardian of the believers (3:68). And when Ibrahim and Isma'il were raising the foundations of the House: Our Lord! accept from us; surely Thou art the Hearing, the Knowing; Our Lord! and make us both submissive to Thee and (raise) from our offspring a group submitting to Thee, and show us our ways of devotion and turn to us (mercifully), surely Thou art the Oftreturning (with mercy), the Merciful. Our Lord! and raise up in them an Apostle from among themselves who shall recite to them Thy communications and teach them the Book and the wisdom, and purify them; surely Thou art the Mighty, the

Wise (2:127- 129). The phrase, the descendants of Ibrahim, therefore, refers to his offspring from the branch of Isma'il. It should be pointed out here that the verse in no way implies any exclusiveness; it simply says that certain named prophets and families were chosen and given excellence over the nations; it does not say that others were not chosen or exalted. It follows that: 1. There is no discrepancy between this verse (which is silent about the excellence of Ibrahim (a.s.) himself, and of Musa (a.s.) and other Israelite prophets) and numerous other verses which eulogize their virtues and excellence. (The Qur'an. contains very many such verses and there is no need to quote them here.) However, as we said, to affirm one thing does not mean to negate or reject the others. 2. Likewise, there is no conflict between this verse and those which bestow similar excellence to the Children of Israel; for example: And certainly We gave the Book and the wisdom and the prophecy to the Children of Israel, and We gave them of the goodly things, and We made them excel the nations (45:16). 3. The fact that two prophets and two families were exalted and given excellence over the nations, does not mean that others could not similarly be given excellence over the nations; nor that some others could not be exalted and given excellence over those already exalted. Giving excellence to one or various groups and nations only implies that they were given precedence, in some worldly or other worldly virtue, over those below them. It does not say anything on whether some others could be given excellence over them or whether some others too could be exalted over the worlds. 4. They were chosen over all the worlds. This is not in conflict with the concept that some among them were made to excel the others. We know that Allah chose the prophets over all other people, but at the same time He gave some of them more prestige than the others. He says: and every one (i.e., of the prophets) We made to excel the world (6:87). And again He says: and certainly We have made some of the prophets to excel others... (17:55). Now we come to the "descendants of 'Imran": Apparently the name, 'Imran, refers to the father of Maryam. These two verses are immediately followed by the stories

of the wife of 'Imran and their daughter, Maryam; moreover, 'Imran, father of Maryam, has been repeatedly mentioned by his name in the Qur'an, while 'Imran, father of Musa, has not been mentioned even once in a way as to make it clear that it was he who was intended. All this supports the view that here too 'Imran refers to the father of Maryam; and "dl 'Imran" (translated here as descendants of 'Imran) refers to Maryam and 'Isa (peace be on both of them), alone or together with the wife of 'Imran. Reportedly the Christians do not agree that Maryam¶s father was called 'Imran: but the Qur'an is not bound to cater to their views. ([ )! Offspring, one from the other: It is said that "adh-dhurriyyah" originally meant small children: later the meaning was extended to cover all the offspring. It is the latter meaning that is implied in this verse. The word is in the accusative because it has the force of an explanatory conjunction. The clause, "one from the other", shows that if you look at any one of the group, it begins from, and returns to, the others. In other words, the whole is made of similar parts, one part does not differ from the other in its attributes and qualifications. The clause, in the framework of its theme and context, implies that these descendants do not differ from one another in the attributes of excellence, and that it is for this reason that Allah made them to excel over the worlds; actions of Allah are not done haphazardly or at random - surely such a selection cannot be done recklessly, because it is the spring-head of such good thing in this world. ([ )! And Allah is Hearing, Knowing: Allah hears their speech which shows their inner thoughts; He knows what is in their minds and hearts. This concluding sentence gives the reason why they were chosen. And the preceding clause, "Offspring, one from the other", explains why the whole group was considered worthy of this Divine selection. The verse implies the following connotation: Allah made them to excel the worlds; that excellence and selection covered them all, because they were a group, each of them being similar to the others, in their spiritual sublimity, surrender of hearts and established truth of the words; Allah, bestowed this excellence on them because He is the Hearing and Knowing, He hears what they say, and knows what is in their minds.  $  ar-Rida (a.s.) had a talk with al-Ma'mun; during which al-Ma'mun said: "Has Allah given the offspring (of the Prophet - s.a.w.) excellence over all other people?"

Abu'1-Hasan (ar-Rida - a.s.) said: "Indeed Allah has clearly described, in His decisive Book, the excellence of the (said) offspring over all the people." alMa'mun asked: "Where is it in the Book of Allah?" ar-Rida (a.s.) said: "In His words: Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of 'Imran above all the worlds; offspring, one from the other..." ('Uyunu'l-akhbar) Ahmad ibn Muhammad narrates from ar-Rida (a.s.) (who narrates) from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said: "Liar is he who thinks that He (Allah) is finished with the (management of the) affairs, because the pleasure is of Allah regarding His creation; He wills what He pleases and does what He pleases. Allah has said: offspring, one from the other, and Allah is the Hearing, the Knowing. Its (i.e., the offspring's) last is from its first, and its first is from its last. Therefore, if you were told that a certain thing would happen in respect of a particular offspring, and it happened about another (person) from the same (offspring), then the thing happened exactly as you were told." (al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! This tradition proves the explanation written earlier, of the verse, "offspring, one from the other". al-Baqir (a.s.) recited this verse and said: "We are from them, and we are the remnant of that al-'itrah (family)." (ibid.} 
 ! al-'itrah actually means the foundation, the root, the basis which a thing relies upon. That is why it is used for the children and near relatives of preceding generations. In other words, it refers to the vertical geneology of a person. It is because of this semantic value of the word that the Imam has taken the clause (offspring, one from the other) to refer to a vertical geneological line beginning with Adam, and passing through Nuh to the aal of Ibrahim and aal of 'Imran. It also explains why Allah has mentioned Adam (a.s.) and Nuh (a.s.) with the two families; it was done to establish an unbroken chain of selection right from the

beginning of the human race to Muhammad (s.a.w.) and his purified and sinless progeny.

å
 
    

G * ϲ͋Ϩϣ˶ ˸ϞΒ͉ Ϙ˴ Θ˴ ϓ˴ ΍˱έή͉ Τ ˴ ϣ˵ ϲ˶Ϩ˸τΑ˴ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴ϣ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˴ Ε ˵ ˸έά˴ ϧ˴ ϲ͋ϧ·˶ Ώ ͋ έ˴ ϥ ˴ ΍˴ή˸Ϥϋ ˶ Γ˵ ΃˴ή˴ ˸ϣ΍ Ζ ˶ ϟ˴Ύ˴ϗ ˸Ϋ·˶ Ϣ˵ ϴ˶Ϡό˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϊ˵ ϴ˶Ϥδ ͉ ϟ΍ Ζ ˴ ϧ˴΃ Ϛ ˴ ϧ͉·˶{35} Ύ͉ϤϠ˴ϓ˴ ϲ͋ϧ·˶ϭ˴ ϰ˴Μϧ˵ϷΎ˴ϛ ή˵ ϛ˴ ά͉ ϟ΍ β ˴ ˸ϴϟ˴ϭ˴ ˸Ζό˴ ο ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ϣ˵ Ϡ˴˸ϋ΃˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ͉ϟ΍˴ϭ ϰ˴Μϧ˵΃ Ύ˴ϬΘ˵ ˸όο ˴ ϭ˴ ϲ͋ϧ·˶ Ώ ͋ έ˴ ˸Ζϟ˴Ύ˴ϗ Ύ˴Ϭ˸Θό˴ ο ˴ ϭ˴ ϲ͋ϧ·˶ϭ˴ Ϣ˴ ϳ˴ ˸ήϣ˴ Ύ˴ϬΘ˵ ˸ϴϤ͉ γ ˴ ϥ ˶ Ύ˴τ˸ϴθ ͉ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ύ˴ϬΘ˴ ϳ͉έ͋ Ϋ˵ ϭ˴ Ϛ ˴ Α˶ Ύ˴ϫά˵ ϴ˶ϋ΃˵ Ϣ˶ ϴ˶Οή͉ ϟ΍{36} Ύ˴ϤϠ͉ϛ˵ Ύ͉ϳή˶ ϛ˴ ί˴ Ύ˴ϬϠ˴ϔ͉ ϛ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˱Ϩδ ˴Σ ˴ Ύ˱ΗΎ˴Βϧ˴ Ύ˴ϬΘ˴ Β˴ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ Ϧ ˳δ ˴Σ ˴ ϝ ˳ Ϯ˵ΒϘ˴ Α˶ Ύ˴ϬΑ͊ έ˴ Ύ˴ϬϠ˴Β͉ Ϙ˴ Θ˴ ϓ˴ Ϊ˶ Ϩ˶ϋ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ˸Ζϟ˴Ύ˴ϗ ΍˴άϫ˴ Ϛ ˶ ϟ˴ ϰ͉ϧ΃˴ Ϣ˵ ϳ˴ ˸ήϣ˴ Ύ˴ϳ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ Ύ˱ϗ˸ίέ˶ Ύ˴ϫΪ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ Ϊ˴ Ο ˴ ϭ˴ Ώ ˴ ΍˴ή˸ΤϤ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ύ͉ϳή˶ ϛ˴ ί˴ Ύ˴Ϭ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ Ϟ ˴Χ ˴ Ω˴ ·˶ Ϫ˶ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ Ϧ˴ϣ ϕ ˵ ί˵ ˸ήϳ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ ϥ ͉ Ώ ˳ Ύ˴δΣ ˶ ή˶ ˸ϴϐ˴ Α˶ ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ {37} ˯Ύ˴ϋΪ͊ ϟ΍ ϊ˵ ϴ˶Ϥγ ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϧ͉·˶ Δ˱ Β˴ ϴ͋σ ˴ Δ˱ ϳ͉έ͋ Ϋ˵ Ϛ ˴ ϧ˵Ϊϟ͉ Ϧ˶ϣ ϲ˶ϟ ˸ΐϫ˴ Ώ ͋ έ˴ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ Ϫ˵ Α͉έ˴ Ύ͉ϳή˶ ϛ˴ ί˴ Ύ˴ϋΩ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ύ˴Ϩϫ˵ {38} Ϫ˴ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ ϥ ͉ ΃˴ Ώ ˶ ΍˴ή˸ΤϤ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ϲ͋Ϡμ ˴ ϳ˵ ˲Ϣ΋˶ Ύ˴ϗ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ϭ˴ Δ˵ Ϝ˴ ΋˶ ϼ˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍ Ϫ˵ ˸ΗΩ˴ Ύ˴Ϩϓ˴ ΍˱έϮ˵μΣ ˴ ϭ˴ ΍˱Ϊϴ͋γ ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ ͉Ϡϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ͋ Δ˳ Ϥ˴ Ϡ˶Ϝ˴ Α˶ Ύ˱ϗΪ͋ μ ˴ ϣ˵ ϰ˴ϴ˸Τϴ˴ Α˶ ϙ ˴ ή˵ θ ͋ Β˴ ϳ˵ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Τϟ˶Ύ͉μϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ͋ Ύ̒ϴΒ˶ ϧ˴ ϭ˴ {39} Ύ˴ϣ Ϟ ˵ ό˴ ˸ϔϳ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶ά˴ ϛ˴ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ ˲ήϗ˶ Ύ˴ϋ ϲ˶Η΃˴ή˴ ˸ϣ΍˴ϭ ή˵ Β˴ Ϝ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϲ ˴ Ϩ˶ ϐ˴ Ϡ˴Α˴ ˸Ϊϗ˴ ϭ˴ ˲ϡϼ˵Ϗ ϲ˶ϟ ϥ ˵ Ϯ˵Ϝϳ˴ ϰ ˴ ϧ͉΃˴ Ώ ͋ έ˴ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ {40} ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ ΍˱ήϴ˶Μϛ˴ Ϛ ˴ Α͉έ͉ ή˵ϛ˸Ϋ΍˴ϭ ΍˱ΰ˸ϣέ˴ ͉ϻ·˶ ϡ˳ Ύ͉ϳ΃˴ Δ˴ Λ˴ ϼ˴Λ α ˴ Ύ͉Ϩϟ΍ Ϣ˴ Ϡ͋Ϝ˴ Η˵ ϻ ͉ ΃˴ Ϛ ˴ Θ˵ ϳ˴ ΁ ˴ϝΎ˴ϗ Δ˱ ϳ˴ ΁ ϲ ˴ ϟ͋ Ϟ˴ό˸Ο΍ Ώ ͋ έ˴ ϲ ͋θ ˶ ό˴ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ˸΢Β͋γ ˴ ϭ˴ έ˶ Ύ˴Ϝ˸ΑϹ ˶ ΍˴ϭ{41} {35} When the woman of 'Imran said: "My Lord! surely I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted (to Thy service); accept therefore from me; surely Thou art the Hearing, the Knowing". {36} So when she brought her forth, she said: "My Lord! surely I have brought it forth a female" - and Allah knew best what she brought forth, and the male is not like the female - "and I have named her Maryam, and I commend her and her offspring into Thy protection from the accursed Satan". {37} So her Lord accepted her with a good acceptance and made her grow up a good growing, and gave her into the charge of Zakariyya; whenever Zakariyya entered the sanctuary to (see) her, he found with her food. He said: "O Maryam! whence comes this to you?" She said: "It is from Allah." Surely Allah gives sustenance to whom He pleases, without measure. {38} There did Zakariyya pray to his Lord; he said: "My Lord! grant me from Thee good offspring; surely Thou art the Hearer of prayer". {39} Then the angels called to him as he stood praying in the sanctuary: "That Allah gives you the good news of Yahya verifying a word from Allah, and honorable and chaste and a prophet, from among the good ones". {40} He said: "My Lord! how shall there be a son (born) to me, and old age has already come upon me, and my wife is barren ? " He said: "Even thus does Allah what He pleases". {41} He said: "My Lord! appoint a sign for me." Said He: "Your sign is that you would not speak to men for three days except by signs; and remember your Lord much and glorify Him in the evening and the morning". å
 

([ )! When the woman of 'Imran said: "My Lord! surely I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted (to Thy service): accept therefore from me; surely Thou art the Hearing, the Know-ing": When a man makes a "an-nadhr" (vow), he in effect hinds himself to do something which hitherto was not compulsory for him. "at-Tahrir" is to release from a bond; that is why emancipation of slave is called "at-tahrir"; the same word is used for writing, probably because writing releases the ideas from the repository of mind and memory. "at-Taqabbul" is to accept willingly and gladly, for example, accepting a gift, accepting a prayer and so on. The words, "When the woman of 'Imran said: 'My Lord! surely I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted (to Thy service)'", clearly show that she made this vow during her pregnancy, and that she was pregnant from 'Imran. It also implies that 'Imran was not alive at that time; otherwise, she could not make the vow so independently to release her child for Divine worship. The same idea is implied in the verse: ...and you were not with them when they cast their pens (to decide) which of them should have Maryam in his charge... (3:44). Obviously, when the parents release the child, it does not mean that they emancipate it from any slavery. What the said release amounts to is that the child is freed from the bonds of parental guardianship; the parents undertake not to train or use the child for their own benefit, nor to demand from it their various rights like obedience etc. Such a release liberates the child from the authority of the parents. If the child has been released for the service of Allah, it is taken under Divine protection and guardianship, and devotes it¶s time to the service of Allah, that is, serving in synagogues, churches and other places reserved for Divine worship. This would continue up to the period the child would otherwise have remained under parental guardianship, reportedly they used to release the child for the service of Allah; the parents did not use the child in their work, or for their benefit. He was put in the synagogue, to clean it and serve in it. This continued till he reached the age of puberty; then he was free to remain therein or to go away; if he decided to continue, he stayed therein; and if he liked to go away, he did so. The verse shows that she firmly believed the child in her womb to be a male, not a female. It is remarkable how confidently she made the vow with her Lord, in full certainty, without attaching any proviso; she said: "My Lord! surely I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted''(to Thy service)", without saying, for example, 'if he is a male child'. And she used the masculine form "muharraran" (released; translated here as, devoted) referring to what was in her womb. Of course,

according to its syntactical position it may be construed as showing (he state of the relative pronoun "ma" (what [is in my womb]), which may be used for either gender. But undoubtedly her choice of word was based on her belief that she carried a male child in her womb. Otherwise, if she had taken a vow to release whatever was in her womb, be it a boy or a girl, she would not have shown such a disappointment when she delivered a girl: "My Lord! surely I have brought it forth a female;" nor was there any reason for the Divine comment, "and the male is not like the female". One more thing. Allah quotes (without any adverse com-ment) her words showing her firm belief. It implies that her conviction was not without a reason; nor was it based on her keen observations which give some such indications to experienced women. After all, such things are mere conjectures; and surely conjecture does not avail against the truth at all. And it is a habit of the Qur'an that whenever it quotes a false idea, it invariably always points to its falsehood. Allah says: Allah knows what every female bears, and that of which the wombs fall short of completion and that in which they increase (13:8); Surely Allah is He with Whom is the knowledge of the hour, and He sends down the rain and He knows what is in the wombs (31:34). The verses clearly say that the knowledge of "what is in the wombs" is one of the unseen, exclusively reserved for Allah. And Allah says: The Knower of the unseen! so He does not reveal His secrets to any, except to him whom He chooses of an apostle (72:26 - 27). It means that others may know the unseen only through Divine revelation. In this background, when Allah quotes her as saying something confidently about a subject exclusively reserved for Allah, it means that her belief, (that she was pregnant with a male child) was somehow based on a Divine revelation. That is why she did not lose hope of a male child even when she found her own child a female; instead, she again said with full conviction and certainty: "and I commend her and her offspring into Thy protection from the accursed Satan". Look at her belief that Maryam would have an offspring - obviously such a commendation was beyond her knowledge, if not based on revelation, "accept therefore from me": She did not mention object of the verb "accept". Possibly it could be the afore-mentioned vow, as it was a good deed; but more probably, she was beseeching Allah to accept her released child. The wording of the next verse, "So her Lord accepted her with a good acceptance", clearly supports the latter meaning. ([ )! So when she brought her forth, she said: "My Lord! surely I have brought it forth a female": By putting a feminine pronoun in "brought her forth", the Qur'an did away with the necessity of a longer description. What this concise sentence actually stands for is this: When she brought forth that which was in her

womb and came to know that it was a female, she said: "My Lord! I have brought it a female." This last sentence, although an informative, was in fact an exclamation to show her disappointment. ([ )! and Allah knew best what she brought forth, and the male is not like the female: These are parenthetic sentences, and the speaker of both is Allah, not the woman of 'Imran; even the second sentence is not spoken by her. There is no doubt that the first sentence is a saying of Allah, commenting on her sorrowful cry. The words, "and Allah knew best what she brought forth", in effect convey the following idea: Allah knew that she had delivered a female child; but He intended to fulfill through this daughter of hers all her hopes and expectations, in a far better way. Had the wife of 'Imran know what Allah's plans were in making her child a female, she would not have shown any sorrow and disappointment. As the later events showed, the male child she hoped for could not accomplish what Allah intended this female child to achieve. Suppose, she were given a son, instead of the daughter she got; what could that son achieve? He, like 'Isa, could be made a prophet; he could give eyes to the blind and heal the lepers; he could raise a few men from the dead. And this was the utmost he could do. But this female child, which Allah has given to the wife of 'Imran, will be a means to complete the word of Allah; she will bring forth a son without a father; Allah will make her and her son together a sign for the people; that son will talk with people in his cradle; he will be a spirit and a word of Allah; his likeness before Allah will be like Adam; and there will be many manifest signs in giving this daughter, Maryam, to the wife of 'Imran and giving to Maryam a son, 'Isa, rather than giving a son directly to Imran's wife. Now it should be clear that the words, "and the male is not like the female", are spoken by Allah. Had they been uttered by the wife of 'Imran, she would have said, 'and the female is not like the male'; she would not have reversed the syntactic arrangement as the Qur'anic sentence has done. If a man hopes to get a very good thing or to be awarded a very high status, and then he gets an inferior thing or a lower rank, he regret-fully says; The thing I got is not what I expected and hoped for. He would never say: The thing I hoped for is not like that which I got. In view of the above explanation, the definite articles in "the male" and "the female", (or at least in "the female") refer to the particular son and daughter spoken about; and the meaning would be as follows: The male she hoped for is not like the female she was given.

Many exegetes have taken the sentence, "and the male is not like the female", to be a part of the speech of the woman of 'Imran. Then they were faced with the difficulty of explaining its apparently reversed syntactic arrangement. They have tried without success to bring about some worthwhile explanation. Any interested reader should consult their books. ([ )! and I have named her Maryam, and I commend her and her offspring into Thy protection from the accursed Satan: It is said that Maryam in their language means the worshipper and the servant. In that case, it is easy to see why she hastened to name the child soon after delivery and mentioned the name to Allah. Apparently, when she found out that the child was not a male (who could easily be released for worship of Allah and service of the synagogue), she hastened to give the child the name, Maryam - thus dedicating her for the said worship and service. The words, "and I have named her Maryam", implied that she had dedicated that female child to the worship of Allah and released her for the synagogue's service. The words were in effect a sort of renewed vow, and that is why Allah accepted her offering in these words: "So her Lord accepted her with a good acceptance and made her grow up a good growing". Thereafter, she commended Maryam and her offspring to the protection of Allah from the accursed Satan, in order that she might dedicate herself for Divine worship and remain devoted to the service of the synagogue, in a way that the name might truly represent the named. She confidently talks with Allah about the offspring of Maryam, without any condition or proviso. Such words cannot be spoken in presence of Allah by someone who knows nothing of the future. What the future holds for a man is a part of the unseen and its knowledge is reserved for Allah. However, she talks here in the same assured way as she did when she made the vow first: "My Lord! surely I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted..." This confidence shows that she had the knowledge that she would get from 'Imran a son of good faith and deed; when she became pregnant and 'Imran died, she became absolutely sure that what she carried in her womb was the same promised son; when she delivered a daughter and became aware of her mistaken guess, she at once understood that that promise would be fulfilled through that daughter, that she would get that son from the offspring of that daughter. As soon as she realized this fact, she transferred her vow from the son she hoped for to the daughter she was given, named it Maryam (i.e., one who worships and serves), and entrusted her and her offspring to the protection of Allah against the accursed Satan.

All these aspects of the story may be understood from meditation on the words of Allah. ([ )! So her Lord accepted her with a good acceptance and and made her grow up a good growing: "al-Qubul" (acceptance), conjoined by the adjective "hasan" (good), gives exactly the same meaning as "at-taqabbul" (to accept willingly and gladly). Then why did Allah choose three words, "with good acceptance", in place of one, "gladly" or "gracefully"? It was to show that goodness of acceptance was the main theme of the talk; and also because clear mention of "good acceptance" was more ennobling and more edifying. Maryam's mother had used two sentences in her invocation: "and I have named her Maryam and I commend her and her offspring to Thy protection..." The two sentences (in answer to her call) run parallel to them. It is then reasonable to believe that the first sentence, "So her Lord accepted her with a good accept- ance" is a response to her words, "and I have named her Mar- yam"; and the second sentence, "and made her grow up a good growing", is the fulfillment of her second plea, "and I commend her and her offspring to Thy protection from the accursed Satan". Obviously, accepting a good acceptance does not refer to accepting the vow of 'Imran's wife and to giving her the reward in the next life for that good deed of hers; in other words, it was Maryam who was accepted, not the vow. Maryam was accepted, as she grew up to be a sincere worshipper of Allah and was freed to serve the sanctuary. In this light, the acceptance im-plies that she was chosen for this purpose by Allah. (We have already explained that this selection implies the chosen one's total surrender to Allah.) The words, "and made her grow up a good growing", mean that Allah bestowed on her and her offspring guidance and sanctity, and gave them a purified life free from the whisperings of Satan, untouched by his misleading suggestions. That is what is called "cleanliness", in the language of Islam. These two aspects, that is, good acceptance and good growing - which ultimately mean her being chosen and purified, respectively - have been referred to in a forthcoming verse: And when the angels said: "O Maryam! surely Allah has chosen you above the women of the worlds" (3:42). We shall further explain this topic under that verse, Allah willing. The above discourse makes it clear that it was in answer to her mother's call that Maryam was chosen and purified. Likewise, the fact that she together with her son was made a sign for the nations, was a verification of the Divine words, "and the

male is not like the female". ([ )! and gave her into the charge of Zakariyya: Zakariyya got her charge because his name came out in the lot that was drawn. They had disputed among themselves to get the privilege of her custody; then they agreed to decide it by a lot in which Zakariyya's name was drawn. Allah refers to this episode when He says: ...and you were not with them when they cast their pens (to decide) which of them should have Maryam in his charge, and you were not with them when they contended one with another (3:44). ([ )! whenever Zakariyya entered the sanctuary to (see) her, he found with her food ...: "al-Mihrab" means a place in mosque or house, reserved for worship. ar-Raghib has said: "Mihrab (i.e., niche) of the mosque: It is said that it was given this name because it is the place where one fights against Satan and his desires. Others say that it is because once a man enters it, it is his duty to be al-harib (wrested away) from worldly deeds and wandering thoughts. Some others have said that originally the foremost portion of the sitting place was called mihrab of the house; when the mosques were built, their foremost part was given the same name, mihrab. Yet others say that the word mihrab was originally used for the niche of the mosque, as it is its most important portion; then the foremost part of a house was also given this name, inasmuch as it resembles the mosque's niche; and probably this (explanation) is more correct. Allah has said: They made for him what he pleased of fortresses and images..." Some scholars have said that the word "mihrab" here refers to what the People of the Book call altar; and it is a closet in front of the synagogue, it has a door, to reach which one has to ascend a few steps; anyone inside remains hidden from others present in the synagogue. 
 ! In Islamic world the recess (reserved for the leader of prayers) in a mosque owes its origin to that. "Rizqan" (food) in the clause, "he found with her food", has been used as a common noun, implying that it was an unexpected and unusual food. It has been said that he used to find with her the fruits of the winter in the summer and those of the summer in the winter. The common noun may be interpreted differently if we look at the clause in isolation. It may be said that the food was not of unusual kind, yet the word "food", is used as a common noun to show that Maryam's sanctuary was never without

some kind of food; whenever Zakariyya went to see her, he always found some food with her. But such an interpretation does not agree with the context. Had the food been of the usual kind, Zakariyya could not be satisfied by the reply that it was from Allah and Allah gives sustenance to whom He pleases without measure. Such a reply in that context would not remove the possibility that someone from the people of the synagogue visited her, either with good intention or bad. Moreover, the words "There did Zakariyya pray to his Lord..." show that Zakariyya thought the presence of that sustenance to be a miraculous event which could only be attributed to Allah. That is why he felt irresistible urge to call on Allah to grant him a good offspring from Himself. It means that the sustenance was of such unusual type as to show the honor of Maryam before Allah. The sentence, "He said: 'O Maryam! whence comes this...'", also proves it. This sentence comes after the words "he found with her food"; yet the two sentences are not joined by any conjunctive. It means that he did not ask the question more than once. When she gave the reply and he was convinced of her prestige in the eyes of Allah, he felt it was the time to pray to Allah to grant him too an unusual prayer and give him a good offspring in his old age. ([ )! There did Zakariyya pray to his Lord; he said: "My Lord! grant me from Thee good offspring...": A thing is good at-tayyib, if it is suitable for the purpose it is required for. A good land is suitable for its inhabitants in its water, atmosphere, climate and other necessities of life. Allah says: And as for the good land, its vegetation springs forth (abundantly) by the permission of its Lord (7:58). A good life is the one whose various aspects are in harmony with each other and give satisfaction to the man concerned. By the same reason, a good perfume is called at-tib. Accordingly, a good offspring would mean a child who, in his attributes, qualities and activities, would fulfill the hopes, and satisfy the ambitions of his father. Zakariyya (a.s.) prayed to Allah: "My Lord! grant me from Thee good offspring." It happened when he saw the grace of Allah on Maryam and found out how great her prestige was before the Lord. He was so overwhelmed by that experience that he could not refrain from praying to Allah to bestow on him too, a similar bounty. Implied in the adjective "good" was a plea that the said offspring should possess a personality much like that of Maryam, and should be granted a similar prestige and honor before Allah. He was then and there granted all that he had asked for. Allah gave him a son, Yahya - the prophet most similar to 'Isa (peace be on both); he was given all the qualities of perfection and excellence which 'Isa and his Truthful mother, Maryam, were granted. It was for this reason that Allah named him Yahya, and sent him to verify a Word from Allah, and made

him honorable and chaste as well as a prophet, from among the good ones. As will be explained later, it was the nearest that any man could resemble Maryam and her son 'Isa, peace be on them all. ([ )! Then the angels called to him as he stood praying in the sanctuary: "That Allah gives you the good news of Yahya...": The third and second person pronouns refer to Zakariyya. al-Bushra, al~ibshar and at-tabshir all have the same meaning: To give good news, to bring good tidings of what would make the recipient happy. "Allah gives you good news of Yahya". It shows that it was Allah who gave him the name, Yahya; some verses in Chapter 19 also indicate the same: 0 Zakariyya! surely We give you good news of a boy whose name shall be Yahya (19:7). The name, Yahya, and its bestowal from Allah at the very beginning of the good tidings (before his birth and even concep-tion), support what we have said above, that Zakariyya had asked his Lord to give him a child with a prestige in Divine presence similar to that enjoyed by Maryam. She and her son, 'Isa (peace be on them), were jointly a sign of Allah, as He says: and We made her and her son a sign for the nations (21:91). Allah therefore gave Yahya, to the utmost possible extent, all the qualities and attributes given to Maryam and 'Isa. The attributes of Maryam had fully blossomed in 'Isa; and Yahya was made to resemble 'Isa as completely and perfectly as was possible. Yet 'Isa had precedence of Yahya, because his creation and birth was firmly decreed long before the prayer of Zakariyya for Yahya was accepted. That is why 'Isa was given superiority over Yahya, and made an ulu'l-'azm apostle, bringing a new shari'ah and a new Book. Apart from such necessary dissimilarities, Yahya and 'Isa resembled each other to the maximum possible extent. For a glimpse of this similarity, look at the stories of Yahya and 'Isa as narrated in Chapter 19 (Maryam). About Yahya (a.s.): O Zakariyya! surely We give you good news of a boy whose name shall be Yahya: We have not made before anyone his namesake... O Yahya! take hold of the Book with strength; and We granted him wisdom while yet a child, and tenderness from Us and purity, and he was one who guarded (Against evil), and dutiful to his parents, and he was not insolent, disobedient. And peace on him

on the day he was born, and on the day he dies, and on the day he is raised to life (19:7, 12-15). Now, compare it with what has immediately been said about 'Isa (a.s.): So she took a curtain (to screen herself) from them; then We sent to her Our spirit, and there appeared to her a well-made man.... He said: "I am only a messenger of your Lord: That I give you a pure boy."... He said: "Even so; your Lord says: 'It is easy to Me and that We may make him a sign to men and a mercy from Us'";... But she pointed to him. They said: "How should we speak to one who is a child in the cradle?"He said: "Surely I am a servant of Allah; He has given me the Book and made me a prophet; and He has made me blessed wherever I may be, and He has enjoined on me prayer and zakat as long as I live; and dutiful to my mother, and He has not made me inso-lent, unblessed; and peace on me on the day I was born, and on the day I die, and on the day I am raised to life" (19:17-21, 29-33). The verses of this chapter too point to this similarity of the two prophets. Allah named him Yahya; and the son of Maryam was called 'Isa which reportedly means ya'ish (he lives); Yahya was sent to verify a Word from Allah, that is, 'Isa, as Allah says: ...a Word from Him whose name is the Messiah, 'Isa son of Maryam (3:45); Yahya too, just like 'Isa, was given wisdom and taught the Book while yet a child; he too is praised, like 'Isa, to be a tenderness from Allah and purity, and to be dutiful to his parents, not insolent or disobedient; also much like 'Isa peace was sent to him on three junctures of his existence. Also, Allah made Yahya honorable as 'Isa was made worthy of regard; and he was made chaste and a prophet, from among the good ones as 'Isa was. All this was in answer to the prayer of Zakariyya, when he asked for a good offspring, to be his heir, and with whom Allah would be well pleased. As explained earlier, he had prayed to Allah to this effect when he was overwhelmed by what he saw of the distinction and excellence of Mary am before Allah. "verifying a Word from Allah": It shows that he was a harbinger of 'Isa; "Word" in this context refers to 'Isa, as the verse 3:45 (quoted above) says that Maryam was given good news of a Word from Allah. "honorable": "as-Sayyid" (chief, head of community); the one who manages people's affairs related to their lives and livelihood or concerning a socially accepted virtue; subsequently, it was used with increasing frequency, for honorable and noble, inasmuch as the above-mentioned management of affairs entails honor

and excellence - emanating from his authority, wealth or other such virtues. "chaste": "al-Husur" (one who abstains from women). In the present context it signifies a man who totally abstains from women because he forsakes all the worldly desires, and leads a life of, asceticism and self-denial. ([ )! He said: "My Lord! how shall there be a son (born) to me, and old age has already come upon me and my wife is barren?": The question is a mirror of the awe and the wonder which overwhelmed Zakariyya when he heard the good news; he wanted to ascertain how and when this promise would be fulfilled. In no way does this question imply that he thought it unlikely to happen, or too great a boon to come his way. How could he harbor any doubt about it when he was clearly told that Allah would give him the son he had asked for? Moreover, he had already mentioned these two factors (which are the basis of this question) in his invocation, as Allah quotes him as saying: "My Lord! surely my bones are weakened and my head flares with hoariness, and, my Lord! never have I been unsuccessful in my prayer to Thee: and surely I fear my relatives after me; and my wife is barren; therefore grant me from Thyself an heir..." (19:4-5). Furthermore, the question reflects on an interesting psychological - nay, spiritual ecstasy experienced by Zakariyya. No sooner did he look at Maryam and the grace of Allah she enjoyed than he was transported to the plane of ecstasy and felt himself overwhelmed by Divine Mercy and love; while in that state, he asked from his Lord for a good child, and mentioned in that prayer the basic factors - his own old age and his wife's barrenness - which had contributed to that sorrowful and pitiable condition. When his prayer was granted and he was given the good news of a son, it was as though he woke up from that trance; then he began expressing his joyful astonishment on such a marvelous phenomenon - Oh! Would I beget a son, in spite of my old age, even though my wife is barren! The same factors which in the past had caused him sorrow and distress now enhanced his happiness and joy. We may also look at this episode in the following light. Zakariyya was assured that his prayer had been accepted; thereupon he started mentioning one snag after the other. Actually, he wanted to ascertain as to how each hindrance would be overcome, how each snag would be removed. He liked to know all the particulars concerning that Divine Grace, in order that his enjoyment would be complete and his happiness perfect. We find the same emotions shown by Ibrahim when he was given similar good tidings: And inform them of the guests of Ibrahim: When they entered upon him, they said, "Peace". He said: "Surely we are afraid of you." They

said: "Be not afraid, surely we give you the good news of a boy possessing knowledge." He said: "Do you give me good news (of a son) when old age has come upon me? - Of what then do you give me good news!" They said: "We give you good news with truth; therefore be not of the despairing." He said: "And who despairs of the mercy of his Lord but the erring ones?" (15:51 - 56) When the angels told him not to despair, he made it clear that his question had not emanated from any despair; how could it be so, when des-pairing from the mercy of Allah was an error, a straying, and he was not an erring or straying servant? The angels must surely know that when a master turns with mercy to a slave in a way as to bring the slave nearer to himself, to raise him in rank, and exalt him in prestige, the slave feels so exhilarated, so overjoyed, that lie yearns to hear those words over and over again, repeatedly going into all its details, joyously looking at all its aspects! One may easily see the good manners of the purified servants of Allah, if one reflects on the words, "and old age has already come upon me". What Zakariyya alluded to was the fact that he had become too old to have ability, or even desire, to perform sexual act; as for his wife, she suffered from double impediment: Old age and barrenness. The clause, "my wife is barren", is expressed, in 19:8, in a way as to mean, my wife had been barren. It signifies that she had not become unable to bear children because of the advanced age; that she was barren from the very beginning. ([ )! He said: "Even so; Allah does what He pleases.": The actual replier is Allah - either directly or through the agency of the angels who had called to Zakariyya. But apparently the pronoun in "He said" refers to the angel; he was the speaker, although the saying is attributable to Allah as it was conveyed to Zakariyya by His command. This interpretation is supported by the verse: He (i.e., the Spirit) said: "So shall it be; your Lord says: 'It is easy to Me, and indeed I created you before, when you were nothing.'" (19:9) The above discourse shows that:  ! Zakariyya heard that voice from the same place whence he used to hear the angel's voice before. %
 $! "Even so" is the predicate of a deleted subject; the completed subject would be something like this: The matter is even so. It emphasizes that the Divine Grace, of which he was given the good news, was certain to appear; it was a firmly

decreed matter which would surely take place. This reply is similar to the one given by the spirit to Maryam: He said: "Even so; your Lord says: 'It is easy to Me;... and it is a matter which has been decreed.'" (19:21)  $! "Allah does what He pleases": It is a separate sentence, explaining the reason of the preceding "Even so". ([ )! He said: "My Lord! appoint a sign for me." Said He: "Your sign is that you would not speak to men for three days except by signs;... in the evening and the morning": It is writ-ten in Majma'u'l-bayan: "ar-Ramz" is to make signs with the lips; sometimes it is used for gesturing with eyebrows, eyes and/or hands; but mostly it is used in the first meaning." al-'Ashiyy (evening) indicates the end portion of the day; probably it is derived from al-'ashwah (dim-sightedness); the evening time was given this name because it merges into the darkness of the night and thus affects the eyesight. "al-Ibkar" (early morning); originally it meant to make haste, to come early. The verse throws light on yet another similarity between Yahya and 'Isa. Compare it with the advice which 'Isa gave to his mother soon after his birth: Then if you see any man, say: "Surely I have vowed a fast to the Beneficent Allah, so I shall not speak to any man today." (19:26) Zakariyya asked his Lord to appoint a sign for him. Sign is a symbol that points to another thing or idea. There is a difference of opinion regarding the purpose behind this prayer: Did he want to ascertain, with the help of the sign, that the good news was really from Allah; that it was an angelic (or a Divine) speech, and not a satanic voice? Or, was it to know the time when his wife would be pregnant, so that he might be sure of the conception? The context and the framework of the story do not agree very much with the second view. Yet the exegetes are reluctant to accept the first interpretation. They are not inclined to say that Zakariyya wanted to be sure of the Divine Origin of that message. The prophets were sinless and protected from errors and mistakes; as such they knew perfectly well the difference between the angelic inspiration and the satanic whispering; the Satan could not interfere in their affairs, nor could he confuse them in a way as to cast doubt about the Divine revelation sent to them. This observation is correct as far as it goes. But it should he remembered that they knew that difference not by themselves, but because Allah had given them that

knowledge. If so, then what objection can be raised if Zakariyya prayed to Allah to appoint for him a sign to help him ascertain the Divine Origin of that news? Of course, this objection could be entertained had his prayer been rejected - had Allah refused to appoint for him a sign as he had asked for. The appointed sign itself - not being able to talk to the people for three days supports (nay, proves) the first view. Utmost that the Satan can do against the prophets is to touch them with some ailments in their bodies; to put hindrance in their mission; to sabotage their efforts; to mislead the people away from the prophetic path; and to encourage and strengthen their enemies. Allah says: And remember Our servant Ayyub, when he called upon his Lord: "The Satan has afflicted me with toil and torment" (38:41); And We did not send before you any apostle or prophet, but when he desired, the Satan made a suggestion respecting his desire; but Allah annuls that which the Satan casts, then does Allah establish His communications... (22:52). "... then I forgot the fish, and nothing made me forget to speak of it but the Satan..." (18:63). But such touches and afflictions do not go beyond annoying or discomforting the prophet concerned. But the Satan can never get any power over the person of the prophets themselves; they are protected from it. (In previous discussions we have proved the 'ismah of the prophets.) Now we come to the present subject matter. It was the sign appointed by Allah for Zakariyya that he would not speak to the people for three days; he would remain tongue-tied for all kinds of speeches except for the remembrance of Allah and His glorification. "Said He: 'Your sign is that you would not speak to men for three days except by signs; and remember your Lord much and glorify Him in the evening and the morning.'' It was a sign that affected Zakariyya's person itself and made him tongue-tied. It was such an effect as was absolutely beyond the power of the Satan, because Zakariyya was protected by Divine 'ismah. This was, therefore, a sure sign that it was affected by Allah, and not by the Satan. And such a sign is more in accord with the first view than the second. 
 ! It will be difficult, if we take the first view, to explain the verse, "He said: 'My Lord! how shall there be a son (born) to me, and old age has already come upon me, and my wife is barren?' He said: 'Even so; Allah does what He pleases.'" This verse clearly says that he spoke to his Lord and asked Him what he wanted to ask, and got an answer to his enquiry. Now, if he harbored any doubt concerning the genuineness of the voice, then why all this dialogue? And if he had no doubt, then why this demand to be given a sign? [
! Certainty and belief have many grades, varying in the degrees of intensity. Possibly, Zakariyya was sure from the very beginning that it was an angelic voice

by the command of the Beneficent Allah; then he asked his Lord concerning the details of the birth of his promised son, because it was a truly awe-inspiring phenomenon, and again he heard the angel's voice answering his question and was again sure of its genuineness; then he prayed to his Lord to appoint for him a sign in order that his certainty - that it was a Divine communication - should reach the degree of tranquility. The clause, "Then the angels called to him", supports this interpretation. an-Nida' means to call from a distance. That is why it is generally used for a shout, a loud utterance - we cannot speak from a distance except in a loud voice - although loudness is not a part of its meaning. For example, Allah refers to the prayer of Zakariyya in these words: When called he (nada) unto his Lord in a low voice (nida'an khafiyyan) (19:3). His prayer was termed as a call from a distance - the distance being the spiritual one between Zakariyya's humility and modesty and the Divine sublimity, might and grandeur; otherwise, it could not be described as "a low voice". Anyhow, "the angels called to him" may be taken to mean that Zakariyya had only heard the voices of the angels without setting his eyes on them. (And therefore he decided to ask for a sign.) An exegete has written: "That Allah gave him a sign of not speaking, means that Allah forbade him to speak to the people for three days; he was to remain silent and spend the stipulated time in remembrance and glorification of Allah; it does not mean that he became tongue-tied and could not speak to the people at all... The fact is that Zakariyya, being a human being, wanted to know the exact time when the conception would take place, in order that he himself might feel at peace and could also inform his wife of the great event. That is why he asked what he asked. When his question was answered, he called upon Allah to prescribe for him a special prayer (in order that he might hasten to show his gratitude to Allah), which would terminate in fulfillment of his hope. In other words, the end of that period of thanks-giving would indicate that the time of conception had arrived. Thereupon, Allah told him not to speak to the people for three days, devoting all that time in remembrance and glorification of Allah; if there arose a need to talk with someone, he was to communicate with him in signs only. When the appointed three days passed, it would be the time to convey the good news to his wife." å
! Clearly, no trace of this imaginary narrative can be found in the verses. The Qur'an has nowhere mentioned - either directly or indirectly - any such story. The said writer has given free rein to his fancy when he says that Zakariyya asked for a special regimen of worship in order to offer his thanks to Allah, that the end of that worship period was to lead to the conception, that the termination of that

time was a sign for the beginning of the pregnancy, that the words, "you would not speak to men", were an order to him not to speak, and that he wanted to convey, at the end of the stipulated time the good news to his wife.  ,
    $% 0
 ,!
%

 We have repeatedly mentioned that when a word is made for a meaning, it actually looks at the main purpose behind that meaning. The words, "talk" and "speech", refer to voice, because voice conveys the idea of the speaker to the hearer. Therefore, whatever conveys that idea may be called a talk or speech. It may be a voice or a combination of several voices; in fact, it may not have any sound at all, as for example, is the case with sign lan-guage and symbols. If a siren conveys a complete idea, it may be called a speech, even though it is not uttered by mouth. Likewise, people use the word, "speech", for signs and symbols although no sound is involved in them. It is for this reason that the Qur'an uses the words, "speech" and "talk", for the ideas created in man's mind by the Satan. Allah narrates the claim of the Satan: And most certainly I will... bid them so that they shall slit the ears of the cattle, and most certainly I will bid them so that they shall alter Allah's creation... (4:119) Also, He says: Like the Satan when he says to man: "Disbelieve", but when he disbelieves, he says: I am surely clear of you. . ."'(59:16) ...the slinking (Satan) who whispers into the hearts of men... (114:5) ...the Satans from among men and jinn, some of them suggesting to others varnished falsehood to deceive (them) . .. (6:112) And the Satan shall say...: "Surely Allah promised you the promise of truth, and I gave you promises then failed to keep them to you . . ." (14:22) Satan threatens you with poverty and enjoins you to abomination, and Allah promises you forgiveness from Himself and abundance; and Allah is Ample-giving, All-knowing. He grants wisdom to whom He pleases, and whoever is granted wisdom, he indeed is given a great good. (2:268-269) Clearly, these misleading ideas, coming into a man's mind, have been ascribed to the Satan, and have been called his bid, order, talk, whispering, suggestion, promise and threat; all these are various modes of speech and talk, although the Satan does not utter them by mouth, nor does the man hear them by his ears. The last quoted verse mentions the promise of Allah - for forgiveness and abundance face to face with the satanic threat. It implies that this promise stands for an angelic

inspiration in contrast to the satanic whispering. And that inspiration has been termed as "wisdom". Also there are other verses pointing to this reality in various terms. For example: ...and (He will) make for you a light with which you will walk... (57:28) He it is Who sent down tranquility into the hearts of the believers that they might have more of faith added to their faith -- and Allah's are the hosts of the heaven and the earth... (48:4), (We have explained this verse while writing about assakinah [= tranquility] under the verse: ...in which there is tranquility from your lord... - 2:248) Therefore (for) whomsoever Allah intends that He would guide him aright, He expands his breast for Islam; and (for) whomsoever He intends that He should leave him to err, He makes his breast strait and narrow as though he were ascending into the sky; thus does Allah lay uncleanliness on those who do not believe (6:125). It should be noted here that the satanic whispering has been called "the uncleanliness of the Satan" in the verse 8:11. The above discourse makes it clear that the Satan and the angels "speak" to man by putting ideas into his mind. Then there is a speaking reserved for Allah, as He says: And there is not for any man that Allah should speak to him except by revelation, or from behind a veil, or by sending a messenger so that he reveals by His permission what He pleases (42:51). Apart from sending a messenger, that is, an angel (with which we are not concerned here), Allah speaks to man in two ways: (i) Revelation, in which there is no veil between Allah and the person spoken to; (ii) Speaking from behind a veil or curtain. These are, in short, various kinds of angelic inspiration and satanic whispering; and various modes of Allah's speech. As for the Divine Speech which is called revelation, it needs no extraneous factor for its recognition, no other distinguishing element to ascertain its authenticity. It is a direct speech, without any curtain between Allah and the recipient of the revelation; and it is just impossible for any doubt to creep up into such a talk. But other kinds of Divine Speech need some supporting evidence, which in its turn

relies on the direct revelation. As for a distinction between the angelic and the satanic talks, the signs mentioned in the above quoted verses are sufficient to separate one from the other. The angelic inspiration accompanies expanding of breast, calls to Divine forgiveness and abun-dance, and encourages man to follow the religion of Allah as expounded in the Divine Book and the prophetic sunnah. The satanic whispering, on the other hand, causes the breast to be strait and narrow, tempts one to follow one's desire, threatens with poverty, enjoins abomination, and finally pushes one to act in a manner opposed to the Book of Allah and the sunnah, .and contrary to the demands of the healthy nature. The prophets and their close followers sometimes saw and recognized the angels and the Satan, as Allah describes in the stories of Adam, Ibrahim, and Lut (peace be on them). Obviously, in such cases, there was no need for any extraneous identifying factor. But in other cases when they did not see the angel (or the Satan), they, like other believers, needed some identification to ascertain that the speaker was in fact from Allah - and that identification ultimately depended on the direct revelation from Allah.  $  as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about the words of Allah, When the woman of 'Imran said...: "Verily Allah revealed to 'Imran: 'I am going to give you a male (child), of sound health and blessed, who shall heal the blind and the leper and raise the dead (to life) by the permission of Allah; and I'll appoint him an apostle to the children of Israel.' 'Imran informed his wife, Hannah, of it - and she is the mother of Mary am. When Hannah conceived. She thought dial she was carrying the same male child. But when she brought it forth, she said: 'My Lord! surely I have brought it forth a female, and the male is not like the female.' (She said it because) a female cannot be an apostle. Allah says: And Allah knew what she brought forth. Thereafter, when Allah gave 'Isa to Maryam, (it was understood that) the good news and promise (which Allah had given to 'Imran) were in fact about that (grandson). Therefore, you should not think it strange if we say something about one of us (Ahlulbayt) and it appears (not in him, but) in his child or grandchild." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) 
 ! A nearly similar tradition has been narrated from the same Imam in al-Kafi, and from al-Baqir (a.s.) in al-'Ayyashi.

as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about the same verse: "A released child lived in the synagogue (and) did not go out. So, when (the wife of 'Imran) delivered her, she said: 'My Lord! surely I have brought it forth a female, and the male is not like the female.' The female has her menstruation, and (therefore she) will (have to) go out of the place of worship, while a released child does not go out of the place of worship." (al-'Ayyashi) al-Baqir or as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "She had vowed what was in her womb to the synagogue for serving the worshippers; and the male is not like the female in service." Then the Imam said: "Then she grew up; and she served them and looked after them, until she attained maturity. Then Zakariyya told her to hide her-self behind a screen (away) from the (other) worshippers." (ibid.) 
 ! As you see, the traditions support what we said in the Commentary. But evidently they take the clause, "and the male is not like the female", to be a part of the speech of 'Imran's wife, not a comment from Allah. In that case, it will be necessary to explain why "the male" was mentioned before "the female", against the norms of grammar and eloquence; also, it will be essential to find out a reason as to why she gave her daughter the name she gave, that is, Maryam (Released; devoted) - unless it can be shown that there was no correlation between releasing her and making her an attendant of the synagogue. The first tradition shows that 'Imran was a prophet who received revelations from Allah. It is also proved by another tradition narrated by Abu Basir in which he says: "I asked Abu Ja'far (a.s.) whether 'Imran was a prophet. He said: 'Yes, he was a prophet sent (to his people)...'" (Biharu'l-anwar) That tradition also shows that the wife of 'Imran was called Hannah, as is generally believed. Some other traditions say that her name was Marthar (Martha?). However, it is not an important subject for us to dwell on. The same tradition (quoted from al-Qummi) goes on to say: "When Maryam reached the age of puberty, she entered the sanctuary and put a curtain (on the entrance) to hide herself; and no one entered therein. And Zakariyya used to enter the sanctuary; and he used to find with her the fruits of summer in the winter and the fruits of winter in the summer; he used to say: 'Whence comes this to you?' And she used to reply: 'It is from Allah. Surely Allah gives sustenance to whom He pleases without measure.' as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "When Zakariyya prayed to his Lord to give him a child and

the angels called to him as they did, he desired to ascertain that the said voice was (really) from Allah. Thereupon Allah revealed to him that it was the sign (of its Divine Origin) that he would remain tongue-tied for three days. When he became tongue-tied and could not speak, he understood that no one, other than Allah, could do that. And it is the (mean-ing of the) word of Allah: He said: 'My Lord! appoint a sign for me.' ' (al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! A nearly similar tradition has been narrated by al-Qummi in his at-Tafsir. It has been made clear in the Commentary that this theme does not go against the context of the verse. An exegete has very strongly objected to many of the themes expounded in these traditions; for example, sending the revelation to 'Imran, presence of the off-season fruits in Maryam's sanctuary, request of Zakariyya for a sign in order that he could ascertain the authenticity of the voice etc. He has said: These are the things which cannot be proved. Neither Allah has mentioned them nor the Prophet has described them; nor can they be proved by reason or any reliable history. There are only some Israelite (and some non-Israelite) legends. Why should the Muslims no out of their way to explain the Qur'an in terms of those unverified legends, which are anyhow too far-fetched to be acceptable? å
! The said exegete has made claims without offering any argument in his support. Of course, these traditions are aahaad, and some are even weak in their chains; also it is not incumbent for a scholar to accept them or to use them as an argument. Yet, when we ponder on the verses of the Qur'an, we find ourselves ready to accept those traditions (because they are consistent with the Qur'an). It is all the more correct for the traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahlulbayt, as they do not contain any theme unacceptable to the reason. Of course, one has to be on guard against some untenable things attributed to some early exegetes. For example, Qatadah and 'Ikrimah are reported to have said: "The Satan came to Zakariyya and created a doubt (in his mind) whether the good news was really from Allah. He said (to Zakariyya): 'Had it been from Allah, He would have talked to you in a low voice as you had called unto Him in a low voice.'"There are many such baseless things which cannot be accepted at all. Another such example may be seen in the Gospel according to Luke, where it says: And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel,... And, behold, thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak, until the day that these things shall be performed,

because thou believest not my words, which shall be fulfilled in their season. (Luke, 1:19-20). 2
 $ -
2
%/
- as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "There is no heart but it has two ears, on one of them is a guiding angel, and on the other a tempting Satan; this orders him and that restrains him - the Satan enjoins him to (commit) sins, and the angel holds him back from it. And this is the word of Allah, the Mighty, the Great: ...sitting on the right and on the left. He utters not a word but there is by him a watcher at hand (50:17-18)." (al-Kafi) 
 ! There are many traditions of the same meaning, some of which will be quoted later on. In this tradition, Imam (a.s.) has applied the verse to an angel and a Satan, while other traditions apply it to the two angels who write down the good and evil deeds of a man. But the two sets of traditions are not mutually exclusive. The verse only says that there are "watchers" with every man who receive (i.e., note down) all his utterances, and that there are two of them, one on his right side and the other on his left. But the verse does not say whether those watchers are from only the angels or from the angels and the satans. As it is silent on this point, it may be applied to either explanation. Zurarah said: "I asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about the apostle, the prophet and almuhaddath (the one spoken to). He said: 'The apostle is the one who sees the angel (who) brings the message of his Lord to him, and tells him: "(Allah) orders you soand-so." And the apostle is a prophet with (the added rank of) apostleship. And the prophet does not see the angel; something comes down to him - the news (comes) to his heart; and he becomes as though he be in a trance, and he sees (the vision) in his dream.' I said: 'Then how does he know that what was (shown to him) in his dream was truth?' He said: 'Allah makes it clear to him, so that he knows that it is truth; and he does not see the angel...'" (ibid.) 
 ! "The apostle is a prophet..." It shows that the two ranks may be combined together in one person. We have explained in detail the meaning of apostleship and prophethood in the Commentary of the verse 2:213, "Mankind was but one people..."

"He becomes as though he be in a trance": It explains the next sentence, "and he sees (the vision) in his dream". It clarifies that what is meant by "dream" is not the dream as known to us; it only refers to a condition in which the prophet becomes oblivious of his surroundings. "Allah makes it clear to him": Allah makes the truth known to the prophet, enabling him to differentiate between an angelic inspiration and a satanic whispering. Burayd enquired from al-Baqir and as-Sadiq (peace be on both of them), inter alia, in a tradition: "Then what are the apostle, the prophet and the one spoken to?" (The Imam) said: "The apostle is the one that the angel appears before him and talks to him; and the prophet sees (the vision) in the dream; and sometimes apostleship and prophethood are combined in one (person); and al-muhaddath (the one spoken to) is the one who hears the voice but does not see the form." Burayd said: "I said: 'May Allah make your affairs good! How can the prophet know that what he saw in (his) dream was truth and that it was from the angel?' (The Imam) said: 'He is helped (by Allah) in it until he knows it. Certainly Allah ended (the series of divine) books with your Book, and the prophets with your Prophet...'" (Basa'iru 'ddarajat) 
 ! It has the same connotation as the preceding tradition. The Imam has sufficiently explained the meaning of "the one spoken to" - it is the one who hears the voice of an unseen speaker who speaks by order of Allah. The words, "Certainly Allah ended the (series of divine) books...", point to this reality. When writing on the following verses, we shall discuss in detail about "the one spoken to".

å
 
    

* 3 Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˴Ύ˴ό˸ϟ΍ ˯Ύ˴δϧ˶ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϙ ˶ Ύ˴ϔτ ˴ ˸λ΍˴ϭ ϙ ˶ ή˴ Ϭ˴˷ σ ˴ ˴ϭ ϙ ˶ Ύ˴ϔτ ˴ ˸λ΍ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϣ˵ ϳ˴ ˸ήϣ˴ Ύ˴ϳ Δ˵ Ϝ˴ ΋˶ ϼ˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍ Ζ ˶ ϟ˴Ύ˴ϗ ˸Ϋ·˶ϭ˴ {42} Ϛ ˶ Α˶˷ή˴ ϟ˶ ϲ˶ΘϨ˵ ˸ϗ΍ Ϣ˵ ϳ˴ ˸ήϣ˴ Ύ˴ϳ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶όϛ˶ ΍˷ή˴ ϟ΍ ϊ˴ ϣ˴ ϲ˶όϛ˴ ˸έ΍˴ϭ ϱ˶ΪΠ ˵ ˸γ΍˴ϭ{43} ·˶ Ϫ˶ ϴ˶ΣϮ˵ϧ ΐ ˶ ˸ϴϐ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ˯Ύ˴Βϧ˴΃ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϳ˵˷΃˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϣ˴ ϼ˸ϗ΃˴ ϥϮ˵Ϙ˸Ϡϳ˵ ˸Ϋ·˶ ˸ϢϬ˶ ˸ϳΪ˴ ϟ˴ Ζ ˴ Ϩ˵ϛ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϴϟ˴

ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϥμ ˶ Θ˴ ˸Ψϳ˴ ˸Ϋ·˶ ˸ϢϬ˶ ˸ϳΪ˴ ϟ˴ Ζ ˴ Ϩ˵ϛ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϣ˴ ϳ˴ ˸ήϣ˴ Ϟ ˵ ϔ˵ ˸Ϝϳ˴ {44} Ϫ˵ Ϥ˵ ˸γ΍ Ϫ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶˷ Δ˳ Ϥ˴ Ϡ˶Ϝ˴ Α˶ ϙ ˶ ή˵ θ ˶˷ Β˴ ϳ˵ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϣ˵ ϳ˴ ˸ήϣ˴ Ύ˴ϳ Δ˵ Ϝ˴ ΋˶ ϼ˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍ Ζ ˶ ϟ˴Ύ˴ϗ ˸Ϋ·˶ ϳ˴ ˸ήϣ˴ Ϧ ˵ ˸Α΍ ϰ˴δϴ˶ϋ ΢ ˵ ϴ˶δϤ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Αή˴˷ Ϙ˴ Ϥ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϭ˴ Γ˶ ή˴ Χ ˶ ϵ΍˴ϭ Ύ˴ϴ˸ϧΪ˵˷ ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˱Ϭϴ˶Οϭ˴ Ϣ˴ {45} Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϭ˴ ϼ ˱ ˸Ϭϛ˴ ϭ˴ Ϊ˶ ˸ϬϤ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ α ˴ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϡ˶˷Ϝ˴ ϳ˵ ϭ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Τϟ˶Ύ˷μ ˴ ϟ΍{46} π ˴ ϗ˴ ΍˴Ϋ·˶ ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ Ύ˴ϣ ϖ ˵ Ϡ˵˸Ψϳ˴ Ϫ˵ ˷Ϡ˴ϟ΍ Ϛ ˶ ϟ˶ά˴ ϛ˴ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ ˲ήθ ˴ Α˴ ϲ˶Ϩ˸δδ ˴ ˸Ϥϳ˴ ˸Ϣϟ˴ϭ˴ ˲Ϊϟ˴˴ϭ ϲ˶ϟ ϥ ˵ Ϯ˵Ϝϳ˴ ϰ˷ϧ˴ ΃˴ Ώ ˶˷ έ˴ ˸Ζϟ˴Ύ˴ϗ ΍˱ή˸ϣ΃˴ ϰ ϥ ˵ Ϯ˵Ϝϴ˴ ϓ˴ Ϧ˵ϛ Ϫ˵ ϟ˴ ϝ ˵ Ϯ˵Ϙϳ˴ Ύ˴Ϥϧ˴˷Έ˶ϓ˴ {47} Ϟ ˴ ϴ˶Πϧ˶Ϲ΍˴ϭ Γ˴ ΍˴έ˸ϮΘ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Δ˴ Ϥ˴ ˸ϜΤ ˶ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϫ˵ Ϥ˵ Ϡ˶˷˴όϳ˵ ϭ˴ {48} Ϟ ˴ ϴ˶΋΍˴ή˸γ·˶ ϲ˶ϨΑ˴ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ϻ ˱ Ϯ˵γέ˴ ϭ˴ Δ˶ Ό˴ ˸ϴϬ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˶ ϴ˷τ ˶ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Ϣ˵Ϝϟ˴ ϖ ˵ Ϡ˵˸Χ΃˴ ϲ˷ϧ˶ ΃˴ ˸Ϣ˵ϜΑ˶˷έ˴˷ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Δ˳ ϳ˴ ΂˶Α Ϣ˵ϜΘ˵ ˸ΌΟ ˶ ˸Ϊϗ˴ ϲ˷ϧ˶ ΃˴ Ή ˵ ή˶ ˸Α˵΃ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˶ ˸ΫΈ˶Α˶ ΍˱ή˸ϴσ ˴ ϥ ˵ Ϯ˵Ϝϴ˴ ϓ˴ Ϫ˶ ϴ˶ϓ Φ ˵ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΄ϓ˴ ή˶ ˸ϴτ ˴˷ ϟ΍ Η˶ Ϯ˵ϴΑ˵ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήΧ ˶ Ϊ˴˷ Η˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϡϛ˵ ˸΄Η˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ϣ˵ϜΌ˵ Β˶˷ϧ˴ ΃˵ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˶ ˸ΫΈ˶Α˶ ϰ˴Η˸ϮϤ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϴ˸Σ΃˵ϭ˴ ι ˴ ή˴ ˸ΑϷ ˴ ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˴ Ϥ˴ ˸ϛϷ ˴ ΍ ϥ˶· ˸ϢϜ˵ ϟ˴˷ Δ˱ ϳ˴ ϵ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸Άϣ˵˷ Ϣ˵ΘϨ˵ϛ {49} Δ˳ ϳ˴ ΂˶Α Ϣ˵ϜΘ˵ ˸ΌΟ ˶ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ˸ϴ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϡ˴ ή˶˷ Σ ˵ ϱ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ξ ˴ ˸όΑ˴ Ϣ˵Ϝϟ˴ Ϟ ˴˷ Σ ˶ ΄˵ ϟ˶ϭ˴ Γ˶ ΍˴έ˸ϮΘ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϱ ˴˷ Ϊ˴ ϳ˴ Ϧ ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ Ύ˴Ϥϟ˶˷ Ύ˱ϗΪ˶˷ μ ˴ ϣ˵ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˶˷έ˴˷ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ ϥ ˶ Ϯ˵όϴ˶σ΃˴ϭ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΗ˴˷Ύ˴ϓ{50} ϴ˶ϘΘ˴ ˸δϣ˵˷ ˲ρ΍˴ήλ ˶ ΍˴άϫ˴ ϩ˵ ϭ˵ΪΒ˵ ˸ϋΎ˴ϓ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˵˷έ˴ ϭ˴ ϲ˷Α˶ έ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˷ϥ ˴ ·˶ ˲Ϣ{51} Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶ ϰ˴δϴ˶ϋ β ˴˷ Σ ˴ ΃˴ Ύ˷Ϥ˴ Ϡ˴ϓ˴ ϧ˴˷΄˴Α˶ ˸ΪϬ˴ ˸η΍˴ϭ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟΎ˶Α Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϣ˴ ΁ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ έ˵ Ύ˴μϧ˴΃ Ϧ ˵ ˸Τϧ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷ϳ˵ έ˶ ΍˴ϮΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ϱ˶έΎ˴μϧ˴΃ ˸Ϧϣ˴ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ ή˴ ˸ϔϜ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˶˸δϣ˵ Ύ{52} Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϣ˴ ΁ Ύ˴ϨΑ˴˷έ˴ Ϩ˴ ˸ΒΘ˵ ˸ϛΎ˴ϓ ϝ ˴ Ϯ˵γή˴˷ ϟ΍ Ύ˴Ϩ˸όΒ˴ Η˴˷΍˴ϭ ˸Ζ˸ϟΰ˴ ϧ˴΃ Ύ˴Ϥ˶Α Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶Ϊϫ˶ Ύ˷θ ˴ ϟ΍ ϊ˴ ϣ˴ Ύ{53} Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϛ˶ Ύ˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍ ή˵ ˸ϴΧ ˴ Ϫ˵ ˴˷Ϡϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ή˴ Ϝ˴ ϣ˴ ϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϜ˴ ϣ˴ ϭ˴ {54} ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ ˸Ϋ·˶ ό˵ Β˴ Η˴˷΍ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϟ ˵ϋ ˶ Ύ˴Οϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϙ ˴ ή˵ Ϭ˶˷ τ ˴ ϣ˵ ϭ˴ ϲ ˴˷ ϟ˴·˶ Ϛ ˴ ό˵ ϓ˶ ΍˴έϭ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϴ˷ϓ˶ Ϯ˴ Θ˴ ϣ˵ ϲ˷ϧ˶ ·˶ ϰ˴δϴ˶ϋ Ύ˴ϳ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϕ ˴ ˸Ϯϓ˴ ϙ ˴ Ϯ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ˸΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϔϠ˶Θ˴ ˸ΨΗ˴ Ϫ˶ ϴ˶ϓ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ Ύ˴Ϥϴ˶ϓ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϩ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ Ϣ˵ Ϝ˵ ˸Σ΄˴ϓ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ό˵ Ο ˶ ˸ήϣ˴ ϲ ˴˷ ϟ˴·˶ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ Δ˶ ϣ˴ Ύ˴ϴϘ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˶ ˸Ϯϳ˴ {55} ϲ˶ϓ ΍˱Ϊϳ˶Ϊη ˴ Ύ˱Α΍˴άϋ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ Α˵ ά˶˷ ϋ ˴ ΄˵ϓ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˷ϣ˴ ΄˴ϓ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήλ ˶ Ύ˷ϧ˴ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϣ˵Ϭϟ˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Γ˶ ή˴ Χ ˶ ϵ΍˴ϭ Ύ˴ϴ˸ϧΪ˵˷ ϟ΍{56} ά˶ ϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˷ϣ˴ ΃˴ϭ˴ ΐ ˵˷ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ ϻ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸Ϣϫ˵ έ˴ Ϯ˵Ο΃˵ ˸ϢϬ˶ ϴ˷ϓ˶ Ϯ˴ ϴ˵ ϓ˴ Ε ˶ Ύ˴Τϟ˶Ύ˷μ ˴ ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϠϤ˶ ϋ ˴ ϭ˴ ΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ ˴Ϧϳ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˶Ύ˷ψ ˴ ϟ΍{57} Ϣ˶ ϴ˶ϜΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ή˶ ˸ϛά˶˷ ϟ΍˴ϭ Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳϵ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ϩ˵ Ϯ˵Ϡ˸Θϧ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ {58} Ϧ˶ϣ Ϫ˵ Ϙ˴ Ϡ˴Χ ˴ ϡ˴ Ω˴ ΁ Ϟ ˶ Μ˴ Ϥ˴ ϛ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ ϰ˴δϴ˶ϋ Ϟ ˴ Μ˴ ϣ˴ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ Ώ ˳ ΍˴ήΗ˵ ϥ ˵ Ϯ˵Ϝϴ˴ ϓ˴ Ϧ˵ϛ Ϫ˵ ϟ˴{59} Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήΘ˴ ˸ϤϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϧ˵ϜΗ˴ ϼ ˴ ϓ˴ Ϛ ˴ Α˶˷έ˴˷ Ϧ˶ϣ ϖ ˵˷ Τ ˴ ˸ϟ΍{60} {42} And when the angels said: O Marium! surely Allah has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of of the world. {43} O Marium! keep to obedience to your Lord and humble yourself, and bow down with those who bow. {44} This is of the announcements relating to the unseen which We reveal to you; and you were not with them when they cast their pens (to decide) which of them should have Marium in his charge, and you were not with them when they contended one with another. {45} When the angels said: O Marium, surely Allah gives you good news with a Word from Him (of one) whose name is the '. Messiah, Isa son of Marium, worthy of regard in this world and the hereafter and of those who are made near (to Allah). {46} And he shall speak to the people when in the cradle and when of old age, and (he shall be) one of the good ones. {47} She said: My Lord! when shall there be a son (born) to I me, and man has not touched me? He said: Even so, Allah creates what He pleases; when He has decreed a matter, He only says to it, Be, and it is. {48} And He will teach him the Book and the wisdom and the Tavrat and the Injeel. {49} And (make him) a messenger to the children of Israel: That I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, that I determine for you out of dust like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird with Allah's permission and I heal the blind and the leprous, and bring the dead to life with Allah's permission and I inform you of what you should eat and what you should store in your houses; most surely there is a sign in this for you, if you are believers. {50} And a verifier of that which is before me of the Taurat and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you, and I have come to you with a sign from your Lord therefore be careful of (your duty to) Allah and obey me. {51} Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore serve Him; this is the right path. {52} But when Isa perceived

unbelief on their part, he said Who will be my helpers in Allah's way? The disciples said: We are helpers (in the way) of Allah: We believe in Allah and bear witness that we are submitting ones. {53} Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed and we follow the messenger, so write us down with those who bear witness. {54} And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners. {55} And when Allah said: O Isa, I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so l will decide between you concerning that in which you differed. {56} Then as to those who disbelieve, I will chastise them with severe chastisement in this world and the hereafter, and they shall have no helpers. {57} And as to those who believe and do good deeds, He will pay them fully their rewards; and Allah does not love the unjust. {58} This We recite to you of the communications and the wise reminder. {59} Surely the likeness of Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, Be, and he was. {60} (This is) the truth from your Lord, so be not of the disputers. å
  ([ )! And when the angels said: "O Maryam! surely Allah has chosen you and purified you: The conjunctive, "And", joins it to the verse 35: When the woman of 'Imran said... Both verses therefore describe the selection of the descendants of Imran mentioned in the verse 34: Surely Allah chose Adam... This verse proves that Maryam was one of "the spoken to"; the angels talked to her and she heard their speech. It is proved also by the words of Allah in the Chapter of Maryam: then We sent to her Our Spirit, and there appeared to her a well-made man... He said: "I am only a messenger of your Lord..." (19:17-21): We shall write, at the end of this Commentary, about "the spoken to". We have earlier written explaining the Divine Words, So her Lord accepted her with a good acceptance and made her grow up a good growing (3:37), that these sentences answer the pleas of Maryam's mother: "and I have named her Maryam, and I commend her and her offspring into Thy protection from the accursed Satan" (3:36); also it was mentioned that the angels' words in the verse under discussion, "O Maryam! surely Allah has chosen you...", show the status which Maryam had

near Allah. You may refer to that explanation for further details. Thus her choosing means that she was accepted a good acceptance for the worship of Allah; and her purification implies that she held fast to the protection of Allah. She was therefore a chosen one who was protected from sin. It has also been said that her purification means that she was a virgin who did not menstruate - thus she was not obliged to go out of the synagogue at any time. There is nothing wrong in this explanation although the meaning given by us is more in conformity with the context. ([ )! "and chosen you above the women of the worlds: We have already described (in the Commentary of the verse 3:33, Surely Allah chose Adam... above all the worlds) the connotation of choosing "above" the worlds; "above" shows that the chosen one was given excellence and precedence over other people in something exclusively given to him; and that it is more than mere selection which implies total surrender to the will of Allah. The announcement that Mary am was chosen "above the women of the worlds" thus, means that she was given precedence over them. Was she given precedence over them in all things? Or only in some matters? Look at the following verses: When the angels said: "0 Maryam! surely Allah gives you good news of a Word from Him whose name is the Messiah..." (3:45). And she who guarded her chastity, so We breathed into her of Our Spirit and made her and her son a sign for the worlds (21:91). And Maryam, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity, so We breathed into it of Our Spirit, and she accepted the truth of the words of her Lord, and she was of the obedient ones (66:12). These verses describe the only distinction which she was given to the exclusion of all women of the worlds - and that is her miraculously conceiving and giving birth to 'Isa (a.s.). It shows that it was this aspect of her life in which she was given precedence over all the women. The other qualities attributed to her in these verses, her purification, her acceptance of the words of Allah and His Books, her obedience to God and her being spoken to) were not her exclusive virtues - they are found in others too. It is said that she was chosen above the women of her time. But the verse is

unconditional and general, and as such it cannot accept any limitation put to it. ([ )! "0 Maryam! keep to obedience to your Lord and prostrate, and bow down with those who bow": "al-Qunut" means keeping to obedience with submission and humility; as-sajdah (translated here as prostration) is well-known ritual of worship; ar-ruku' (to bow down; to be humble). When someone calls another person, the called one looks towards the caller and listens to him. In this verse, Maryam is again called by name. It is as though the angels wanted to tell her: We have brought to you good news and again some more; you should listen to both of the good tidings. The first concerns with the rank and status you have been given by Allah. The second is what you are obliged to do alongside that Divine Favor; in other words, what you have got to offer to Allah of the duties of servitude; it will show your gratitude for that rank and meet the demands of servitude. In this light, this verse, "O Maryam! keep to obedience ...", seems to branch out from the preceding one, "O Maryam! surely Allah has chosen you..."; that is, because Allah has chosen you, purified you and chosen you over the women of the worlds, you should keep to obedience to Him and prostrate and bow down with those who bow down. Each of the three orders given in this verse may possibly have emanated from one of the three excellences mentioned in the preceding one - although their respective relationship is not clear. ([ )! This is of the tidings of the unseen which we reveal to you: Allah has counted it as a tiding of the unseen as He has done after relating the story of Yusuf (a.s.): This is of the tidings of the unseen (which) we reveal to you, and you were not with them when they resolved upon their affair, and they were devising plans (12:102). Of course, the scriptures of the People of the Book contain stories about them, but no credence can be attached to them, because they have not remained safe from alterations, deletions and interpolations. For example, a lot of details and particulars given by the Qur'an concerning the story of Zakariyya are nowhere to be found in the Bible. It is probably for this reason that Allah goes on to say: "and you were not with them when they cast their pens..." Moreover, the Prophet and his people were unlettered; they had not known these stories, nor had they read them in books, as Allah says after mentioning the story

of Nuh: These are of the tidings of the unseen which We reveal to you; you did not know them - (neither) you nor your people - before this (11:49). But the first interpretation is more in keeping with the context of the verse. ([ )! and you were not with them when they cast their pens (to decide) which of them should have Maryam in his charge: "al-Qalam" (pen; plural: al-aqlam), also means arrow shaft or arrow which was used for casting lot; in this meaning it is synonymous to as-sahm. Therefore, "when they cast their pens", means, when they cast their arrows to decide by lot which of them should have Maryam in his custody. This sentence shows that the contention mentioned in the next phrase, "and you were not with them when they contended one with another", refers to this same conflict which they had had about the guardianship of Maryam, and that they did not stop arguing with each other until they agreed to decide the matter by lot. They cast the lot and it came out in favor of Zakariyya, and he took her charge, as Allah says: and gave her into the charge of Zakariyya (3:37). According to some people, this contention and decision by lot probably occurred when Maryam was grown up and Zakariyya had become too weak to look after her. Why did this idea occur to them? Probably it was because this contention and its settlement through lot has been mentioned after the story of Maryam's birth and her being chosen by Allah, and also because the guardianship of Zakariyya has already been mentioned before. Thus, according to them, this verse refers to another guardianship. But it is not unusual, while describing an event, to repeat, or to allude to, some of its previously mentioned aspects in order to prove a claim. A similar style has been used in the story of Yusuf, where Allah says at the end: This is of the tidings of the unseen (which) We reveal to you, and you were not with them when they resolved upon their affair, and they -were devising plans (12:102). This points to their conspiracy which is mentioned at the beginning of the story: When they said: "Certainly Yusuf and his brother are dearer to our father than we,... Slay Yusuf or cast him (forth) into some land..." A speaker from among them said: "Do not slay Yusuf, and cast him down into the bottom of the pit if you must do (it), (so that) some of the travelers may pick him up" (12:8-10). ([ )! When the angels said: "0 Maryam! surely Allah gives you good news of a Word:

Evidently it refers to the same event which is mentioned in the Chapter of Maryam in these words: then We sent to her Our Spirit and there appeared to her a wellmade man. She said: "Surely I fly for refuge from you to the Beneficent God, if you are pious. " He said: "I am only a messenger of your Lord: That I should give you a pure boy" (19:17-19). The good tiding ascribed to the angels in the verse under discussion is thus attributed here to the Spirit. It is said that the word "angels" refers to Gabriel. He has been described with a plural, "angels", to show his great honor and high rank. People say: He went on a journey riding horses and sailing in ships - while actually he rode one horse and sailed in one ship only. Also, we say: People told him so, while in fact it was only one person who gave him the news. A similar style is seen in the story of Zakariyya, mentioned earlier: Then the angels called to him... He said: "Even thus; does Allah what He pleases" (3:39-40). Others have said that there were other angels with Gabriel and they jointly gave her the good news. However, if you ponder on the verses which describe the angels, you will see that the angels are of various ranks; some have precedence over others, some are nearer to Allah than others. Those who are behind are mere followers of the orders of those who are in the forefront. The actions and words of the follower are counted as the actions and the words of the leader himself. It is not different from the activities of our own powers and limbs which are counted as our own activities without there being any duality of doers. We say: My own eyes saw it, my own ears heard it; and the same idea is conveyed when we say: I saw it and heard it. We say: My hand did it; my fingers wrote it; and also we say: I did it, I wrote it. Likewise the deeds and words of the angels of higher ranks are counted as the deeds and words of those of lower rank who follow the former's orders, and vice versa. And similarly the actions and words of all the angels - the leaders and the followers - are attributed to Allah Himself. Look at the action of giving death: In one place, Allah attributes it to Himself: Allah takes completely the souls at the time of their death (39:42); another verse ascribes it to the angel of death: Say: "The angel of death who is given charge of you shall take you completely" (32:11); and yet another one attributes it to a group of the angels: until when death comes to one of you, Our messengers take him completely (6:61). A similar interchange is seen in the following verses: Surely We have revealed to you (4:163); The Faithful Spirit has descended with it upon your heart (26:193194); Say: "Whoever is the enemy of Jibril - for surely he revealed it to your

heart..." (2:97) ;Nay! surely it is an admonishment. So let him who pleases mind it. In honored books, exalted, purified, in the hands of scribes, noble, virtuous (80:1116). Now it is clear that the announcement of good news by Gabriel was precisely the announcement by the group of the angels under his authority. And Gabriel is one of the chiefs of the angels, one of those who are nearer to Allah, as the Divine Words show: Most surely it is the word of an honored messenger, the possessor of strength, having an honorable place with the Lord of the Throne, one (to be) obeyed, and faithful in trust (81:19-21). We shall explain it further, Allah willing, under the ch. 35. You may have a glimpse of the above mentioned reality in the verse: He said: "Even so; Allah creates what He pleases..." (3:47). Apparently the speaker of these words is Allah, while in ch. 19 the same thing has been attributed to the Spirit: He (i.e., the Spirit) said: "I am only a messenger of your Lord: That I should give you a pure boy. " She said: "How shall I have a boy and no mortal has touched me, nor have I been unchaste?" He said: "Even so, your Lord says: 'It is easy to Me ...'"(19: 19-21). That the angels and the Spirit talked with Maryam, shows that she was one of "the spoken to". Not only this; the earlier quoted words of ch. 19 show that in addition to hearing their speech, she even saw an angel: then we sent to her Our Spirit, and there appeared to her a well-made man. We shall further explain it, Allah willing, under the Traditions. ([ )! "a Word from Him whose name is the Messiah, 'Isa son of Maryam: We have fully explained the significance of the "speech of Allah", under the verse: Those apostle, we have made some of them to excel the others (2:253). al-Kalimah (word) is a collective noun, one unit of which is called al-kalim, as is the case with at-tamrah and at-tamr (date). al-Kalimah is used for one meaningful word as well as for a sentence (e.g., Zayd is standing); also, it is used with equal validity for a phrase or incomplete sentence (e.g., If Zayd is standing. ..). This explanation is according to language. As far as the terminology of the Qur'an is concerned, as for example where it attributes a word to Allah, it means: 'that which shows the will of Allah'; it may be an order, e.g., the word of creation when He says to a thing, 'Be'; or it may be a word of revelation and inspiration, etc.

What is the meaning of "a Word from Allah" when it is applied to 'Isa (a.s.)? Some people say: This title was given to 'Isa (a.s.) because the prophets who preceded him (or especially the prophets of Israel) had foretold his advent, giving the good news that he would be the savior of Israel. We say in similar situations: This is my. word which I had said. And it is in the same meaning that this word has been used by Allah in connection with the advent of Musa (a.s.): and the good word of your Lord was fulfilled in the Children of Israel because they bore up (sufferings) patiently (7:137). å2

Ô)! Although the books of the Bible may support this interpretation, the Qur'an does not subscribe to it. According to the Qur'an, 'Isa son of Maryam was a prophet who had brought the good news^of~n, Messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmad (61:6); he was not the one whose good news was given by the others. Moreover, the phrase, "whose name is the Messiah", does not fit this interpretation; because according to this interpretation, "a Word from Him" refers to the advent of 'Isa, and not to 'Isa himself; while the phrase "whose name is the Messiah", says that the Messiah is the name of the word - and not the name of him in whom the word of Allah was fulfilled.  
 

 ! The "Word" refers to 'Isa (a.s.) because he explained the Torah giving it the meaning intended by Allah, pointing out the interpolations and alterations made by the Jews, and clarifying the religious matters in which they had differed. Allah quotes him as saying to the Children of Israel: ...so that I may take clear to you part of what you differ in (43:63). å2

Ô)! This interpretation justifies application of the "Word" to 'Isa (a.s.); but there is no association or proof in the Qur'an to support it.  $ 

 ! The "Word" refers to the good news itself; Maryam was told that she would conceive 'Isa and deliver him. Accordingly, "Allah gives you good news of a Word from Him," means that Allah gives you good news that you will give birth to 'Isa without the agency of man. å2

Ô)! Obviously, the phrase, "whose name is the Messiah, 'Isa son of Maryam", does not fit this interpretation.   

 ! It refers to 'Isa (a.s.) because he was the word of creation, i.e., the Divine Command, 'Be'. No doubt every man, nay, every thing, comes into being by the creative word, 'Be'; but every man is conceived and born according to

the well-known normal system: the usual course is for the male sperm to fertilize the female ovum - and it requires many main and supporting causes to materialize. That is why conception is attributed to man as its efficient cause - as every effect is attributed to its immediate cause. But conception of 'Isa did not follow this course; many usual and gradual causes were simply missing. His existence was just by the creative word, 'Be', and no usual causes intervened. And in this way, he became the "Word" itself, as we see in the verse: ...and His Word which He communicated to Maryam (4:171). It gets support from the verse 3:59, coming at the end: Surely the likeness of 'Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, "Be", and he was. å2

Ô)! This is the best of the interpretations. al-Masih (anointed; wiped clean), 'Isa (a.s.) was given this name because he was anointed with success and blessing. Or because he was wiped clean of sins, was purified. Or because he was anointed with holy olive-oil, with which the prophets were anointed. Or because Gabriel wiped him with his wings at his birth, so that it should be a protection from Satan. Or because he used to touch and wipe the heads of the orphans. Or because he used to wipe the eyes of the blind and they gained eye-sight. Or because whenever he touched and wiped any suffering person, he became whole. These are the reasons given by the exegetes for this name. The fact is that this name was included in the good news given by Gabriel to Maryam, as Allah quotes him as saying: O Maryam! surely Allah gives you good news of a Word from Him whose name is al-Masih, 'Isa son of Maryam. This word is the Arabicised form of the Meshiha, which is found in the Old and the New Testaments. The Bible shows that when a king was enthroned among the Children of Israel, the priests anointed him with the holy oil, so that he might be blessed in his rule. The king was therefore called messiah. It may be inferred from it that the messiah means either the king or the blessed one. It appears from their books that 'Isa (a.s.) was called the Messiah because the messianic prophecies of the Old Testament contained the prophecy of his kingdom; it was believed that there would appear in the Children of Israel a king who would deliver them from bondage. The Gospel according to Luke describes the angel's good news to Maryam in these words: "And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail thou that are highly favored, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. And when she saw him, she was

troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favor with God. And, behold, thou shaft conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end." (Luke, 1:28-33) And that was the excuse offered by the Jews for not accepting 'Isa's claim of prophethood. They said that the good news contained the prophecy of his kingdom and it did not materialize at any time during his life. And it was precisely to overcome this objection that the Christians interpreted the promised kingdom as the spiritual, and not the temporal one. Some Muslim exegetes too have taken the same line. 
 ! It is not unlikely that the name al-Masih used in the good news may have meant "the blessed". When they anointed a king with the holy oil, it was done to bring blessings on him. This connotation may be supported by the verses: He said: "Surely I am a servant of Allah, He has given me the Book and made me a prophet: and He has made me blessed wherever I may be. . ."(19:30-31). 'Isa was originally Yashu' which they interpret as deliverer, savior. Some Muslims' traditions say that it means "he lives". It seems more appropriate in view of the perfect similarity between 'Isa and Yahya whose name too means "he lives". The name 'Isa is qualified with the phrase, son of Maryam, although the good news was being given to Maryam herself. It was done to emphasize the fact that he would be born without the agency of a father, and therefore would be known with this name; and that Maryam would jointly share this sign with him. Allah says: and made her and her son a sign for the worlds (21:91). ([ )! "worthy of regard in this world and the hereafter and of those who are made near (to Allah): al-Wijahah (translated here as worthiness of regard) means esteem, prestige, eminence and acceptability. 'Isa's eminence and acceptability in this world is not a secret; and the Qur'an confers this position to him in the hereafter too. Undoubtedly 'Isa (a.s.) was one of "those who are made near". He is near to Allah, included in the rank of the friends of Allah and the near angels in the verse: The Messiah does by no means disdain that he should be a servant of Allah, nor do the

angels who are near to Him (4:172). Allah has explained the importance of being made near to Him, in the ch. 56. He says: When the great event comes to pass, ...and you shall be three sorts... And the foremost are the foremost; these are they who are drawn near (to Allah) (56:1-11). These verses point to the reality of the nearness to Allah: Man presses forward leaving others behind in the way that leads one back to Allah, then he comes nearer to Allah. Proceeding on this way is prescribed for every man, nay, everything. Allah says: 0 man! surely thou art striving to thy Lord, a hard striving, so that thou art to meet Him (84:6). Also, He says: now surely to Allah do all affairs eventually come (42:53). There is another aspect to this reality. Nearness to Allah is an attribute of some angels. It means that this nearness is not necessarily a thing to be acquired by one's endeavors; whatever it is a gift from Allah. It may therefore be said that it is a rank and status which the angels get by Divine bestowal and the men by their striving. The expression, "worthy of regard in this world and the hereafter" is a circumstantial phrase; and so are other words in conjunctive with it, i.e., "and of those who are made near"; "and he shall speak"; "and one of the good ones"; "and He will teach him..."; "and a messenger..." ([ )! "And he shall speak to the people when in the cradle and when of mature age...": al-Mahd (cradle; bed or cot for infant, especially one on rockers). al-Kahl (of mature age) is derived from al-kuhulah (to be of mature age); it is the middle age between youth and old age, it is the time when the body is at the height of its perfection and strength. That is why it is said that middle age is when white hair mixes with black. Others say that mature age means the age of forty-three. In any case, it was a prophecy that he would live until he reached middle age; it was another good news for Maryam. The Gospels say that he did not live on the earth more than thirty-three years. And yet the Qur'an clearly talks about his middle age. It is a point to be pondered upon. It is because of this that some people have said that his middle age speech would occur after his coming down from the heaven - because he was not on the earth till his middle age. Some others have claimed that according to "historical research" 'Isa (a.s.) lived for about sixty-four years, contrary to what the Gospels say. But the expression, "when in the cradle and when of mature age," shows that he would not reach old age - his life on this earth would end in his middle age. In other words, the verse gives us both sides of his age - the infancy and the middle age.

Usually a child is put in cradle in the beginning of its life when it is in diapers, before it starts crawling or walking - generally in its second year or even before; and it is the age when it starts talking. Therefore, for a child to speak in cradle is not an extraordinary achievement. But the verse obviously has another importance: It means that he would speak to the people, when in the cradle, a complete and thought provoking speech which men of understanding would listen to, as they listen to the talk of a middle-aged man. In other words, he would talk to them in his cradle in the same manner as he would do in his mature age. Surely such a talk from an infant is extraordinary sign, a miracle. Apart from that, the story as given in the ch. 19, clearly shows that he had spoken to the people in the very first hour of his life, when Mary am brought him to them soon after his birth. And undoubtedly when a child talks on the day he is born, it must be a miracle. Allah says: And she came to her people with him, carrying him (with her). They said: "O Mary am! surely you have done a strange thing. O sister of Harun! your father was not a bad man, nor was your mother an unchaste woman." But she pointed to him. They said: "How should we speak to one who is a child in the cradle?" He said: "Surely I am a servant of Allah; He has given me the Book and made me a prophet: And he has made me blessed wherever I may be, and He has enjoined on me prayer and zakat so long as I live: And dutiful to my mother, and He has not made me insolent, unblessed: And peace on me on the day I was born, and on the day I die, and on the day I am raised to life" (19:27-33). ([ )! She said: "My Lord! how shall there be a son (born) to me and man has not touched me?": She addressed her talk to the Lord, although it was the Spirit in the form of a wellmade man who was talking to her. It was based on the earlier explained reality that the talk of the angels and Spirit is in fact the talk of Allah. She knew that it was God who was talking to her although the talk occurred through the agency of the Spirit or the angels. That is why she expressed her perplexity to her Lord. Also, it is possible to look at this sentence as a cry for help. In that case, it will be a sentence in parenthesis, somewhat similar to the expression: he says: "Send me back, my Lord, send me back" (23:99). ([ )! He said: "Even so; Allah creates what He pleases when He has decreed a matter, He only says to it, 'Be', and it is:

We have described earlier the syntactic position of the word, "Even so". We have shown that, putting this reply by the side of the verse 19:21 (He said: "Even so; your Lord says: 'It is easy to Me: and that we may make him a sign to men and a mercy from Us; and it is a matter which has been decreed' "), it may be inferred that the word, "Even so", is a complete sentence, implying: Even so is the matter. That is, what you have been told is a matter which has been decreed; nothing can avert it. As for her astonishment, it could only be in place if the matter was beyond the power of Allah, or very difficult for Him to do. So far as His power is concerned, it is unlimited, He does whatever He pleases. And as for difficulty it is imaginable only where the matter depends on preliminaries and causes - the more numerous and more formidable the causes and preliminaries, the more difficult that matter. But Allah does not create, what He creates, with the help of the causes; "when He has decreed a matter, He only says to it, 'Be', and it is". It is thus evident that the word, "Even so", is a complete sentence meant to remove the perplexity of Maryam; the next sentence, "Allah creates what He pleases," aims at getting rid of the possible misunderstanding about Allah's power; and lastly the sentence, "when He has decreed a matter, He only says to it, 'Be', and it is," removes the delusion of difficulty and hardship. ([ )! "And He will teach him the Book and the Wisdom and the Torah and the Injil: The definite articles, in "the Book" and "the Wisdom", denote the genes of the Book and the Wisdom. The Book, as explained earlier refers to revelation which removes the people's differences. The Wisdom is the useful knowledge related to the belief and action. Now the Torah and the Injil themselves were books containing Wisdom. Yet, the Spirit or the angels mentioned them separately after the Book and the Wisdom. Sometimes a particular person or thing is mentioned after description of its genes, because that thing is important enough to deserve separate mention. The definite article in "the Book" is not for comprehensiveness. In other words, it does not say that 'Isa (a.s.) was taught all the book, all the revelation. Allah says: And when 'Isa came with clear arguments, he said: "I have come to you indeed with Wisdom, and so that I may make clear to you part of what you differ in; so fear Allah and obey me" (43:63). Note the word, "part of"; we have written about it earlier. When the Qur'an mentions the Torah, it refers to the revelation which Allah had

sent down to Musa (a.s.) inscribed on the tablets when he was on the Mount Sinai, as Allah describes in the ch. 7, i.e., "The Battlements". As for the books presently in the hands of the Jews, they themselves admit a big vacuum and void, a large gap, in its chain of narrators between the reigns of Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, and Cyrus, King of Persia. Nevertheless, the Qur'an confirms that the Torah which was with the Jews in the days of the Prophet (s.a.w.) was not altogether different from the original Torah - although it had been altered and interpolated to a great extent. The Qur'anic verses clearly show these facts. As for the Injil - and it means "good news" - the Qur'an says that it was a single book that was revealed to 'Isa (a.s.), it was therefore a revelation sent especially to him. Allah says: and He revealed the Torah and the Injil aforetime, a guidance for the people (3:3-4). But the present Gospels attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, were admittedly written and composed long after 'Isa (a.s.). The Qur'an also shows that the Law was only in the Torah; the Injil did not bring any new shari'ah, except that it abrogated some rules of the Torah. Allah says in the verses under discussion: "And a verifier of that which is before me of the Torah, and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you." Again He says: and We gave him the Injil in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Torah, and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil). And the people of the Injil should have judged by what Allah revealed in it... (5:46-41). It may be inferred from this verse that there were some affirmative rules too in the Injil. The Qur'an also shows that the Injil, like the Torah, contained the good news of the advent of the Prophet (s.a.w.), Allah says: Those who follow the Messenger Prophet, the ummi, whom they find written down with them in the Torah and the Injil (7:157). ([ )! "And (make him) a messenger to the Children of Israel: Evidently 'Isa (a.s.) was sent particularly to the Children of Israel; and the verses concerning Musa (a.s.) imply the same thing about him. But while writing on the subject of prophethood, under the verse: Mankind was but one people; so Allah sent the prophets... (2:213); we have explained that 'Isa (a.s.), like Musa (a.s.), was one of the ulu 'l-azm prophets, who were sent to the whole world. (volume 3, p. 212) This problem may be solved if you look at the difference between a messenger and

a prophet written there. It was mentioned that a prophet conveys to his people what is good for them in this world and the hereafter; and an apostle brings to them a special message which decides between the people with truth and finality - either providing them with eternal blissful life or bring to them destruction and perdition, as has been described in the words of Allah: And every nation had a messenger; so when their messenger came, the matter was decided between them with justice and they shall not be dealt with unjustly (10:47). In other words, a prophet is a man who is sent to explain the religion to the men, while a messenger is sent to convey a special message whose rejection brings destruction and perdition in its wake, and whose acceptance bestows eternity and bliss. (volume 3, p. 205)This idea gets strengthened if we ponder on the messages given by the messengers (like: Nuh, Hud, Salih, Shu'ayb and others, peace of Allah be on them) to their nations, and which are quoted in the Qur'an. This being the case, being a messenger to a particular nation does not necessarily mean that he was sent as prophet to them only. Possibly a messenger sent to a particular nation could have been appointed as prophet to that nation together with other people - as was the case with Musa and 'Isa (a.s.). We find in the Qur'an evidence in support of the above views. For Example, Musa (a.s.) was sent to Pharaoh, as Allah said to him: Go to Pharaoh, surely he has exceeded all limits (20:24); and the magicians of the Pharaoh's nation believed in Musa (a.s.); evidently their belief was accepted by Allah although they too were not from the Children of Israel, as Allah says: they said: "We believe in the Lord of Harun and Musa" (20:70). Likewise, the call to the Divine Religion was addressed to the whole nation of Pharaoh: And certainly We tried before them the people of Pharaoh, and there came to them a noble messenger (44:17). A similar phenomenon is seen about 'Isa (a.s.). Before the appearance of the Prophet (s.a.w.), there had entered into the religion of 'Isa a multitude of nonIsraelites, like the Romans, the Franks, the Austrians, the Prussians and the AngloSaxons in the West, and the tribe of Najran in the East. And when the Qur'an speaks about the Christians, it does not single out the Israelite Christians. When it says something for or against them, it covers all Christians - Israelites and nonIsraelites alike. ([ )! " 'That I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, that I create for you out of dust like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird with Allah's permission, and I heal the blind and the leper, and bring the dead ones

to life with Allah's permission: "al-Khalq" (= to create; to assemble the parts of a thing). This verse ascribes creation to someone other than Allah; the same idea is implied by the verse: so blessed be Allah, the best of the creators (23:14). al-Akmah (one who is born blind). ar-Raghib says that it is sometimes used for one who has lost his eyesight, i.e., as synonymous to blind. It is said: His eyes kamahat (lost their sight until they became white). al-Abras means one having al-bars (leprosy, a well-known skin disease). He said, "and bring the dead ones to life", using the plural. It proves, or at least hints, that he brought to life many dead persons. And he said, "with Allah's permission", to make it clear that these miraculous signs appearing on his hands were actually attributed to Allah, not that 'Isa (a.s.) had any independent power to do so. He went on repeating this phrase to put utmost emphasis on this aspect. There was a real danger of people believing him to be a god - because of these miracles. That is why he repeatedly added the proviso, "with Allah's permission", after every miracle which could confuse and mislead the people, like creation of bird, and bringing the dead to life. And it was because of this very reason that he ended his talk saying: Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore worship Him; this is the straight path. The verse, "that I create for you ...", apparently means that these miracles had actually happened on his hands; it was not just a talk, nor just a challenge. Had he wanted only to tell them that he had got that power - just to complete his argument against them - he would have added some proviso like, "if you ask for it", or "if you so desire". Moreover, the talk that Allah will have on the Day of Resurrection with 'Isa clearly shows that these miracles had actually happened: When Allah will say: "O 'ha son of Mary am! remember My favor on you and on your mother... and when you created out of clay a thing like the form of a bird by My permission, then you breathed into it and it became a bird by My permission, and you healed the blind and the leper by My permission; and when you brought forth the dead ones by My permission..." (5:110). Some people have said: Utmost that can be proved from these verses is that Allah

had given him this power, and that he mentioned that power when he argued with the people. Thus, he completed his proof against them, because he would have shown those miracles, if they had asked for them. But it does not prove that all or some of these miracles did actually happen. å2

Ô)! The explanation given by us and the Divine Speech on the Day of Resurrection make it abundantly clear that all these miracles did actually take place, and that it is absolutely wrong to cast any doubt on them. ([ )! " 'and I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses...: This is news of the unseen which is reserved for Allah and his messengers who knew it by Divine Revelation. It is another miracle, an information of the unseen which was beyond any doubt or confusion - man, after all, cannot have any doubt about what he has eaten or has stored in his house. This miracle does not have the proviso, "by permission of Allah", although no miracle can take place without Allah's permission. Allah Himself says: and it was not meet for a messenger that he should bring a sign except with Allah's permission (40: 78). The reason of this omission lies in the verb "inform". 'Isa (a.s.) was to give them those information; it would be a speech emanating from 'Isa (a.s.). In other words, it was 'Isa's action, and as such was not worthy of being attributed to Allah, in contrast to the preceding two signs, i.e., creation and bringing the dead to life, which are really the actions of Allah and cannot be attributed to anyone else except by His permission. Moreover, these two signs were not like giving those information. They had more potentiality of leading people astray, when compared to his informing them of what they ate and what they kept in store. Simple minded people can very easily accept the Godhead of a creator of birds and resurrector of dead, rather than the divinity of one who gives them the news of the unseen. Common people do not think that the knowledge of the unseen is exclusively reserved for Allah; they think that it is not so difficult an art and may be attained to by any magician through training and practice. That is why 'Isa (a.s.) found it necessary, when talking to them, to put the condition of Allah's permission, on the two signs, and not on this last one. The same is the case of healing; it was sufficient just to mention, as he did in the beginning, that it was "a sign from your Lord"; and especially when he was talking with the people who claimed to be believers. That is why he ended his talk with the words, most surely there is a sign in this for you, if you are believers, i.e.,

if you are truthful in your claim that you are a believer. ([ )! " 'And a verifier of that which is before me of the Torah, and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you: It is in conjunction with "and a messenger to the Children of Israel". Of course, this phrase is in the first person (i.e., spoken by 'Isa, a.s.) while the former is in the third person (i.e., spoken by the Spirit); but it makes no difference because the former, i.e., "and a messenger...", has been immediately explained by 'Isa (a.s.) in the following words: "That I have come to you with a sign from your Lord..."; and this has changed the mode from the third to the first person - and this makes the conjunction perfect. He came as a verifier of the Torah; he verified the Torah which was revealed before him and which he was taught by Allah, as the preceding verse says. In other words, he verified the original Torah which was given to Musi (a.s.). This phrase, therefore, does not show that he verified the Torah which was with the Jews in his time, nor does it imply that the Torah of his days was unaltered. The same applies to the verification of the Torah by our Prophet (s.a.w.). ([ )! "and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you: Allah had forbidden them some of the good things, as He says: Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them. .. (4:160). This talk shows that 'Isa (a.s.) had endorsed the laws of the Torah with exception of some tough rules prescribed for them in the Torah, which he abrogated. That is why it is said that the Injil does not contain a new shariah. The phrase, "and that I may allow you...", is in conjunction with, the phrase, "with a sign from your Lord"; the preposition, li (that) describes the purpose; the sentence therefore means: I have come to you for the purpose of abrogating some of the hard rules imposed on you in the Torah. ([ )! " 'and I have come to you with a sign from your Lord ...: Apparently, this is to make it clear that the following phrases, "therefore fear Allah and obey me", are based on his bringing a sign from Allah, and not on his allowing some of the forbidden things. It is to remove this possible misunderstanding that the phrase, "and I have come to you with a sign from your Lord", has been

repeated. ([ )! "'Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore worship Him...": 'Isa (a.s.) said it in order to cut off the excuse of those who were to believe in his divinity - either because he (a.s.) had detected such tendency in them or because he was informed through revelation of these future happenings. It was a sincere attempt to remove all chances of misunderstandings, as he had done when he added the proviso, "with Allah's permission", while talking about creating a bird and bringing the dead ones to life. But it appears from his talk on the Day of Judgment as quoted by the Qur'an in the verse 5:117 (I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: That worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. . .), that he had said it in pursuance of the order of Allah and His revelation. ([ )! But when 'Isa perceived unbelief on their part, he said: "Who are my helpers to Allah?": The narration leaves unsaid his life story from his conception to the early days of his mission, because its important milestones had already been mentioned in the good news given to Maryam. That is why this verse picks up the thread of narration from the point when 'Isa (a.s.), after announcing his mission and showing the aforesaid miracles, faced resistance from his people. It describes how he selected his disciples, how his people planned against him, and how Allah defeated their conspiracy by purifying him, taking him away to Himself and making him to ascend to Him. And thus the story ends. The narrative throws light on those aspects only which were immediately needed for clarifying the subject matter to the Christians of Najran, whose delegation was then at Medina for discussion and argument. That is why many other points of the story, mentioned in the Chapters of: 'The Women,' 'The Table,' 'The Prophets,' 'The Embellishment' and 'The Ranks,' have been omitted in this one. The use of the word, perception or sense, in connection with unbelief - although disbelief is a matter pertaining to heart - implies that their disbelief was so transparent that it could be perceived by external senses. It could alternatively mean that when they, because of their disbelief, planned to harm and kill him, he sensed it and in this way perceived their disbelief. The verse therefore means: When 'Isa perceived, i.e., felt, sensed and noticed the unbelief of the Children of Israel - whose name was mentioned in the good news given to Maryam - he said: "Who are my helpers to Allah?" He asked this question as he wanted to distinguish and set apart a selected group of his people who would be solely dedicated to truth; they would strengthen

the power of religion and form the nucleus around which the structure of religion would be built - they would be the centre from which the Divine Religion would spread. We find this phenomenon in every physical, social and other powers: When a party begins its activities, it finds it necessary to take for itself a core of dedicated cadre, on which it gets its strength. Otherwise, it could not pursue its activity and would become useless. In Islamic history, the same phenomenon is seen in the pledges of allegiance of the mountain pass and the tree. The Messenger of Allah's aim in the two pledges was to concentrate the full strength of Islam, reinforcing its power, in order that the Divine Mission could spread and succeed. Thus 'Isa (a.s.) became sure that his mission was not succeeding in the Children of Israel - in a major part of them - and that they were not ready to believe in him no matter what he did. He was afraid that if they succeeded in destroying his life, the mission would fail and the difficulties would increase. Therefore, he wanted to make arrangements as a safeguard against that eventuality. He sought help of a selected group in proceeding towards Allah. The disciples answered his call and thus were distinguished from among the whole nation by their belief. It paved the way to distinguish belief from disbelief, by making the faith victorious over faithlessness, spreading his mission and establishing proofs. Allah says: O you who believe! be helpers of Allah, as 'Isa son of Mary am said to (his) disciples: "Who are my helpers to Allah?" The disciples said: "We are helpers of Allah." So a party of the Children of Israel believed and another disbelieved: then we aided those who believed against their enemy, and they became uppermost (61:14). 'Isa (a.s.) qualified his question, "Who are my helpers", with the phrase, "to Allah". He did so to awaken their longing and arouse their eagerness to proceed towards Allah, to be near Him. And this was the real reason for asking this question. The same was the idea behind the question, Who is it that will lend to Allah, a goodly loan... (2:245). It is the preposition "to". in "my helpers to Allah", which implies the meaning of going or proceeding, etc. A similar connotation is found in the declaration of Ibrahim (a.s.) as quoted in the Qur'an: Surely I go to my Lord: He will guide me (37:99). Some commentators have said that "to" in the above sentence means "with"; the question according to them means: Who are my helpers with Allah? But there is no evidence to support this explanation. Moreover, it is against the manners of the Qur'an to count Allah in line with others. The Qur'an cannot count others as the helpers when it counts Allah as the Helper. Nor is it in conformity with the manners of 'Isa (a.s.) which shines so brightly everywhere in his narrative in the Qur'an. Furthermore, the reply of the disciples too does not support this

interpretation. In case this meaning were correct, the disciples should have said: 'We are your helpers with Allah.' (Think over it). ([ )! The disciples said: "We are helpers of Allah: We believe in Allah and be (our) witness that we are submitting ones: A man's "al-hawariyy" is the one exclusively attached to him. It is reportedly derived from al-hawr (intense whiteness; marked contrast between the white of the corona and the black of the iris). The Qur'an has not used this word except for the close companions of 'Isa (a.s.) The sentence: "We believe in Allah", is a sort of explanation of their former declaration, "We are helpers of Allah". This too supports the above exegesis that 'Isa's phrase, "my helpers to Allah", implies proceeding on the way leading to Allah, because true belief is the prescribed way. Was it their first entry into the circle of faith? Obviously not. The wordings used in verse 61:14 (... 'Isa son of Mary am said to [his] disciples: "Who are my helpers to Allah?" The disciples said: "We are helpers of Allah. " So a party of the Children of Israel believed. . .), show that it was a belief after belief. And there is nothing strange in it, as we have already explained that the iman and islam are of various ranks, one upon the other. Going a step further, look at the verse: And when I revealed to the disciples, saying, "Believe in Me and My messenger," they said: "We believe and be our witness that we are the submitting ones" (5:111). It clearly shows that this reply of theirs was based on a revelation from Allah; in other words, they were prophets. Therefore, the belief referred to in their reply was a belief after belief. Proceeding further, we find them saying: ...and be our witness that we are submitting ones. Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed and we follow the messenger; so write us down with those who bear witness. The islam or submission to which they have referred, is unconditional surrender and submission to all that Allah demands from them and desires for them. This too implies that it was not the initial belief, but a belief after belief, because such submission is not found except in the sincere believers; it is not within the reach of those who merely bear witness to the Oneness of God and the prophethood of the Prophet. We have earlier explained in detail that every stage of iman is preceded by a relevant stage of islam. Their words: "We believe in Allah and be (our) witness that we are submitting ones," also point to this very fact: They used the verb for belief (imply-

ing a new occurrence) and adjective for submission (implying a sort of permanence). The first stage of islam is submission and generally bearing witness to the basic of religion. This is followed by a heartfelt belief in the above testimony in principle. Then comes the second stage of islam and that is the sincere submission to the meaning of the said belief. When this stage comes, all possibilities are removed of anger or annoyance with what Allah and His messenger has ordered. In other words, the believer puts in practice the tenets of religion. It is followed by the second stage of iman. This is the stage when deeds become sincere and the attributes of servitude are deeply ingrained in all actions and activities. This is followed by the third stage of islam which means surrender to the love of Allah and to His will; such a Muslim does not love anything except because of Allah and does not want anything except for Allah; then nothing happens on his hands except that which Allah loves and desires, and the man's own love and desire are completely forgotten. It is followed by the third stage of [man, when this servile submission permeates all his actions and deeds. Keep in view this short description of the stages of islam and iman. Then ponder on the call of 'Isa (a.s.) as he said: "therefore fear Allah and obey me. Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore worship Him; this is the straight path". Note that he (a.s.) first told them to fear Allah and obey himself. And he gave the reason of that order, in these words, "Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord". That is, Allah is your Lord, O people of my nation, and He is also the Lord of His messenger whom He has sent to you. Therefore, it is obligatory for you to fear Him by believing in Him, and to obey me by following me. In short, you are obliged to worship and serve Him with piety and His fear, obeying His messenger, i.e., with belief and following. This much is clearly understood from his words. That is why the fear of Allah and obedience of the prophet have been changed to the phrase, "therefore worship Him"; He effected this change to make it clear that this order and this affair is attributed to Allah, and that attribution becomes crystal clear in the worship. Then he said that this worship is a straight path - it is a way that leads the walker to Allah. After issuing that call, he perceived their disbelief, and he felt that there was no ground for hoping that their general public would accept true faith. Therefore, he said: "Who are my helpers to Allah?" He was seeking helpers for proceeding on this straight path to which he had invited the people. That is the path of servitude the piety and obedience. The disciples answered his call accepting the same thing he had asked for. They said: "We are helpers of Allah." Then they proceeded to explain it in these words: "We believe in Allah and be (our) witness that we are submitting ones." The submission here refers to their obedience and following. It

was for this reason that when they humbly and beseechingly spoke to their Lord, telling Him what they had promised 'Isa (a.s.), they changed the word, submission, to the following; and expanded the circle of belief to cover all that was revealed by Allah. They said: "Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed and we follow the messenger." It means that they believed in all that Allah had revealed, and in what He had taught 'Isa son of Maryam of the Book and the Wisdom and the Torah and the Injil, and they followed the messenger in this matter. You will appreciate that it is among the highest ranks of belief, not its lower ones. The disciples did not say: We believe in Allah and we are submitting ones. Instead they asked 'Isa (a.s.) to be their witness regarding their submission and following. They did so in order that they should have a proof when they spoke to their Lord and said: "Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed and we follow the messenger." It was as though they said: Our Lord! This is our condition and Thy messenger is our witness for it. ([ )! "Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed and we follow the messenger; so write us down with those who bear witness": It is direct quotation of what the disciples said - without using an introductory phrase, like, 'They said.' This dramatic style of the Qur'an (as we have mentioned somewhere) puts the audience in a position where they seem to hear the words directly from the speakers - not through a narrator. They asked their Lord to write them down with those who bear witness. And they based this prayer on their Islam and Iman both. A messenger conveys his message when he explains what Allah has revealed to him - both in words and in practice. He teaches the tenets of religion and himself acts upon them. Those who shall bear witness that the messenger conveyed the Divine Message to his people shall do so by learning the message from the messenger and following him in the shari'ah. In this way, it will be seen that the messenger himself practices what he tells others to do - he does not ignore it nor does he transgress it. Apparently, this witnessing refers to their testimony that the messenger had truly conveyed the message, as Allah says in the verse: Most certainly then We will question those to whom (the messengers) were sent, and most certainly We will question the messengers (7:6). As for the witnessing mentioned in the verse 5:83 (And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you will see their eyes overflowing with tears on account of the truth that they recognize; they say:

"Our Lord! we believe, so write us down with the witnesses."), it refers to bearing witness for the truth of the messengership not for conveying the message. And Allah knows better. Another possible explanation: They had asked the messenger to be witness for their islam; thereafter they prayed to Allah to write them down with those who bear witness. Probably they wanted Allah to write them among those who shall bear witness for deeds, as appears from the prayer of Ibrahim and Isma'il (a. s.) quoted in the Qur'an: "Our Lord! and make us both submissive to Thee and (raise) from our offspring a group submitting to Thee, and show us our ways of devotion... (2:128). Refer for details to what we have written under that verse. ([ )! And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners: The planners were the Children of Israel, as appears from the preceding verse, "But when 'Isa perceived unbelief on their part ..." We have explained under the verse 2:26 (... but He does not cause to err by it [any] except the transgressors) what planning means when it is attributed to Allah. ([ )! And when Allah said: "O 'Isa! I am going to take you away completely: "at-Tawaffi" is to take something completely. It is for this reason that it is also used for death, because at the time of death Allah takes man's soul away from his body. See, for example, the following verses: ...Our messengers take him completely (6:61), i.e., cause him to die. And they say: "What! when we have become lost in the earth, shall we then indeed be in a new creation?"... Say: "The angel of death who is given charge of you shall take you completely (i.e., cause you to die), then to your Lord you shall be brought back" (32:10-11). Allah takes completely the souls at the time of their death, and those that die not during their sleep: then He withholds those on whom He has passed the decree of death and sends the others back till an appointed term... (39:42). Pondering on the last two verses you will see that the Qur'an has not used attawaffi in the meaning of death, rather the word gives the idea of taking and preserving. In other words, when at-tawaffi is used for death, it is not because it

means death; rather it is used to emphasize the connotation of taking and preserving, to show and establish that man's soul does not perish, is not destroyed by death - contrary to what ignorant people think; Allah keeps and preserves it until comes the time to return it to its body for resurrection. At other places where this sense is not involved, Allah uses the word al-mawt (death), and not at-tawaffi'. For example:And Muhammad is no more than a messenger, the messengers have already passed away before him: if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels? (3:144) ...it shall not be finished with them entirely so that they should die... (35:36). There are a lot of other verses of this type, not excepting some verses in 'Isa's story itself: For example, there are, 'Isa's words about himself: And peace be on me on the day I was born, and on the day I die, and on the day I am raised to life (19:33); and Allah's words about him: And there is not one of the people of the Book but most certainly shall believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he ('Isa) shall be a witness against them (4:159). It all shows that attawaffi does not necessarily mean death. This interpretation is also supported by the words of Allah refuting the claim of the Jews: And their saying: "Surely we killed the Messiah, 'Isa son of Mar yam, the messenger of Allah;" and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like 'Isa); and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture; and they killed him not for sure. Rather, Allah took him up to Himself; and Allah is Mighty, Wise. And there is not one of the people of the Book but most certainly shall believe in him before his death and on the Day of Resurrection he ('Isa) shall be a witness against them (4:157-159). The Jews claimed that they had killed the Messiah, 'Isa son of Maryam, and likewise the Christians think that the Jews had killed 'Isa son of Maryam by crucifixion, and that after he was crucified Allah raised him up from his grave to the heaven, as the Gospels say. But the Qur'anic verses, as you see, unequivocally refute the story of killing and crucifixion both. It is apparent from the Divine Words, And there is not one of the people of the Book..., that 'Isa (a.s.) is alive near Allah and that he will not die until all the people of the Book shall believe in him. Keeping all these factors in view, the word attawaffi, used in the verse under discussion, would only mean that Allah was to take

him away completely from among the Jews. Yet the verse does not say so clearly; it is only its apparent connotation. (We shall write in detail on this subject at the end of the fourth Chapter, 'The Women'.) ([ )! "and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve: "ar-Raf" (to raise, to cause to ascend) is opposite of al-wad' (to put down). attaharah (cleanliness, purity) is opposite of al-qadharah (dirtiness, impurity). We have already explained the meaning of cleanliness. The phrase, "cause you to ascend", is qualified by the word, "unto Me"; and it implies that the ascension was spiritual, rather than physical; because Allah has no place like the physical spaces in which a body or things related to body arrive, stay or settle down, and from which they depart or to which they come nearer. Accordingly, this phrase will have the same connotation as the words at the end of this very verse have: then to Me shall be your return. This interpretation will be strengthened if at-tawaffi is taken to mean "to cause to die"; because in that case, "to cause to ascend to Me" would imply raising his rank and taking him nearer to Allah. Its meaning will, then, be similar to the verse 3:169, wherein Allah says about those who are martyred in His way: they are alive near their Lord; and the verse 19:57, where He says about Idris (a.s.): And We raised him to a high station. Another interpretation: The ascension refers to his being raised alive with his body and soul together to the heaven; because the apparent meaning of the Qur'anic verses suggest that the heaven - i.e. the physical one - is the place of nearness to Allah, the venue from which the Divine favors and blessings are sent down, and where the honored angels live. Probably, we shall discuss the meaning of as-sama" (sky, heaven) somewhere else, Allah willing. Purification from the unbelievers, as it is preceded by ascension to Allah, implies spiritual, rather than physical purification. Accordingly, it means that Allah would keep him away from the unbelievers, protect him from mingling with them, and remove him from their society - the society that is polluted by their unbelief and rejection of truth. ([ )! "and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the Day of Resurrection: In this verse Allah gives a promise that He will surely make the followers of 'Isa (a.s.) prevail over his adversaries who disbelieved in his prophethood, and that this

predominance will continue up to the Day of Resurrection. This verse distinguishes the superior group from the inferior one, saying that the superior ones are those who follow 'Isa (a.s.) and the opposite group is that of the unbelievers - without mentioning that they were from the Children of Israel, or that they were the Jews who professed to follow the shari'ah of Musa (a.s.) or pointing to them in any other way. Of course, looking at the fact that his adversaries have been defined as unbelievers, it appears that "those who follow you" refers to the following in the way of truth, a following that is approved by Allah and which He is pleased with. Accordingly, his followers would be those Christians who did not deviate from his straight path before Islam came to abrogate 'Isa's religion: and after the advent of Islam it is the Muslims who are his followers - because only these two groups are his followers in the path of truth. If so, then the promised superiority would mean their superiority in their arguments and proofs, not their material domination or their rule over his adversaries. The meaning thus will be as follows: The proof of your followers, i.e., the above mentioned Christians and the Muslims, shall be victorious over the proof of those who disbelieve in you, i.e., the Jews, up to the Day of Resurrection. The above was the explanation given and chosen by the exegetes. But I think that the verse does not support this interpretation either explicitly or implicitly. Evidently the whole sentence, "I am going to take you away completely and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve, and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the Day of Resurrection," is news of what was to happen in the future: His being taken away, his ascension to Allah, his purification from disbelievers and the domination of his followers over unbelievers all was to happen sometimes after Allah had given him this news. Moreover, the words, "and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve," contain a promise and a good tiding, and good tiding always refer to some future event. And it is known that the proof of the 'Isa's followers is nothing but the proof of 'Isa himself. These are the very proofs which were mentioned in the good news given to Maryam. And those proofs had certainly gained ascendancy over those of the unbelievers, both when 'Isa (a.s.) was present before his ascension, as well as after his ascension. It may rather be said that before his ascension those proofs were more decisive and more convincing in face of his adversaries claims than they were after his ascension. This being the case, what is the meaning of a promise that his followers proofs would overcome those of his adversaries - in future? Again, why should this dominance be limited "to the Day of Resurrection" only? If a proof is victorious and convincing it should remain so for all times, without any limitation of time or day. Moreover, victory of a true

proof over false ones will be even more manifest on the Day of Resurrection, as the Qur'an informs us in connection of that Day's happenings. A suggestion: Perhaps predominance of proof means that it would be more popular, more widely accepted - people would heed more to it, would accept it more readily; in this way their number would increase, and their power be more formidable. å2

Ô)! Does it mean that his true followers would prevail over the disbelievers, would rule over them and overwhelm them with their power? But the fact is otherwise. It is no use saying that it may be a good news which would come true in distant future in the last days of the world, because the wordings of the verse do not allow such delay Or does it mean predominance in number that is, his followers - the followers of truth after 'Isa (a.s.) would be more numerous than the followers of falsehood? But reality belies it. The followers of falsity have always been in majority, and the people of truth always in minority, right from the time of 'Isa (a.s.) upto these days of ours - a long period of two millennia. Moreover, the wordings of the verse do not support this interpretation either. Look at the context; the verse gives 'Isa (a.s.) the good news that Allah's displeasure was to descend on the Jews, that they were to be overwhelmed by Divine Anger. In this background, the predominance of his followers conforms more with his followers' hold and dominance over his adversaries - either through convincing proofs or through rule and domination. But in no way does it point to the majority in number. Let us have a fresh look at this verse: It distinguishes the two groups with two verbs: "those who follow you", and "those who disbelieve". The verb shows that an action has taken or will take place within the framework of a time - past, present or future. The implication would differ if these phrases were changed to adjectives: "followers" and "disbelievers"; because adjectives show a more or less permanent attribute which transcends time limits, the said attribute is found in its related thing or person at all times. Suppose there is a group of people who do something good or bad, and the rest of the nation is pleased with it, even the coming generations agree with what their ancestors did, then this much ideological identity and psychological identification are enough to ascribe that action or thing to the whole nation. For example, the Qur'an admonishes the Jews and condemns them because of their ancestors' actions like hurting and slaying the prophets, their arrogance in face of the commands of Allah and His messengers, their alterations and interpolations in the Book of Allah and many other things like that.

In view of the above-mentioned two principles, "those who disbelieve" may be interpreted as the whole Jewish nation; and "those who follow you" may mean all the Christians because their early fathers had believed in and followed 'isa (a.s.) and it was a correct belief and true following - although Allah was not pleased with those among them who believed in the trinity before Islam, nor was He pleased with the whole nation when they continued to follow 'Isa (a.s.) even after the advent of Islam. The sentence therefore means that Allah was to make the Christians - whose ancestors had truly followed 'Isa (a.s.) - dominant over the Jews because they had disbelieved in 'Isa (a.s.) and had planned and conspired against him. The aim is to show that Allah's wrath has descended on the Jews, and His severe chastisement has engulfed their nation. (We have explained above that the early Christians had truly followed 'Isa [a.s.]; and therefore the whole Christian nation may be included in the phrase, "those who follow you".) Going further, we find the phraseology changed. Instead of saying "those who follow you", Allah says: "And as to those who believe and do good deeds ..." This too supports our interpretations that "those who follow you" covers all the Christians, irrespective of their present belief and behavior. It does not mean only the Muslims and those Christians who had correct belief and had truly followed 'Isa (a.s.) - in short it is not confined to those who will be saved in the hereafter. Otherwise, Allah would have continued the earlier mode of expression and said: And as to those who follow you, He will pay them fully their rewards. Another interpretation: "those who follow you" covers all the Christians and all the Muslims; and the verse foretells that up to the Day of Resurrection the Jews would always remain under the domination of those who believe that it is obligatory to follow 'Isa (a.s.) - and the basis of the explanation is the same as above. And it is the best of the interpretations written for this verse. ([ )! "then to Me shall be your return, so I will decide between you concerning that in which you differed: This talk is addressed jointly to 'Isa (a.s.) and those who followed him and those who disbelieved in him. It gives their ultimate result on the Day of Resurrection. And with this verse the story of 'Isa (a.s.) comes to its end - from the time Maryam got the good news to the end of his earthly life.

([ )! "Then as to those who disbelieve, I will chastise them with severe chastisement in this world and the hereafter,...": Apparently, it branches out from the phrase, "so I will decide between you"; it gives detail of that preceding general statement, describing the Divine Judgment on the Day of Resurrection - severe chastisement for the Jews who disbelieve, and full reward for the believers. But the phrase "in this world" shows that the verse branches out from two preceding sentences: "and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve..."; "Then to Me shall be your return ..." Thus, the verse says that as a result of that "making" and that "returning", the disbelievers shall be severely punished in this world on the hands of those whom Allah has made dominant above them, and in the hereafter with the Fire, and they shall have no helpers. It is another proof to show that in the preceding verse, making dominant means domination through power and rule, not through proofs. The sentence "and they shall have no helpers" proves that they will not be able to avail of any intercession which could protect them from the chastisement. It is a firm decree which cannot change. ([ )! And as to those who believe and do good deeds. He will pay them fully their rewards...: It is an attractive promise of good reward for those who followed 'Isa (a.s.). But, as mentioned above, the phrase "those who follow you" could be applied to the whole nation even when only a few of them actually followed him. Application of a name is one thing and actually having that attribute personally is something else. Good result and lovely reward is given only to him who actually has that attribute - not to him who is merely included in nomenclature. Allah says: Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabaeans, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve (2:62). This then is the reward of those who believed and did good deeds from among those who followed 'Isa (a.s.); Allah will pay them fully their reward. The other group from those followers shall get no reward. Allah has pointed to this fact at the end of the verse: and Allah does not love the unjust.

It is now clear why this verse - a verse of mercy and paradise - has ended with the phrase "and Allah does not love the unjust". Otherwise, such verses usually end with Divine Names of mercy and forgiveness, or on praise of those for whom the verse is revealed. For example: And Allah has promised good to all; and Allah is aware of what you do (57:10). If you lend to Allah a goodly loan, He will double it for you and forgive you; and Allah is grateful, forbearing (64:17). ... and whoever believes in Allah and does good, He will remove from him his evil and cause him to enter gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide therein for ever: that is the great achievement (64:9). Then as to those who believed and did good, their Lord will make them enter into His mercy; that is the manifest achievement (45:30). We may go on quoting such examples from the Qur'an. However, it is now clear that the phrase "and Allah does not love the unjust" describes the other group from among those who claim to follow 'Isa (a.s.) but are not true believers, nor do they do good deeds. ([ )! This we recite to you of the signs and the wise reminder: It indicates the end of the story. The "wise reminder" is the Qur'an; it reminds one of Allah and is firm and wise in its verses and descriptions; falsehood cannot enter it, nor can non-serious talk pollute it. ([ )! Surely the likeness of 'Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be," and he was: It is the summary of the necessary points described in detail in preceding verses. Such summing up after detailed description - especially in arguments and discussions - is a beauty of style. The verses were revealed for arguments with the delegation of the Christians of Najran. It was proper to sum up the basic point of 'Isa's creation - after giving the story in detail - to show that the particular circumstances of his birth do not prove anything except that he was a created man like Adam (peace be on them both). Therefore, it is not permissible to say about him more than that which is said about Adam (a.s.) - that is, he was a man whom Allah created without the agency of a father.

The verse therefore means: The condition of 'Isa (a.s.) in the eyes of Allah - as Allah knows how He had created 'Isa - is only that the manner of his creation resembles that of Adam's creation. How was Adam created? Allah gathered various portions of earth and said to him, "Be", and he became a human being without any father. This verse actually contains two independent proofs, either is sufficient to refute the idea of 'Isa's divinity. First: 'Isa is a creature created by Allah - as Allah knows, and He is never confused in His knowledge. He created him a man. albeit without a father. And such a person is a servant of Allah, not a god. Second: 'Isa's creation is not greater than that of Adam. If 'Isa's unusual creation may in any way justify the belief in his godhead, then Adam's creation will justify the same belief. But no Christian says that Adam was god. Therefore, they should not have such belief about 'Isa (a.s.). After all. both cases are the same. The verse shows that 'Isa's creation, like that of Adam, was physical and of this world, although it happened against the usual manner of conception, because usually a child is conceived through the agency of a father. Apparently, fa-yakun (he is) is used here to describe a past event - that is why we have translated it as "and he was". The phrase, "then said to him, 'Be', and he was", shows instant, not gradual creation, but we know that both Adam and 'Isa had undergone a gradual process of creation. The fact is that there is no contradiction in these two aspects - because condition changes with the change of context. All things, whether they come into being gradually or instantly, are created by Allah, brought into being by His command, i.e., by the word, "Be", as He says: His command, when He intends anything, is only that He says to it, "Be", and it is (36:82). Many of these things, come into existence gradually - when they are seen in the framework of their gradual causes. But when they are seen in relation to Allah, then there is no graduality in their existence, no gap between the command, "Be", and their "being"; Allah says: And Our command is but one, as the twinkling of an eye (54:50). We shall explain it in detail in a more appropriate place, Allah willing. The main idea behind the statement, "then said to him, 'Be', and he was", is as follows: Allah is not dependent on causes when He creates a thing. Things which

He intends to create have equal relation with Him. If they were related to Him through causes, their conditions could have differed one with another, some would have looked possible, others impossible; one would have been easy, the other difficult; one nearer, another far away - all depending on the conditions of the relevant causes. But Allah does not need any cause to bring about an effect; whatever He intends, He says to it, "Be", and it comes into being. ([ )! The truth is from your Lord, so be not of the doubters: It emphasizes the meaning of the preceding verse which was itself emphasized by the use of the particle "surely". It serves the same purpose as the verse, "This We recite to you of the signs and the wise reminder", revealed at the end of the detailed story. It was to set the Prophet's mind at rest that he was on truth,, and to strengthen him in the argument. The sentence, "The truth is from your Lord", is one of the finest expressions of the Qur'an. It uses the preposition, "from", which shows beginning point. The truth starts from your Lord. If you were to change it to some other particle, e.g., "with", saying, the truth is with your Lord, it would give a hint of polytheism; and would actually show God as helpless, in need of that truth. The true maxims and the propositions showing real and unalterable facts are selfevident and impossible to change; for example, four is an even number; one is half of two; and so on. Man finds out these self-evident truths from the really existing things; and existence - all of it - is from Allah. Therefore, the truth - all of it - is from Him. That is why Allah is not questioned concerning what He does and men are questioned. An action of a creature, if it is correct and right, accompanies the truth, but the action of Allah is existence itself, and therefore, truth itself.  $  The Imam (a.s.) said about the words of Allah, O Maryam! surely Allah has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of the worlds: "(Allah) chose her twice: As for the first, He chose her, i.e.. selected her: and as for the second, .she conceived without a husband; in this way, He made her excel over the women of the worlds." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) This is the commentary of 'Ali ibn al-Qummi himself and not the saying of the Imam (tr.) Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said about this verse: "It means that He selected you for the progeny of the prophets, and purified you from unchastity. and chose you for the

birth of 'Isa (a.s.) without a husband." (Majma'u l-bayan) 
 ! The saying of the Imam: "He selected you for the progeny of the prophets", means that He selected you to be a good offspring worthy of being related to the prophets. The phrase, "and purified you from unchastity", means that He gave you protection from unchastity; this is the best explanation of the Qur'anic words, because she had given birth to 'Isa (a.s.) without a husband. Thus, the tradition describes some concomitants of her selection and purification. The two traditions are not in conflict with each other, as may be seen manifestly. And we have explained that the verse implies this meaning. It has been narrated by Ahmad, at-Tirmidhi (and he said that it is correct), Ibnu 'lMundhir, Ibn Habban. and al-Hakim from Anas, that he said: "Verily the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: "Sufficient are in excellence from among the women of the worlds, Maryam bint Tmran, and Khadijah bint Khuwaylid, and Fatimah bint Muhammad (s.a.w.) and Asiyah wife of Pharaoh!" (ad-Durru 'lmanthur) as-Suyutl has said that Ibn Abi Shavbah has narrated it from al-Hasan without connecting the chain of narrators with the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.). al-Hakim has narrated from Ibn 'Abbas (and has said that it is correct), that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'The most excellent of the women of the worlds are Khadijah, and Fatimah, and Maryam, and Asiyah wife of Pharaoh.'" (ibid.) Ibn Marduwayh narrates from al-Hasan that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Verily, Allah chose four (women) over the women of the worlds: Asiyah bint Muzahim, and Maryam bint 'Imran, and Khadijah bint Khuwaylid. and Fatimah bint Muhammad (s.a.w.).'" (ibid) Ibn Abi Shaybah and Ibn Jarir have narrated from Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her!) that she said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said to me: "You are the chief of the women of the people of the Garden, (and) not Maryam, The Virgin." (ibid.) Ibn 'Asakir has narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'The chief of the women of the people of the Garden are Maryam bint 'Imran, then Fatimah, then Khadijah, then Asiyah wife of Pharaoh.'" (ibid.)

Ibn 'Asakir has narrated through the chain of Muqatil from ad-Dahhak from Ibn 'Abbas from the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he said: "Four women are the chiefs of the worlds: Maryam bint 'Imran, and Asiyah bint Muzahim. and Khadijah bint Khuwaylid, and Fatimah bint Muhammad (s.a.w.); and the most excellent of them in the world is Fatimah." (ibid.) Ibn Abi Shaybah narrates from 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn Abi Lay la that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Fatimah is the chief of the women of the worlds after Maryam bint 'Imran, and Asiyah wife of the Pharaoh, and Khadijah bint Khuwaylid.'" (ibid.) as-Saduq narrates through his chains from 'IkrLnah from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) drew four lines, then said: 'The best of the women of the Garden are Maryam bint Tmran, and Khadijah bint Khuwaylid, and Fatimah bint Muhammad, and Asiyah bint Muzahim, wife of the Pharaoh.'" (alKhisal) Also, he narrates through his chains from Abu 'l-Hasan al-Awwal (a.s.) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Verily Allah, the Mighty, the Great, has selected four from among the women: Maryam, and Asiyah, and Khadijah, and Fatimah ...'" (ibid) 
 ! There are numerous traditions of nearly the same meaning, narrated by both sects. The fact that these four are the chiefs of the women does not preclude the difference in excellence as amongst themselves, as may be seen in the sixth tradition quoted from ad-Durru 'l-manthur, as well as other traditions. And a similar discourse was written under the verse: Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh... (3:33).   $
! The verse talks about selection and choosing, while the above traditions describe their supremacy. There is a difference between selection and supremacy; the latter being a degree of the former's perfection. al-Baqir (a.s.) said explaining the words of Allah: ...when they cast their pens (to decide) which of them should have Maryam in his charge: "They were drawing the lot about her, when she was orphaned of her father." (al-'Ayyashi) The Imam (a.s.) said about the verse: And when the angels said: 'O Maryam! surely Allah has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of

the worlds': "(Allah) chose her twice: As for the first, He chose her, i.e., selected her, and as for the second, she conceived without a husband; in this way He made her excel over the women of the worlds. "... Then Allah said to His Prophet: 'This is of the tidings of the unseen which We reveal to you, (O Muhammad; and you were not with them when they cast their pens (to decide) which of them should have Maryam in his charge, and you were not with them when they contended one with another.' When she was born, the family of 'Imran contended one with another about her; everyone said: 'We shall have her in our charge.' So they went out and cast lot among themselves with the arrows, and the arrow of Zakariyya came out (in the draw)..." (at-Tafsir, alQummi) 
 ! The Commentary written above supports this and the preceding tradition. There are numerous traditions giving the details regarding the good news given to Maryam, birth of 'Isa (a.s.), his mission and his miracles. But the general outline of his story, given in these verses is enough for the purpose of exegesis. That is why we have not written them here except the important ones. al-Baqir (a.s.) said about the words of Allah, and I inform you of what you eat...: " 'Isa (a.s.) used to say to the Children of Israel: I am the messenger of Allah to you, and I create for you out of dust like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird with Allah's permission, and I heal the blind and the leper (alAkmah means blind). They said: 'We do not think that what you do is anything but sorcery. Show us therefore a sign by which we may know that you are truthful.' He said: 'Do you think that you would know I was truthful if I informed you of what you eat and what you store in your houses, i.e., what you had eaten before you came out of your houses and what you had stored at night?' They said: 'Yes.' So he used to tell them: 'You ate this and this.' Some of them confirmed his words and became believers, and other rejected it. And there was for them a sign in it, if they were believers." (ibid.) 
 ! The style of the verse when describing the latter two signs differs from that used for the former ones, as we had pointed out in the Commentary. And this difference supports the theme of this tradition. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said explaining the verse, And a verifier of that which is before me of the Torah, and that I may allow you...: "There was (a distance of) four hundred years between Dawud and 'isa; and it was the shari'ah of isa that he was sent with monotheism and sincerity, and with what (Allah) had enjoined on Nuh, Ibrahim and Musa; and He revealed to him Injil; and took from him the covenant that was taken from (all other) prophets; and He ordained for him in the Book establishing

the prayer with religion, and enjoining good, and forbidding evil, and prohibiting unlawful, and allowing lawful: and revealed to him in Injil the sermons and the parables, and the panel code which did not have retaliation; it contained neither (detailed) rules of panel code nor the shares of inheritance; and He revealed to him alleviation of what was (ordained) for Musa in the Torah. And this is (the meaning of) the words Allah quoting what 'Isa said to the Children of Israel: and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you. And Isa ordered those who were with him, from among those who followed him of the believers, to believe in the shari'ah of the Torah and the Injil." (al-'Ayyashl) 
 ! This tradition is narrated in Qisasu 'l-an-biya", in detail, from as-Sadiq (a.s.), and there it says that there was a distance of four hundred and eighty years between Dawud and 'Isa (a.s,). But neither of these dates conforms with the history of the People of the Book. ar-Rida' (a.s.) was asked: "Why the disciples were called al-hawariyyun?" (companions, disciples; the root word denotes "intense whiteness"). He said: "According to (other) people, they were named al-hawariyyun, because they were washer-men, they cleansed the dirt from clothes by washing; and it is a name derived from al-hawr (to bleach, to whiten). But according to us, they were given this name because they were pure in their own selves and cleansed others from filth of sins by sermon and reminder." ('Uyunu 'l-akhbar) The same Imam said that they were twelve men, and the most excellent and most learned of them was Luke. (at-Tawhid) as-Sadiq (a.s.) said, inter alia, in a tradition: "Allah sent 'Isa son of Maryam; and entrusted to him light, knowledge and wisdom; and (gave him) all knowledge of the previous prophets, and added Injil to it. And He sent him to Baytu 'l-Maqdis, to the Children of Israel, (he came) calling them to his Book and his wisdom, and to the belief in Allah and His messenger. But most of them insisted on exceeding (the limits) and disbelieving. When they did not believe (in him), he prayed to his Lord, and adjured on Him (to punish them). So (Allah) transformed (some) satans from among them, in order to show them a sign, so that they might take lesson from it. But it did not increase in them except (their) transgression and disbelief. Then ('Isa) came to Baytu'l-Maqdis, and continued calling them to, and awakening their interest in, that which is with Allah, for thiry-three years, until the Jews got up in his pursuit. And they claimed that they tortured him and buried him in the earth alive. And some of them claimed that they killed and crucified him. But Allah was not to give them power over him; but it only appeared to them so; and they were

not able to torture and kill him or to kill and crucify him, because if they could do so it would have been a refutation of the words completely." (Kamalu 'd-din) 
 ! The words of the Imam: "Allah transformed (some) satans from among them," means that He transformed a group of evil persons from among them. "And continued calling them... for thirty-three years"; perhaps it refers to his span of life, as it is well-known that he lived on this earth for thirty-three years. 'Isa (a.s.) talked to them from his cradle upto his mature age. and he was prophet from his early childhood, as the Qur'an quotes him saying in the verses: But she pointed to him. They said: "How should we speak to one who is a child in the cradle'.'" He said: "Surely I am a servant of Allah; He has given me the Book and made me a prophet (19:29-30). "...it would have been a refutation of the words of Allah; but Allah caused him to ascend after taking him away completely". It is a paraphrase of the Qur'anic words: Rather Allah took him up to Himself (4:158); and, "I am going to take you away completely and cause you to ascend unto Me." As this verse mentions taking him away before causing him to ascend, the tradition infers that the events happened in the same sequence. al-Baqir (a.s.) said: " 'Isa (a.s.) made a promise to his companions, the night when Allah took him up to Himself. So they gathered near him in the evening, and they were twelve men; and he made them enter into a house. Then he came to them from a fountain that was in the corner of the house, shaking off water from his hair. Then he said: 'Verily Allah has revealed to me that. He is going to take me up just now to Himself and purify me from the Jews. Now who among you (agrees) that my features be put on him, in order that he is killed and crucified (in my place) and he shall be with me in my rank?' A young man among them said: 'I, O Spirit of Allah!' He said: 'So you are that.' Then 'Isa said to them: 'Why! surely there is one of you who will reject me twelve times before it is morning.' One of them asked: 'Am I that? O prophet of Allah!' 'Isa said to him: 'Do you feel it in your heart? Then be you that.' Thereafter 'Isa told them: 'Why! surely you will divide after me in three groups: two groups, forging lie against Allah, (shall be) in the Fire; and one group following Sham'un, being true to Allah, (shall be) in the Garden.' Then Allah caused 'Isa to ascend to Him from the corner of the house while they were looking at him." Then the Imam (a.s.) said: "The Jews came searching for 'Isa the same night. And they caught the man about whom 'Isa had said: 'Surely there is one of you who will reject me twelve times before it is morning'; and they took the young man who had

been given the features of 'Isa and he was killed and crucified. And he for whom 'Isa had said that he would reject him twelve times before it was morning, did (indeed) reject him." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) 
 ! The traditions of nearly the same meaning have been narrated from Ibn 'Abbas, Qatadah and others. Some people have said that the man who was made to look like 'Isa was the same person who had guided the Jews so that they could arrest and kill him. There are some other views regarding those details. But the Qur'an is silent on this subject; and we shall write on it in detail under the verse: ...and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so... (4:157). ar-Rida (a.s.) said: "There never was, in the eyes of the people, any uncertainty concerning the affairs of any prophet or Proof of Allah except the affair of 'Isa alone; because he was taken up from the earth alive, and he was given death between the heaven and the earth, then he was taken up to the heaven. And this is (the meaning of) the words of Allah, the Mighty, the Great: And when Allah said: '0 Isa! I am going to take you away completely and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you'; and (also) Allah says quoting the words of 'Isa (which he will say) on the Day of Resurrection: 'and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take me (away) completely, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things (5:117).'" (Uyunu 'l-akhbar) as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: " 'Isa son of Maryam was taken up with a woollen outer garment, spun by Maryam, and woven by Maryam, and sewn by Maryam. But when he reached the heaven, he was addressed: 'O 'Isa! Lay down your worldly embellishment.'" (al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! We shall explain the meaning of the above quoted two traditions, Allah willing, at the end of the Chapter 4, "The Women." It is written in ad-Durru 'l-manthur about the verse: Surely the likeness of 'Isa is with Allah...: 'Abd ibn Hamid and Ibn Jarir have narrated from Qatadah that he said: "We have been told that as-Sayyid and al-'Aqib, the two chiefs and bishops of the people of Najran, met the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.) and asked him about 'Isa, and said to him: 'Every human being has a father. Then why is it that 'Isa (a.s.) had no father?' Then Allah revealed this verse about him: Surely the likeness of 'Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam..." 
 ! The traditions of nearly the same meaning have been narrated

from as-Suddi, 'Ikrimah and others; al-Qummi also has narrated in his at-Tafsir, that the verse was revealed on the same occasion. %
2
 $   $$  Zurarah said: "I asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about the messenger, the prophet and al-muhaddath (the one spoken to). He said: 'The messenger is the one who sees the angel (who) brings the message of his Lord to him, and tells him: "(Allah) orders you so-and-so." And the messenger is a prophet with (the added rank of) messengership. And the prophet does not see the angel. something comes down to him - the news (comes) to his heart; and he becomes as though he be in a trance, and he sees (the vision) in his dream.' I said: 'Then how does he know that what he saw in his dream was truth?' He said: 'Allah makes it clear to him, so that he knows that it is truth; and he does not see the angel. And al-Muhaddath is the one who hears the voice and does not see (the speaker) in person.'" (Basa 'iru 'd-darajat) 
 ! It has been narrated from the same Imam in al-Kafi ;also The original word of the Imam at the end of the tradition is shahidan (translated here as "in person"); it literally means "at present"; also it may be a conditional phrase related to the subject: in other words, it may mean, "he does not see manifestly". Burayd enquired from al-Baqir and as-Sadiq (peace be on both of them), inter alia, in a tradition: "Then what is a messenger, a prophet and 'the one spoken to'?" He (the Imam) said: "A messenger is one to whom the angel appears and speaks; and a prophet is one who sees in his dream, and possibly the messengership and the prophethood is combined in a single person. The muhaddath is the one who hears the voice of the angel but does not see his person." Burayd said: "I said: 'May Allah make things right for you! How can he know that what has he seen in his dream is the truth and that it is from the angel?' He (the Imam) said: 'He is directed in the right way until he knows it (with certainty). Allah has surely set a seal on the (divine) books with your Book, and on the prophets with your prophet.'" (ibid.) Muhammad ibn Muslim said: "I mentioned al-Muhaddath in the presence of Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.). He said: 'Verily he hears the voice but does not see his person.' I

said: 'May Allah make things right for you! How does he know that it is the speech of the angel?' He said: 'He is given tranquility and dignity so that he knows that it is the angel (speaking).'" (ibid.) Abu Basil narrates from the same imam that he said: " 'All was the muhaddath, and Salman was the muhaddath." Abu Basir says: "I said: 'Then what is the sign of the muhaddath?' He said: 'The angel comes to him and scratches his heart (i.e., communicates to him) so-and-so.'" (ibid.) Humran ibn A'yan said: "Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said to me that 'Ali was the muhaddath. (When I told this to) our Companions, (they) said: 'You did nothing when you did not ask him who used to speak to him?' Then it happened that 1 (again) met Abu Ja'far; and I said to him: 'Did not you inform me that 'Ali was spoken to?' He said: 'Surely.' I said: 'Who used to speak to him?' He said: 'An angel.' 1 said: 'Then I may say that he was a prophet or a messenger?" He said: 'No. But you should say that his likeness was the likeness of the Companion of Sulayman and the Companion of Musa; and his likeness was the likeness of Dhu 'l-Qarnayn. Why! Have not you heard that 'All was asked about Dhu 'l-Qarnayn whether he was a prophet?' He said: 'No, But he was a servant who loved Allah, so (Allah) loved him; and he was sincere towards Allah, so (Allah) gave him good advice (i.e., guided him). So this also is like that.'" (ibid.) 
 ! There are numerous traditions narrated from the Imams of the Ahlulbayt about the meaning of 'the one spoken to' found in Basa'iru 'd-darajat, alKafi, Kanzu 'l-fawa'id, al-Ikhtisas and other books. This topic is found in the Sunni traditions too. As for the distinction given by these traditions, between a prophet, a messenger and 'the one spoken to', we have described the difference between a messenger and a prophet. Also it has been explained that through revelation Allah speaks to His servant, and it creates by itself firm and certain knowledge, and this knowledge does not require any other proof. Among all Divine messages, revelation has the same position as the self-evident truths have in human knowledge - man does not need any proof or logical deduction to know that it is truth.

As for the dream, you must have noted that the traditions explain it in another way; it is not the vision which one sees normally in sleep; rather it denotes something like a trance, in which the external senses of the prophet are suspended, and then he observes what Allah wants him to see - in the same way as we observe the things in our wakening. Then Allah strengthens his conviction by bestowing on him the certainty that what he has seen is from Allah and not a Satanic manipulation. As for being spoken to, it denotes hearing the voice of an angel. But he hears it by his heart, not by the ears, nor is it something like ideas or imaginations occurring in the mind, because idea or imagination is not called 'hearing the voice' - except as a far-fetched allegory. That is why the traditions describe it as hearing the voice and also as communicating to the heart; and yet name it as speech and talk. In short, the muhaddath hears the voice of the angel and listen to it with his 'hearing power' just as we hear and listen to normal talks and voices heard in this material world; but no other person can share in that talk or hear that voice, and therefore it is called a matter of heart. As for his firm knowledge that what he heard was an angel's talk and not a Satanic whispering, it happens by the help of Allah, as is explained in the above quoted tradition of Muhammad ibn Muslim: "He is given tranquility and dignity so that he knows that it is the angel (speaking)." The Satanic whispering surely a falsehood - may come in either of the two ways: It may appear in a form which the believer knows to be false, and then he naturally will know that it cannot be the talk of an angel because angels do not disobey Allah and do not go against His command. Or, it may appear wearing a mask of truth and fact - hoping to bring in its wake falsehood and lie. In such case, the Divine Light, which always leads the believer, exposes its reality. Allah says: Is he. who was dead then We raised him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people... (6:122) Apart from that, whispering and evil suggestions always create restlessness in soul and turmoil in heart, contrary to the remembrance of Allah and His speech which create gravity, and tranquility. Allah says: It is only the Satan that frightens his friends (3:175); now surely by Allah's remembrance are the hearts set at rest (13:28); Surely those who are pious, when a visitation from the Satan afflicts them they become mindful, then lo! they see (7:201).

When therefore the heart of the muhaddath is blessed with tranquility and dignity at the time when he hears the message, it conclusively proves that the message is from Allah. Conversely, restlessness and anxiety would show that it was a Satanic whispering, which brings precipitation, anxiety, anguish, etc., in its wake. The traditions say that the muhaddath hears the voice of the angel and does not see him. It looks at the reality of being spoken to, and gives its academic definition. But it does not mean that the muhaddath cannot see the angel. A man becomes almuhaddath (the one spoken to), as soon as he hears an angel's voice, it is not necessary for him to see the angel. And if the muhaddath sees the angel, it is not because he is spoken to; it is an added excellence. Many verses clearly show that some of those spoken to had seen the angels when they spoke to them. For example: Maryam: then We sent to her Our Spirit, and there appeared to her a well-made man. She said: "Surely I fly for refuge from you to the Beneficient Allah, if you are pious. " He said: "I am only a messenger of your Lord: That I should give you a pure boy" (19:17-19). Wife of Ibrahim: And certainly Our messengers came to Ibrahim with good news. They said: "Peace," "Peace," said he... And his wife was standing (by), so she laughed: then We gave her the good news of Ishaq and after Ishaq of (a son's son) Ya'qub. She said: "O woe to me! shall I bear a son (now) when I am an (extremely) old (woman) and this my husband an (extremely) old (man)? Most surely this is an amazing thing." They said: "Do you wonder at the decree of Allah? The mercy of Allah and His blessings be on you, 0 people of the house surely He is Praised, Glorious" (11:69-73). However, the above traditions may have got another explanation: The statement that the muhaddath does not see the angel, may mean that he does not see the reality of the angels, although he might see them in the form which they assume when appearing before him. After all, the above-quoted verses only show that Maryam and the wife of Ibrahim had seen the angels in human form - the assumed form.

Someone has suggested a third interpretation: The statement means that the angel does not bring to him any revelation of the shari'ah; he does not appear before him with a legislative order; and this distinction is meant to protect the dignity of the messengers and the prophets. But it is a far-fetched interpretation.

å
 
    

  Ύ˴ϧ˯Ύ˴δϧ˶ ϭ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ˯˴ Ύ˴Ϩ˸Α΃˴ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϧ˯˴ Ύ˴Ϩ˸Α΃˴ ω ˵ ˸Ϊϧ˴ ΍˸Ϯϟ˴Ύ˴όΗ˴ ˸ϞϘ˵ ϓ˴ Ϣ˶ ˸Ϡό˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϙ ˴ ˯˴ Ύ˴Ο Ύ˴ϣ Ϊ˶ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ϫ˶ ϴ˶ϓ Ϛ ˴ Ο ˴˷ Ύ˴Σ ˸ϦϤ˴ ϓ˴ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ ˸ϢϜ˵ δ ˴ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ Ύ˴Ϩδ ˴ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ˯Ύ˴δϧ˶ ϭ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ΑΫ˶ Ύ˴Ϝ˸ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Δ˴ Ϩ˴ ˸όϟ˴˷ Ϟ˴ό˸ΠϨ˴ ϓ˴ ˸ϞϬ˶ Θ˴ ˸Βϧ˴ {61} ΰ˵ ϳ˶ΰό˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϯ˴ Ϭ˵ ϟ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϫ˳ ϟ˴·˶ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ϖ ˵˷ Τ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ κ ˵ μ ˴ Ϙ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϯ˴ Ϭ˵ ˴ϟ ΍˴άϫ˴ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϣ˵ ϴ˶ϜΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍{62} Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶Ϊδ ˶ ˸ϔϤ˵ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ˲Ϣϴ˶Ϡϋ ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ Έ˶ϓ˴ ΍˸Ϯϟ˴˷Ϯ˴ Η˴ ϥ˶Έϓ˴ {63} {61} But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our near people and your near people, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars. {62} Most surely this is the true explanation, and there is no god but Allah; and most surely Allah-- He is the Mighty, the Wise. {63} But if they turn back, then surely Allah knows the mischief-makers. å
  ([ )! But whoever disputes with you in this after what has come to you of knowledge: "Fa" (translated here as "But") shows that the offer of 'al-mubahalah (earnest imprecation) branches out from the Divine teaching explained above so clearly and convincingly about 'Isa son of Maryam (a.s.), and ended so emphatically with the words, The truth is from your Lord, so be not of the doubters (60). "in this": The pronoun "this" refers either to 'Isa or to the "truth" mentioned in the preceding verse. The preceding verses were Divine Revelation in which there could be no doubt at all. Apart from that, they contained a clear logical proof, that is, the verse: Surely

the likeness of 'Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam... (59). Thus, the knowledge emanating from these verses is two-fold: one, because it is a Divine Speech: two, because of its rational proof. That is why this knowledge was not reserved for the Prophet only; others too could understand it. Even if someone did not believe it to be a Divine Revelation, he could not entertain any doubt about the truth of the subject discussed, because it contained rational argument which unbiased mind was bound to accept. Perhaps that is why Allah said: "after what has come to you of knowledge"; and did not say, after what We have explained to them. Another point: By reminding the Prophet of the Divine Knowledge, Allah wanted to assure him that he would overwhelm his adversaries by Allah's permission and that Allah would surely be on his side supporting him in that dispute. ([ )! then say: "Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our selves and your selves: The first person plural pronoun in "let us call" has a different import from the plural pronouns in "our sons" "our women" and "our selves". The former refers to the both parties of the argument, that is, the advocates of Islam and those of Christianity; while the latter refer to the side of Islam only. Accordingly, the meaning would be as follows: Let us both call the sons, the women and the 'selves'; we should call our sons, our women and our 'selves', and you should call your sons, your women and your 'selves'. The verse thus has shortened a long sentence in a meaningful and pleasant way. al-Mubahalah and al-mula'anah both have the same meaning: to curse each other. The actual parties of the argument were the Messenger of Allah on one side, and the Christians men on the other. But in the challenge for the imprecation, the call was extended to the sons and women, as it would show more convincingly that the claimant is perfectly sure of the truth of his claim, that he is absolutely right. Allah has put in man the love of his children and family, to such an extent that he puts himself in jeopardy to save them, plunges into perilous situations to keep them safe. And precisely for this reason, sons have been mentioned before women, because man loves his sons more than his women. An exegete has said: "The verse means, let us call your sons, your women and your selves; and let you call our sons, our women and our selves." But the explanation given by us above shows how absurd this meaning is. This meaning does not leave any justification for including the sons and the women in the earnest imprecation.

The detailed description of the invitees is a further proof that the caller (i.e., the Prophet) has absolute confidence in the truth of his claim. The import of the call is as follows: Let my whole group and your whole group enter into earnest imprecation, so that both groups pray earnestly to Allah and bring about the curse of Allah on the liars. In this way, the Divine curse and chastisement shall cover the sons, women and selves of the liars, and the enemies of truth shall be annihilated completely, they shall be rooted out without leaving any trace. Consequently, the truth of this speech does not depend on numerousness of the sons, the women or the 'selves'. The main brunt of the challenge is that one party that which is on wrong - should perish together with all its near and dear ones male and female, old and young. The exegetes unanimously say - and traditions and history support them - that when the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) came out for the imprecation, the only persons whom he brought with him were: 'Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn (peace be on them all!). Therefore, the only participants, on the side of Islam, were two 'selves', two sons and one woman - and yet the Prophet did fully comply with the Divine Command. Moreover, the meaning of a word in a verse is one thing, and it is quite another matter as for whom, or on how many people, could that word be applied in practice. We find numerous examples in the Qur'an where an order, a promise or a threat has been mentioned using plural words, but the circumstances of its revelation show that it was revealed for one person only. For example: (As for) those of you who put away their wives by likening their backs to the backs of their mothers, they are not their mothers (58:2); And (as for) those who put away their wives by likening their backs to the backs of their mothers then would recall what they said... (58:3); Allah has certainly heard the saying of those who said: "Surely Allah is poor and we are rich" (3:181); And they ask you as to what they should spend. Say: "Whatever can be spared" (2:219). There are a lot of verses which were revealed with plural words, although the events for which they were revealed concerned one person only. ([)! "then let us pray earnestly and bring about the curse of Allah on the liars": "al-Ibtihal" is derived from al-bahlah also pronounced al-buhlah (curse). This is its basic meaning; then it was commonly used for earnest prayer. The words, "and bring about the curse of Allah", are a sort of explanation for the

preceding verb, "then let us pray earnestly." The verse said, "and bring about the curse of Allah"; it did not say, and ask from Allah to curse. It was an indication that that prayer would surely be granted because at that juncture it was the only way to distinguish the truth from the falsehood. The word, "the liars", does not refer to all the liars found anywhere in the world, nor does it mean the genes of the liars. It refers to a particular group - that party of the argument (between the Prophet and the Christians) which was wrong in its claim. The Prophet was saying that Allah is One, there is no god besides Him, and that "Isa was His servant and messenger; while the Christians said that "Isa was God, and son of God, and that God had three persons. This observation leads us to another reality. All those who came out for the proposed imprecation were equal partners in their respective claim. Had the claim and the resulting imprecation been between the Prophet only and the Christians, one party (i.e., the Prophet) would demand singular words, and the other, plural. In such cases, it is necessary to use an expression which would cover singular and plural both. For example, the sentence under discussion could have been written like this: and bring about the curse of Allah on whosoever is lying. But it says: "... on the liars." It proves that indeed there were liars (in plural) in one party of the argument, either on the side of the Prophet or on the Christians' side. Consequently, all those who came out for the imprecation would be partners in the claim - because lie presupposes a claim. Therefore, those who were present on the side of the Prophet for the imprecation - i.e., 'Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn - were partners in the claim of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and his Mission. It is one of the most excellent virtues which were given exclusively to these familymembers of the Prophet (peace be on them all!). Another exclusive excellence: Allah gave them the names of 'selves', women and sons of the Prophet to the exclusion of all the men, women and children of the ummah. 
 ! You have mentioned above that the Qur'an uses, more often than not, plural words for singular; and even this verse says "our women" while it was only one lady, i.e., Fatimah (a.s.), who participated in the imprecation. Then why should the plural, "the liars", be not explained in the same way? [
! There is a vast difference between the two. There is a situation which may happen again and again, and there is another which is not expected to repeat itself. In the former situation, it is perfectly all right to use a plural in place of a singular, so that the rule or comment would cover even those who would be doing the same thing in future. But in the latter situation it is not allowed to use plural in place of

singular, because the event is not to repeat itself and no one else is expected to be included in that order or comment, etc. Look for example at the following verses: And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favour and to whom you had shown favour: Keep your wife to yourself and fear Allah... (33:37). The tongue of him whom they are inclined to blame (for it) is barbarous and this is clear Arabic tongue (16:103). O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, ...and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her - specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers;... (33:50). And the order for calling to the imprecation could not be extended beyond that particular situation, that is, the imprecation between the Prophet and the Christians. Therefore, when Allah uses a plural, there should be more than two in both parties which were called; otherwise, the use of the plural "the liars" would be out of place. 
 ! All the Christians who had come in the delegation of the Najran were a party to a claim - the claim that 'Isa was God, and the son of God, and one of the three persons of God. There was no discord among them in this matter, nor was there any difference in this claim between their men and women. Likewise, the claim on the side of the Prophet - that Allah is One, there is no god but He; and 'Isa son of Maryam was His servant and His messenger - was upheld by all the believers; it was not confined to any one of them - not even the Prophet. Therefore, it is out of place to say that those who were brought by the Prophet for the imprecation had any superiority or excellence over the rest of the believers. In fact, the Prophet had brought them just as examples of the sons, women and selves mentioned in the verse. Moreover, claim and mission are two different things. Those who participated in the imprecation were party to the claim. How is it that you have made them partners in the Mission too? [
! Had the Prophet brought them just as samples, it was necessary for him to bring at least two other men, three women and three sons - to comply with the demand of the plurals. Yet, he did not do so. It proves that only those who came with him were worthy of being called his sons, his women and his selves - to the

exclusion of all the others. Only on accepting this fact, we can say that he obeyed the Divine Order given in this verse. In other words, he could not find any one worthy of being included in these categories, except the one man, one woman and two sons whom he brought with him. There was no one else whom he could include in compliance with the plural words of the verse. In these circumstance, he fully complied with the order, although he could not bring three persons in any category. Moreover, if you ponder on the events, you will see that the only aim of the Christians of Najran in coming to Medina was to confront the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and to argue with him about "Isa son of Maryam. It was the Messenger of Allah who was claiming that 'Isa was a servant of Allah and His messenger. It was he who called others to believe in this claim, saying that it was based on Divine Revelation - the revelation which, he said, was sent to him. As for the rest of the believers, the Christians had nothing to do with them; nor did they argue with them. That is why Allah has used singular verbs and pronouns in the beginning of this verse, when referring to the Prophet: "But whoever disputes with you (literally: thee) in this after what has come to you (lit.: thee) of knowledge, then say (lit.: say thou)..." The same is the case of the verse: But if they dispute with you (lit.: thee), say (lit.: say thou): "I have submitted myself (entirely) to Allah and (so has) every one who follows me" (3:20). The above explanation shows that the Messenger of Allah (blessings of Allah be on him and his progeny!) had not brought those personalities as samples or examples of other believers - because the believers, per se, had no part in that disputation or imprecation; and there was no reason why they should be offered as targets for the curse and punishment which were to come to one of the two parties (the Christians and their adversary, i.e., the Prophet). The Prophet himself was a party of that argument and it was his obligation to offer himself as the target of the calamity which could come to him in case his claim was (God forbid!) wrong. Now, there was no reason why he should bring 'All, Fatimah, al-Hasan and alHusayn (a.s.) with him, if his claim were not dependent on them also, as it was on his own self. He had come with them for imprecation because they were the only sons, woman and self on whom his claim depended. Surely he had not brought them as samples or examples. It is now crystal clear that these personalities were his partners in his claim; the claim depended on them as it did on him. Furthermore, the Christians had come to argue with the Prophet not just because he

believed that 'Isa son of Maryam was the servant and messenger of Allah. They had taken upon themselves to come up to Medina because, in addition to claiming those things about 'Isa, he had called and invited them to believe likewise. This call, this mission, was the main reason why they had come in delegation for argument. Consequently, when the Prophet came to the appointed place of imprecation, bringing with him the four personalities, it was because of that claim and that call together. Thus these personalities were his partners in his mission, as they had been his partners in his claim. 
 ! We accept that the Prophet came with them because they were a part of him; and this attribute was not found in others, it was their exclusive excellence. But it appears - and normal practice confirms it - that when a man brings his near and dear ones, his women and children, in dangerous and frightening places, it shows that he is fully confident of his and their safety and comfort. His bringing them for imprecation proves only that he was absolutely sure of his truth - it does not show anything else. It is quite irrelevant to say that his action proves that they were his partners in the mission. [
! It is true that the beginning of the verse does not show more than that which has been mentioned above. But the end of the verse, that is, "on the liars", shows that there were surely liars (in plural) in one of the two sides of the argument and imprecation. Such expression could only be used if there were several people in each group, all making some claim - be it true or false. Therefore, those who were brought there by the Prophet were indeed his partners, both in the claim and in the mission, as was explained above. It is thus proved that those who were present there with the Prophet - all of them - were parties to the claim and the mission, together with the Prophet, and were his partners in it. 
 ! It follows, from what you have said, that they were his partners in the prophethood. [
! Not at all. We have explained earlier where we have discussed "Prophethood" that the Call and Propagation are not one and the same with the prophethood, although they are among its conditions and concomitants, and are parts of the divinely bestowed responsibilities which a prophet takes upon himself. Likewise, we have made it clear in the discourse about the Imamah that they are not identical with Imamah either, although they are in a way among its concomitants. ([ )! Most surely this is the true story, and there is no god but Allah:

The demonstrative pronoun "this" refers to the earlier mentioned stories of 'Isa (a.s.). There is a fine literary transposition in the sentence. What it says is as follows: Most surely the stories We have told you concerning 'Isa are the truth - not that which is told by the Christians. There is multiple emphasis in this sentence: Inna (= surely), and la (surely) followed by an additional pronoun huwa (= this) are all combined together to put utmost emphasis on this statement. It was done to cheer the Prophet and to encourage him and strengthen his heart for the coming imprecation, by augmenting his certainty and insight, and fortifying his confidence in the revelation which Allah had sent to him. It is further strengthened by additional emphasis contained in the next sentence which describes an accompanying reality: "and there is no god but Allah". This fact once again shows that the preceding stories are truth. ([ )! and most surely Allah is the Mighty, the Wise: The conjunctive "and" joins it to the first sentence of the verse. The same modes of emphasis have again been used here. It aims at further comforting the Prophet and strengthening his heart. It says that Allah is Mighty: He has power to help the side of the truth. And He is Wise: He cannot neglect or forget this aid, because ignorance or oblivion cannot reach Him. He is not like those false deities whom the enemies of the truth have taken for themselves besides Him. This explanation shows why these two Divine Names were chosen for concluding this verse. The sentence contains an exclusiveness: Only Allah is the Mighty and the Wise. ([ )! But if they turn back then surely Allah knows the mischief makers: What should be the actual aim of any argument or imprecation? The manifestation of the truth. If so, then it is unthinkable for a seeker of truth to turn back from it. If the Christians really wanted the truth to be manifested - and they knew that Allah was the Guardian of truth and that He would never allow it to be destroyed or invalidated - they would not turn back from the proposed imprecation. And if they did, it would show that their aim by all this argumentation and disputation was not the manifestation of truth; they only wanted apparent victory, preservation of the status they had and beliefs they followed, and continuation of the customs and traditions with which they were familiar. Their only goal was that which their desire, lust and greed had made to seem fair to them - and it was not the good life

which conforms with truth and happiness; it was but a semblance of life. In other words, they did not want reform and improvement; they wanted to make mischief in the world by corrupting the good life. Their turning back would mean that they were mischief-makers. The sentence uses a metaphorical device of putting the cause in place of the effect; it mentions their mischief-making instead of saying that they do not want the truth to be manifested. The second part of the sentence refers to the Divine Attribute of knowledge, and it has been emphasized with addition of inna (surely), as it says: "then surely Allah knows". It was to show that mischief-making and thwarting the manifestation of truth was ingrained in their psyche, and Allah knows that as a result of that deep rooted trait they will surely turn back from the imprecation. And so they did and by doing so proved the truth of the Divine Words.  $  as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "When the Christians of Najran came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) as a delegation - and their leaders were al-Ahtam, al-'Aqib, and asSayyid - and (the time of) their prayer came, they began to ring hand-bells and prayed. The Companions of the Messenger of Allah said: 'O Messenger of Allah! This in your Mosque?' He said: 'Let them be!' When they finished (their prayer) they came near the Messenger of Allah and said: 'To what do you call (us)?' He said: 'To bearing the witness that there is no god except Allah, and that I am the Messenger of Allah, and that 'Isa was a servant created (by Allah), he used to eat, drink and relieve himself.' They said: 'Then who was his father?' Thereupon came the revelation to the Messenger of Allah saying: 'Say to them, "What do you say about Adam? Was he a servant created (by Allah) who used to eat, drink, relieve himself and cohabit?" ' The Prophet put this question to them and they replied: 'Yes.' He said: 'Then who was his father?' and they became speechless. Then Allah sent down (the verse): Surely the likeness of 'Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust ...; and the verse: But whoever disputes with you in this after what has come to you of knowledge... and bring about the curse of Allah on the liars. "Then the Messenger of Allah said: '(If you do not agree with what I say) then enter into earnest imprecation with me; thus if I am truthful the curse will be sent down on you and if I am a liar it will be sent down on me.' They said: 'You have done justice.'

"So they made an appointment for the imprecation. When they returned to the place they were staying, their leaders as-Sayyid, al-'Aqib and al-Ahtam, said: 'If he comes for the imprecation against us with his nation (i.e., people unrelated to him), we shall enter into imprecation against him, because then he is not a prophet. But if he enters into imprecation against us with only the people of his House, we shall not enter into imprecation against him, because he will not put the People of his House forward unless he is truthful.' "When the morning came, they came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) - and there were with him the Leader of the Faithful ('Ali), Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn (a.s.). The Christians said: 'Who are these?' They were told: 'This is his cousin, alwasiy (executor of will) and son-in-law, and this is his daughter Fatimah, and these are his sons al-Hasan and al-Husayn.' So they were frightened and said to the Messenger of Allah: 'We shall pay you whatever you are pleased with, but excuse us from the imprecation.' Thereupon the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) made agreement with them on (the condition of) al-jizyah (tax); and they went away." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) ar-Rayyan ibn as-Salt narrates a talk of ar-Rida (a.s.) with al-Ma'mun and the scholars about the difference between the Prophet's progeny and the rest of the ummah and the former's superiority over the latter, in which he, inter alia, says: "The scholars said: 'Has Allah explained (this) selection in His Book?' ar-Rida (a.s.) said: 'He has explained the selection manifestly in twelve places - apart from the hidden (references).' Then he described those places of the Qur'an, during which he said: 'As for the third (verse, it was) when Allah distinguished His purified creatures and ordered His Prophet to earnestly pray with them for His curse on the liars, in the verse of imprecation. So Allah, the Mighty, the Great, said: But whoever disputes with you in this after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: "Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our selves and your selves. " ' The scholars said: 'our selves means the Prophet himself.' Abu 'l-Hasan (ar-Rida) said: 'You are mistaken. He only meant 'All ibn Abi Talib. And one of the proofs to show it is the saying of the Prophet (himself): "Banu Wali'ah should give up (their mischief): otherwise, I will surely send to them a man like my own self" - referring to 'Ali ibn Abi Talib. And He meant al-Hasan and al-Husayn with "sons", and meant Fatimah with "women". So this is an exclusive virtue in which no one can precede them, and an excellence in which no man can reach them, and an honor in which no creature can overtake them, because He made 'Ali's person like his (Prophet's) own self (person)...'" ('Uyunu 'l-akhbar)

as-Saduq narrates through his chain from al-Imam Musa ibn Ja'far (peace be on both of them!), that he had a talk with (Harun) ar-Rashid, during which ar-Rashid said to him: "How is it that you say, 'We are the offspring of the Prophet', while the Prophet did not leave any offspring? And progeny is through male, not through female; and you are the children of the daughter and her child is not (her father's) progeny." The Imam said: "I said to him: 'I ask you by the right of kinship and that of the grave (i.e., of the Prophet) and of him who is therein, that you should excuse me from (replying to) tins question.' He said: 'You shall tell me of your proof for it, O son of 'Ali, and you, O Musa! are their leader and their present Imam - thus I have been informed - and I am not going to excuse you from any question I put to you until you bring me a proof from the Book of Allah; because you claim, O children of 'Ali! that nothing of it (the Book) comes out from you - not even an alif or a waw - but you know its interpretation; and you advance the word of Allah, the Mighty, the Great, as your proof; We have not neglected anything in the Book [6:38], and you are not in need of the opinion of scholars and their analogy.' "Then I said; 'Do you permit me to reply?' He said: "Let me have.' I said (reciting the Qur'anic verse): 'I seek refuge of Allah from the cursed Satan. In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful... . and of his (Ibrahim's) offspring, Dawud and Sulayman and Ayyub and Yusuf and Musa and Harun; and thus do We reward those who do good, and Zakariyya and Yuhya and 'Isa and Ilyas: every one was of the good ones (6:84-5). Who was the father of 'Isa? O Leader of the Faithful!' He said: 'Isa had no father.' Then I said: 'Yet He (Allah) has joined him with the progenies of the Prophets through Maryam; and in the same way Allah, the High, has joined us with the progenies of the Prophet through our mother, Fatimah.' (Then I said): 'Should I tell you more? O Leader of the Faithful!' he said: 'Let me have.' I said: '(It is) the word of Allah, the Mighty, the Great: But whoever disputes with you in this after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: "Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our selves and your selves, then let us pray earnestly and bring about the curse of Allah on the liars." And nobody has ever claimed that the Prophet - on the occasion of the imprecation with the Christians - made anyone enter under the drape except 'Ali ibn Abl Talib, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn. So (this) was the interpretation of His Word: "our sons" meant al-Hasan and al-Husayn; and "our women", Fatimah; and "our selves", 'Ali ibn Abl Talib.'" (ibid) al-Ma'mun had asked ar-Rida (a. s.) several questions, one of which was as follows:

al-Ma'miin said: "What is the proof for the caliphate of your grandfather, 'Ali ibn Abi Talib? (The Imam) said: "The verse of our selves." He (al-Ma'mun) said: "If there were not our women." He (the Imam) said: "If there were not our sons." 
 ! The Imam argued on the strength of the word, our selves. He meant that Allah had made 'Ali (a.s.) like the person of the Prophet. (And who could have more right to succeed the Prophet than his own person?). al-Ma'mun said: "If there were not our women." He wanted to say that the reference to "women" indicates that the word "our selves" means "our men", and as such it would not show any excellence. The Imam replied: "If there were not our sons." That is, if "our selves" referred to the men, then why should the sons be mentioned separately? They would have been included in "our men". Hariz narrates from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "The Leader of the Faithful ('Ali, a.s.) was asked about his excellent virtues. He mentioned some of them. Then they said to him: 'Tell us (some) more.' So he said: 'Verily two Bishops of the Christians of Najran came to the Messenger of Allah, and talked (with him) on the subject of 'Isa (a.s.). Thereupon Allah revealed the verse: Surely the likeness of 'Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam... Then the Messenger of Allah entered (the house), and held the hands of 'Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn and Fatimah; then he came out, and raised his palms to the heaven and separated his fingers one from another; and called them (the Christians) to the imprecation.'" (Abu Abdillah, a.s.) then said: "And Abu Ja'far (a.s.) has said: 'And that is the way of imprecation; one intertwines his hand in one's (adversay's) hand raising them to the heaven.'" Thereupon when the two Bishops saw him, one of them said to his companion: "By God! If he is a prophet, we shall surely perish; and if he is not a prophet his (own) people would save us (from the trouble of confronting him)." So they gave up (the imprecation) and went back.'" (al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! This or nearly the same meaning has been narrated in other traditions through the ShI'i chains. All of them unanimously say that those who were brought by the Prophet for the imprecation were 'Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn only. ash-Shaykh at-Tusi has narrated it in his al-Amali, through his chains from 'Amir

ibn Sa'd from his father; and also through his chains from 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn Kathir from as-Sadiq (a.s.); and also through his chains from Salim ibn Abi 'l-Ja'd, raising it to Abu Dharr; and also through his chains from Rabi'ah ibn Najid from 'Ali (a.s.). al-Mufid has narrated it in his al-Ikhtisas, through his chains from Muhammad ibn az-Zibriqan from Musa ibn Ja'far (a.s.); and also from Muhammad ibn al-Munkadir from his father from his grandfather. al-'Ayyashl has narrated it in his at-Tafsir from Muhammad ibn Sa'id al-Urdunnl from Musa ibn Muhammad ibn ar-Rida (a.s.) from his brother; and also from Abu Ja'far al-Ahwal from as-Sadiq (a.s.); and also from al-Mundhir from 'Ali (a.s.); and also through his chains from 'Amir ibn Sa'd. al-Furat has narrated it in his at-Tafsir several traditions to this effect, which separately reach to Abu Ja'far (a.s.), Abu Rafi', ash-Sha'bi, 'Ali (a.s.), and Shahr ibn Hawshab and several other traditions to the same effect have been narrated in Rawdatu 'l-wa'izin, I'lamu 'l-wara, al-Khara'ij and other books. It has been narrated in at-Tafsir of ath-Tha'labi from Muja-hid and al-Kalbi: "When the Prophet called the Christians for the imprecation, they said: 'Let us return and think over it.' When they were alone, they asked al-'Aqib ² and he was a man of good judgment among them: 'O 'Abdu 'l-Masih! What is your opinion?' He said: 'By Allah! You are well-aware, O ye Christians! that Muhammad is a prophet, sent by Allah, and that he has brought to you the decisive word about your Companion ('Isa, a.s.). By Allah! whenever a nation has entered into imprecation with a prophet, their elders have perished and their youngsters have died. And if you do it, we shall surely perish; but, if you turn down, for the love of your religion and (want) to remain on what you have at present, then make peace with the man and go back to your towns.' "So they came to the Messenger of Allah; and he had come out in the morning carrying al-Husayn in his lap, holding the hand of al-Hasan, with Fatimah walking behind him and 'Ali was behind her; and he was saying: 'When I pray, you say "Amen" '. Then the Bishop of Najran said: 'O ye Christians! Surely I see the faces that if they ask Allah to remove a mountain from its place, He would surely remove it. Therefore, do not do imprecation, otherwise you will perish, and there will not remain any Christian on the face of the earth, up to the Day of Resurrection.'

"Then they said: 'O Abu 'l-Qasim! We have decided that we should not enter into imprecation against you; and that we leave you on your religion and we remain on our religion.' He said: 'Well, if you refuse imprecation, then accept Islam ² you will have (the rights) which (other) Muslims have, and on you shall be (the duties) which are on them.' But they refused. So (the Prophet) said: 'Then I shall fight you.' They said: 'We do not have strength to fight against the Arabs. But we shall make peace with you that you will not fight against us or frighten us; nor will you turn us away from our religion, on the condition that we shall pay to you every year two thousand robes - one thousand in Safar and one thousand in Rajab - and thirty coats of mail, (of) common (quality), made of iron.' So the Prophet made agreement with them on these conditions. And he said, "By Him in Whose hand is my soul! Surely destruction had almost descended on the people of Najran.' And if they had entered into imprecation they would have been transformed into monkeys and pigs, and there would have erupted in the valley a conflagration of fire engulfing them all: and surely Allah would have annihilated Najran and its inhabitants even the birds on treetops; and the year would not have ended for all the Christians but they would have perished." 
 ! The event, nearly in similar words, has also been narrated in Kitabu 'l-Maghazl from Ibn Ishaq. Also al-Maliki has narrated it in his al-Fusidu 'lmuhimmah from many exegetes; and al-Hammuyi has narrated nearly similar tradition from Ibn Jurayh. The agreement contains the phrase, "'one thousand in Safar;" it means alMuharram of Islamic calendar, which was the first month of the year in Arabia. In pre-Islamic days it was called "Safar" - the first two months were called Safar alAwwal and Safar ath-Thanl, Arabs in the days of ignorance used to postpone Safar al-Awwal. Then Islam confirmed the sacredness of the Safar al-Awwal: so it was called, "the sacred (al-Muharram), month of Allah;" then it became known as alMuharram. Amir son of Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas narrates from his father that he said: "Mu'awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan ordered Sa'd telling him, 'What prevents you from abusing Abu Turab (Ali, a.s.)? He said, 'As for this matter, as long as I remember three things which the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) has said (about 'Ali) I will never abuse him; if even one of them were for me, it would have been dearer to me than red livestocks.' I heard the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) saying, when he left him ('Ali) as his Deputy (when going) for one of his battles. 'Ali said to him. "O Messenger of Allah! Are you leaving me behind with women and children?' Thereupon, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said to him: 'Are you not pleased that you should have

the same position with me that Harun had with Musa - except that there is no prophet after me?' And I heard him saying on the day of Khaybar: 'Most surely tomorrow I will give the standard (of army) to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger, and whom Allah and His Messenger do love.' (Sa'd) said: 'So we held our heads high (hoping to catch the eye of the Prophet). But he said: 'Call Ali to me.' So he was brought (before him), sore-eyed; and (the Prophet) put (his) saliva in his eyes (and he was cured); and gave the standard to him. And Allah conquered (Khaybar) on his hand. And when this verse was revealed: ...then say: "Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our selves and your selves, then let us pray earnestly...", the Messenger of Allah called 'Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, and said: 'O Allah! These are the People of my House.' "(as-Sahih, Muslim) 
 ! This tradition has been narrated by at-Tirmidhi in his as-Sahih, Abu'l-Mu'ayyad al-Muwaffaq ibn Ahmad in his Kitab Fada'il 'Ali, Abu Nu'aym in his Hilyatu 'l-awliya' (from the same narrator as above), and al-Hammuyi in his Fard'idu 's-simtayn. Abu Nu'aym narrates through his chains from Amir ibn Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas from his father that he said: "When this verse was revealed, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) called 'Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn and said: 'O Allah! These are the People of my House." (Hilyatu 'l-awliya') Also he narrates in the same book through his chains from ash-Sha'bi from Jabir that he said: "al-'Aqib and at-Tayyib came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and he invited them to Islam. They said: 'We are (already) Muslims, O Muhammad! He said: 'You tell a lie. If you wish, I would tell you what prevents you from (accepting) Islam.' They said: 'Then let us have.' He said: 'The love of the cross, drinking liquor, and eating the flesh of pig.' Jabir further said: "Then the Prophet invited them to imprecation, and they promised him to come to him in the morning. When the morning came, the Messenger of Allah held the hands of 'Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn and Fatimah. Then he sent (someone) to them. But they refused to accept his call (for imprecation); instead they acknowledged to him (his sovereignty). Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'By Him Who has sent me with truth! Had they done (the imprecation) the valley would have rained fire on them.'" Jabir said: "About them was revealed the verse: ...let us call our sons and your sons... Jabir further said "our selves refers to the Messenger of Allah and 'Ali; and our sons to al-Hasan and al-Husayn; and our women to Fatimah." 
 ! This tradition has been narrated by Ibn al-Maghazili in his al-

Manaqib through his chains from the same ash-Sha'bi from Jabir; by al-Hammuyl in his Fard'idu 's-simtayn, through his chains from the same narrator; by al-Maliki in his al-Fusulu 'l-muhimmah from the same; by Abu Dawud at-Tayalisi from the same; and by as-Suyuti in his ad-Durru 'l-manthur from al-Hakim (who has said that this tradition is correct), and from Ibn Marduwayh as well as Abu Nu'aym (in his Dala'ilu 'l-khayrat) - all from Jabir. Abu Nu'aym has narrated in his Dala'ilu 'l-khayrat through the chain of al-Kalbi from Abu Salih from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "Verily a delegation of the Christians of Najran came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and there were fourteen persons of their nobles. Among them were as-Sayyid (and he was the leader) and al-'Aqib, the second in rank and a man of good judgment among them." (Then he has described the event as given above.) (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) al-Bayhaqi has narrated in his Dala'ilu 'n-Nubuwwah through the chain of Salmah ibn 'Abd Yashu' from his father from his grandfather that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) wrote to the people of Najran, before the (chapter of) Ta Sin Sulayman (The Ant) was revealed: 'In the name of Allah, the God of Ibrahim and Ishaq and Ya'qub. From Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah to the Bishop of Najran and the people of Najran. If you accept Islam, then I extol before you Allah, the God of Ibrahim and Ishaq and Ya'qub, Now after (the praise of Allah), I call you to the worship of Allah leaving aside the worship of the servants (of Allah), and I invite you to (come under) the guardianship of Allah instead oi the guardianship of the servants. But if you refuse (it), then (you should pay) the headtax; and if you refuse (even this), then I declare war against you. And peace (be on you),' When the Bishop read the letter, he was shocked and extremely terrified. So he sent (someone) to call a man of Najran Shurahbil ibn Wada'ah by name; and gave him the letter of the Prophet and he read it. Then the Bishop said to him: 'What is your opinion?' Shurahbil said: 'You surely know the promise which Allah made to Ibrahim about the prophethood in the progeny of Isma'Ii. Therefore, how can one be sure that it is not this very man? I would not give any opinion regarding the prophethood. If it were an opinion about a worldly matter, I would have advised you about it and made efforts on your behalf.' Then the Bishop called the people of Najran one after another, but all said as Shurahbil had said. Thereupon, they decided to send Shurahbil ibn Wada'ah, '"Abdullah ibn Shurahbil and Jabbai ibn Fayd, so that they might bring them the (correct) news of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)

"So the delegation proceeded until they came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). And he asked them (questions) and they asked him, and this questioning between him and them continued, until they said to him: 'What do you say about Tsa son of Maryam'." The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said; 'Today, I do not have anything about him; therefore you stay (here), in order that 1 may tell you tomorrow morning what is to be said about Tsa.' Then Allah sent down this verse: Surely the likeness of 'ha is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust... and bring about the curse of Allah on the liars. "But they refused to agree to that (truth). Thus, when the next morning came after the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had given them that information, he proceeded for the imprecation to a place thick with trees that belonged to him, carrying al-Hasan and al-Husayn, and Fatimah was walking behind him; and he had many wives those days (but did not take any of them with him). And Shurahbil said to his two companions: 'Surely, I see a (serious) matter coming (to us). If this man is a prophet sent (by Allah) and we ventured to imprecate against him, there would not remain on the face of the earth any hair or claw of us (i.e., any cattle or bird belonging to us), but it will perish.' They said to him: 'What is your view?' He said: 'My opinion is that we should leave the judgment to him, because I see (in him) a man who will never exceed the proper limits in his decision.' They said: 'You may do as you like in this matter.' Thereupon, Shurahbil met the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and said: 'I have thought (of one thing) better than the imprecation against you.' He said: 'And what is it?' He said: '(We give you the authority) to decide (between us) this day up to the night and from the night to the (next) morning. Whatever you will decide will be binding on us.' "So the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) returned without doing imprecation, and made agreement with them on the head-tax." (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) Ibn Jarir has narrated from 'llba' ibn Ahmar al-Yashkuri that he said: "When the verse was revealed... then say: 'Let us call our sons and your sons ...', the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) sent (someone) to (call) 'Ali, Fatimah and their sons, al-Hasan and al-Husayn; and invited the Jews to enter into imprecation against them. Then a young Jew said: 'Woe unto you! Are you not familiar with (the story) of your brothers who were yesterday transformed into monkeys and pigs? Do not enter into (this) imprecation.' So they desisted (from it)." (ibid.) 
 ! This tradition supports the view that the pronoun "this" in the opening sentence, disputes with you in this, refers to "truth" in the preceding verse, The truth is from your Lord. In this way, the order of imprecation would cover

other matters too, besides the controversy about 'Isa son of Maryam. In that case, it would be another story after the events which took place with the delegation of Najran as narrated in numerous traditions which supports each other, and a large portion of which has been quoted above. Ibn Tawus has written in Sa'du 's-su'ud: "I saw in the book Ma nazala mina 'lQur'ani fi 'n-Nabiyyi wa Ahli baytih (by Muhammad ibn al-'Abbas ibn Marwan) that he has narrated the tradition of the imprecation through fifty-one chains from the Companions and others; and some of them are: al-Hasan ibn 'Ali (peace be on them both), 'Uthman ibn 'Affan, Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas, Bakr ibn Sammal, Talhah, az-Zubayr, 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn 'Awf, 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas, Abu Rafi' (slave of the Prophet), Jabir ibn 'Abdillah, al-Bara' ibn 'Azib and Anas ibn Malik." Likewise (Ibn Shahrashub) has narrated this tradition in al-Manaqib, from a number of narrators and exegetes. as-Suyuti has done the same in ad-Durru 'lmanthur. A very strange thing has been written by an exegete who said: "The traditions unanimously say that the Prophet selected 'Ali, Fatimah and their two sons for the imprecation; and they apply the word our women to Fatimah, and our selves to 'All only. The source of these traditions are the Shi'ahs, and their motive in this respect is well-known. They have tried as much as they could to propagate such traditions until it has spread among a vast number of the Sunnis too. "But those who forged these traditions did not succeed in properly fitting their interpretation on the verse. When an Arab says, 'our women' he never means his daughter - especially when he has wives too. Such thing is not known in their language. Even more far-fetched is the claim that 'our selves' means 'Ali. Moreover, the delegation of Najran - concerning whom the verse is said to be revealed - had not come to Medina with their women and children. "The only thing which the verse shows is that the Prophet was ordered to call the People of the Book (who were disputing with him about 'Isa) to gather all - men, women and children -together; and he was to gather the believers - men, women and children - together, in order that they might earnestly pray to Allah to curse the party which was in the wrong regarding its claim about 'Isa (a.s.). "Such thing would prove that the Prophet had strong conviction of the truth of his

claim and had utmost confidence in it. And likewise, the desistence of those who were challenged to imprecation - the Christians or other People of the Book would show that they had no confidence in their own claim and were disputing not for the purpose of ascertaining the truth; their belief was shaky and they had no clear proofs. How can a believer in Allah agree to gather such a group - consisting of the truthful ones and the liars - in one place to fix their attention to Allah asking for His curse, to pray to remove the liars from His mercy? Can anyone be more daring than such a person? Can anything be more mocking to the Divine Power and Majesty than this? "The Prophet and the believers had full confidence in the truth of what they believed about 'Isa (a.s.). It may be understood from the words of Allah, after what has come to you of knowledge; because knowledge in matters of belief means certainty only. "The words of Allah, let us call our sons and your sons ..., may be interpreted in either of the two ways: "First: Each group should call the other; you should call our sons and we should call your sons and likewise about the other two categories of women and selves. "Second: Each group should call his family. We, the Muslims, should call our sons, women and ourselves, and you should do likewise with your family. "There is no difficulty in either case in calling the 'selves'. The difficulty arises when this phrase is restricted to one person, as the Shi'ahs and their followers do." å2

Ô)! This is such a non-sense that no knowledgeable person would ever like to write it in academic books; and perhaps someone might venture to say that we have wrongly attributed it to such a renowned man! Yet, we have quoted it in full to show how low a man can sink in misapprehension and jaundiced views because of his bias and prejudice. He goes on demolishing what he had earlier built, and reconfirms what he had rejected before, without caring or even knowing what he was doing. Also, we wanted evil to be known to all, so that they could protect themselves from it. We may comment on this talk in two ways:1. To show that the verse proves utmost excellence and superiority of 'Ali (a.s.). But it is a subject more appropriate for the books of theology, and is not so much

related to our subject, that is, explanation of the meanings of the Qur'anic verses. 2. To review what the above exegete has written about the meaning of the verse of imprecation and concerning the traditions showing what had happened between the Prophet and the Christians of Najran. This comes within the purview of exegesis, and we shall deal with it here. You have already seen what the verse means. And the numerous traditions (which support each other), quoted by us, perfectly fit the meaning of the verse. If you ponder on what we have written earlier, you will see where and how his innovated "proof" has gone wrong, and at what points his blinkered vision has made him stumble. Here are some details: He says: "The source of these traditions are the Shi'ahs, and their motive in this respect is well-known. They have tried as much as they could to propagate such traditions until it has spread among a vast number of the Sunnis too." This he says after admitting that the traditions are unanimous! Would that I knew which traditions he speaks about. Does he mean the above-mentioned traditions which support and strengthen each other, which the scholars of traditions have unanimously accepted and narrated? They are not one, two or three; they are countless in number. The traditionalists have quoted them with one voice; the compilers of traditions have written them in their books, including Muslim and atTirmidhi in their collections of correct' traditions: and the historians have confirmed them by describing the events in a similar way. The exegetes of the Qur'an have unanimously-quoted and copied them, without expressing any doubt or leveling any objection against them - and there are among them stalwarts of traditions and history, like at-Taban, Abu 'l-Fida', Ibn Kathir and as-Suyuti etc. And who were those Shi'ahs who were the source of this story? Does he mean those companions who narrated it in the first place? Like Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas, Jabir ibn 'Abdillah, 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas and others? Or the disciples of the companions who took this tradition from them and conveyed it to others? Like Abu Salih, al-Kalbi, as-Suddi, ash-Sha'bi and others? Does he want to say that those companions and their disciples became Shi'ahs - just because they narrated a tradition which he does not like? It is these companions and disciples - together with other like them who are the final links in the chains of the narrators of the Prophet's traditions. Discard them, and you will be left neither with any tradition nor any biography of the Prophet. How can a Muslim - nay, even a non-Muslim researcher - aspire to know the details of the Prophet's message, if he rejects the traditions? How can he know the teachings and laws brought by the Messenger of

Allah? The Qur'an clearly upholds the authority of the sayings and actions of the Prophet; and declares that the religion is based on his life. Reject the authority of the traditions and you have lost the Qur'an as well: there will remain no trace of the Divine Book, nor will there be any fruit of this revelation. Or perhaps he thinks that the Shi'ahs have interpolated and surreptitiously inserted these traditions in the books of traditions and history? But then the problem, instead of going away, would rather increase and be more overwhelming: the tradition will lose its authority and the shari'ah will be nullified. He says: "They apply the word our women to Fatimah and our selves to 'Ali." Probably he wants to say that according to the Shi'ahs, the words our women and our selves literally mean only Fatimah and 'Ali respectively. Perhaps he got the idea from an earlier quoted tradition in which Jabir said: "Our selves refers to the Messenger of Allah and 'Ali;... and our women to Fatimah." But obviously he has not understood its meaning. The traditions do not say so. They only mean that because the Prophet when acting on the verse, did not bring (any other person for imprecation) except 'AH and Fatimah, it made it clear that she was the only one worthy of being included in the category our women, as he was the only one qualified for the category our selves; and likewise al-Hasan and al-Husayn were the only two for the category our sons. The words: sons, women and selves taken together meant the family. Therefore, these four were the family of the Messenger of Allah and his closest relatives, as we have seen in some traditions that he (s.a.w.) said after coming with them at the appointed place: "O Allah! These are the people of my house." The sentence implies: I did not find anyone whom I could call, except these four. That this is the correct explanation may be seen in the wording of some traditions which say: "our selves refers to the Messenger of Allah and 'Ali" It clearly shows that the tradition aims at describing who had come under which category - not at explaining the literal meaning of the words. He says: "But those who forged these traditions did not succeed in properly fitting their interpretation on the verse. When an Arab says our women he never means his daughter - especially when he has got wives too. Such thing is not known in their language. Even more far-fetched is the claim that our selves means 'Ali." First he has given an imaginary meaning to the traditions, then he uses it as an excuse to discard all those narrations - in spite of their numerousness, in spite of

their great number. Then he discredits its narrators and all those who have accepted them by accusing them of the crime of Shi'ism! Had he been a true seeker of knowledge, he should have studied the books of exegesis, and remembered the vast multitude of the masters of eloquence and authorities of rhetoric, since they have quoted and written these traditions in their books of exegesis and other subjects without any hesitation, without any objection. Look at the author of Tafsiru 'l-Kashshaf. He is a recognized authority on Arabic language, grammar and literature. He has often pronounced judgment on various recitations of the Qur'an showing why a certain recitation was not in keeping with the norms of language or usage. And see what he has to say about this verse: "And this verse contains a proof - unsurpassed in strength - of the excellence of the people of the mantle, peace be on them. And there is in it a clear proof of the truth of the prophethood of the Prophet, because nobody - either a supporter or an antagonist - has ever narrated that they (the Christians) answered that call (for imprecation)." How come that those giants of rhetoric and champions of literature could not realize that these traditions - in spite of their vast multitude and their repeated narrations in the books of traditions - accuse the Qur'an of using incorrect expression by employing a plural (women) for one woman only? Not, by my life! This exegete is in fact confused; he does not know the difference between the literal meaning of a word and its application. Obviously, his thinking goes like this: "Allah said to His Prophet, But whoever disputes with you in this after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: 'Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our selves and your selves..." Now if we admit that the disputers at that time were the delegates of Najran numbering according to some traditions, fourteen men; and that there were no women or children with them; and if after that we admit that when the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) went for the imprecation, he had with him only. 'All, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, then the phrase, whoever disputes with you, would literally mean the delegation of Najran; our women would mean one woman: our selves would mean one 'self; and your sons and your women would become words without meaning because there were neither women nor sons in that delegation!" I wonder why he forgot to add that it would also mean use of our sons (a plural, meaning at least three sons) for only two sons, because it is more repugnant than the use of plural for singular. Since post-classical period, people have been using plural in place of singular - although such use is not found in the classical Arabic,

except when done as a mark of respect. But the use of plural for dual is an unheard of thing - it has no justification at all. However, it was this trend of thought which led him to discard all these traditions, saying that they were forged. But he has completely misunderstood the talk. The fact is that an eloquent talk conforms with the situation which it is related to, and throws light on what in a given context is important to explain. Sometimes the talk is between two strangers, neither knowing the other's life condition. Then they use normal expressions which are applied in general talk. Suppose two groups are facing each other; one of them wants the other to know that their conflict is deeprooted, and that the whole tribe - men and women, elders and youngsters - shall continue the fight till the last. In such a situation, he will say: We shall fight you with our men, women and children. Now this sentence is based on the assumption that normally and naturally a tribe does have women and children. The statement aims at making it clear to the enemy that the speaker's tribe is one in its determination to fight against their adversary. On the other hand, if he were to say, 'We shall fight against you with our men, a woman and two sons', it would be a superfluous detail, uncalled for in this context unless there be some good reason for it in a particular situation. But when the talk is between friends who know each other's family, then it may be couched in general terms. For example, one may say while inviting the other to his home: We are at your service - we ourselves as well as our women and children. Or, he may wish to be more specific and say: All of us will be at your service the men, the daughter and the two children. In short, normal way of expression is one thing and its application on real facts is another matter. Sometimes they may coincide, at other times they may be different. If a man speaks in normal and general terms and then it appears that the real situation is different, he is not accused of telling a lie. This verse is based on the same principal. Accordingly the words... then say: "Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our selves and your selves...". means as follows: Tell them that you are coming with your closest relatives who are your partners in your claim and knowledge, and invite them to come with their closest relatives. Thus, the verse proceeds in the normal way assuming that the Messenger of Allah had in his family men, women and sons, and the Christian delegates had likewise men, women and sons in their families; it was a challenge couched in general and usual terms. But when the time

came to act on that challenge, it was found that the Prophet did not have any men, women and sons except one man, one woman and two sons, while his adversaries had no woman or son with them - there were only men in their group. But this difference in implementation did not falsify the challenge. That is why when the Prophet came out with one man, one woman and two sons, the Christians did not accuse him of lying or of not fulfilling the conditions; nor did they cover their refusal by saying that the Prophet had told them to bring their women and sons which they did not have with them at that time and therefore they were unable to enter into imprecation. Also, it was because of this that those who heard this story never imagined that it was a forgery. The above explanation also shows the absurdity of his assertion where he says: "Moreover, the delegation of Najran - concerning whom the verse is said to be revealed - had not come to Medina with their women and children." He says: "The only thing which the verse shows is that the Prophet was ordered to call the People of the Book (who were disputing with him about 'Isa) to gather all men, women and children - together: and he was to gather the believers - men, women and children together; in order that they might earnestly pray to Allah to curse the party which was in the wrong in its claim about 'Isa... How can a believer in Allah agree to gather such a group - consisting of the truthful ones and the liars in one place to fix their attention to Allah asking for His curse, to pray to remove the liars from His mercy? Can anyone be more daring than such a person? Can anything be more mocking to the Divine Power and Majesty than this?" In short, the verse invites both parties to gather together with their "selves", their women and their sons in one place and then to earnestly pray for Allah's curse on the liars. Now let us find out what is the meaning of this gathering which he talks about. Was it a call to gather together all the believers and all the Christians? But the believers at that time included all, or almost all, Arabs of the tribes of Rabi'ah and Mudar residing from Yemen and Hijaz to Iraq and beyond. And the Christians included those in Najran (then forming a part of Yemen), Syria and the regions around the Mediterranean sea; the Romans and the Franks, as well as the people of the Britain, Austria and other places. Such a vast multitude of people, scattered from the East to the West, must have exceeded millions upon millions, counting men, women and children all together. There can be no doubt whatsoever in the mind of a sane person that it was almost

impossible for all of them to gather in one place. Normal ways and means reject such a proposition altogether. If the Qur'an had offered this proposal then it had asked for an impossible. It would mean that the Prophet was offering a conditional proof for the authenticity of his claim - and the condition, on which it depended, was an impossible one! It would have given an excuse - a valid excuse - to the Christians not to accept his call of imprecation; in fact it would have been more damaging to his claim, rather than weakening their case. Or, does he mean that it was a call to gather from both groups only those who were present thereby - the believers of Medina and nearby places, and the Christians of Najran and the places in its vicinity? This alternative - although less absurd than the preceding one - was no less impossible. Who was capable that day of gathering all the residents of Medina and Najran and their neighboring places, not leaving a single woman and child out, in one place for the intended imprecation? Such proposal would have been an admission that the truth was impossible to prove, because the proof depended on an impossible condition. Or, was it a call covering only those who were actively engaged in the disputation and arguments? That is, the Prophet and the believers around him, and the delegation of the Christians of Najran. But then his own objection would boomerang: "Moreover, the delegation of Najran - concerning whom the verse is said to be revealed - had not come to Medina with their women and children." So the problem would not go away. Further he says: "The Prophet and the believers had full confidence in the truth of what they believed about 'Isa (a.s.). It may be understood from the words of Allah, after what has come to you of knowledge; because knowledge in matters of belief means certainty only." It is true that the knowledge, as used in this verse, means certainty. But would that I knew where does it say that the believers were sure of the truth of their belief concerning 'Isa? The verse does not speak about anyone except the Prophet in singular pronouns: But whoever disputes with you (lit. thee) in this after what has come to you (lit. thee) of knowledge, then say (lit. say thou). And there was no reason why the verse should have addressed anyone except the Prophet alone; the Christians' delegation had only one aim before their eyes - to dispute and argue with the Prophet. It was not their intention to meet the believers; they had not argued at all with the believers, nor had the believers spoken to them. If the verse shows at all that anyone other than the Prophet had attained knowledge

and certainty, it does so about those whom the Prophet had brought with himself for imprecation, as we have inferred from the words, and bring about the curse of Allah on the liars. On the other hand, the Qur'an shows that not all the believers had attained knowledge and certainty. For example: And most of them do not believe in Allah without associating others (with Him) (12:106). Here Allah announces their polytheism. How can polytheism co-exist with certainty? And when the hypocrites and those in whose heart was a disease began to say: "Allah and His Messenger did not promise us (victory) but only to deceive" (33:12). And those who believe say: "Why has not a chapter been revealed?" But when a decisive chapter is revealed, and fighting is mentioned therein you see those in whose hearts is a disease look to you with the look of one fainting because of death. Woe to them then!... Those it is whom Allah has cursed so He has made them deaf and blinded their eyes (47:20-23). The fact is that certainty was attained by only a few of the followers of the Prophet who had got clear sight. Allah says: But if they dispute with you, say: "I have submitted myself (entirely) to Allah and (so has) every one who follows me" (3:20). Say: "This is my way, I invite (you) unto Allah; with clear sight (which) land he who follows me (possess) (12:108). He says: "The words of Allah, let us call our sons and your sons . . ., may be interpreted in either of the two ways: First: Each group should call the others; you should call our sons and we should call your sons; and likewise about the other two categories of women and selves." You have already seen in the Commentary that this interpretation (which he gives as his first choice) is totally absurd and not in conformity with the wordings of the verse. So far as the call for imprecation was concerned, it would have sufficed to say: Come, let us earnestly pray and bring about the curse of Allah on the liars. Why then were the remaining phrases added: Let us call our sons and your sons

and our women and your women and our 'selves' and your 'selves'? These phrases were meant to bind each party to bring for the imprecation its dearest and preciousmost things, that is, the sons, the women and the selves. This challenge could be meaningful only if each party was to bring its own sons, women and selves. It would lose its meaning completely if it was interpreted as he says: You should call our sons, women and selves and we should call your sons, women and selves. Moreover, common sense rejects this interpretation. Why should the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) give the Christians power and authority over their sons and women? Because only after getting that power and authority could each party call the other's sons and women and bring them at the place of imprecation. Surely the aim could be achieved in a better way if each party called its own sons and women. Further, as we have shown above, this interpretation makes it necessary to add in the verse the idea of giving someone the power and authority over others. But how and on what ground can we do so? The truth is that this interpretation is absolutely wrong. Only the other interpretation is correct - that each party was to call its own family members. He says: "There is no difficulty in either case in calling the "selves'. The difficulty arises when this phrase is restricted to one person, as the Shi'ahs and their followers do." The difficulty, to which he refers, arises from the following objection: How can a man call himself? But this objection has nothing to do with either interpretation. It has been leveled against the explanation that our selves means the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) himself. Reportedly during one religious discussion, one group said that ourselves referred to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), not to 'Ali. The opposite party said that it would imply that he called himself, which is manifestly wrong. (See the second tradition, quoted from 'Uyunu 'l-akhbar.) It will be seen from the above that his claim that "the difficulty arises from the Shi'ahs' interpretation", is absolutely wrong. The Shi'ahs say that the word, our selves, means the men from the family of the Prophet; and when the order was implemented, it was applied to the Messenger of Allah and 'Ali (blessings and peace be on them!). And there could be no difficulty in their calling one another. Accordingly, no objection can be directed at the Shi'ahs, even according to the interpretation which he ascribes to them, that our selves means 'Ali. What difficulty could there be if the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was to call 'Ali (a.s.)?

His disciple (i.e., Rashid Rida, author of Tafsir al-Manar.) has written in alManar, after mentioning some traditions: "Ibn 'Asakir has narrated from Ja'far ibn Muhammad from his father in explanation of the verse, then say: 'Come let us call our sons and your sons...' 'Then (the Prophet) brought Abu Bakr and his son, 'Umar and his son, and 'Uthman and his son.'" Then he comments: "Apparently the verse speaks about a group of the believers." Thereafter he has copied the abovequoted writing of his teacher, and then has opined as follows: "As you see the verse orders women to participate with men in national struggles and religious wars. It is based on the principle of equality between men and women even in public affairs - except where an exception has been made. (Then he goes on elaborating the same points.) å2

Ô)! As for the tradition which he has quoted, it is an isolated and peculiar one and goes against all the other traditions on this subject; and needless to say that the other traditions are so numerous and so well known. That is why the exegetes have not mentioned it. Moreover, it contains statements which do not tally with the facts: It supposes that all the people mentioned therein had sons, but surely not all of them had sons at that time. He says: "Apparently the verse speaks about a group of the believers."Probably, he wants to infer from the tradition (quoted by him) that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had brought there all the believers and their children; thus the words that the Prophet, "brought Abu Bakr and his son..." would indirectly imply that he brought all the believers. In this way he wants to support the interpretation of his teacher, discussed above. But you see how isolated, shunned and discarded this tradition is; and how defective is its text. Apart from that it does not give the meaning he infers from it. Now look at the principle adduced by him that women should participate in the public affairs just as men do. If his reasoning is accepted then it would also prove that small children too should participate in those affairs with their elders. This one point alone is enough to show the falsity of his observation. We have talked at length on the subject of the women's participation, under the verses of divorce in the second volume; and we shall be writing some more in a relevant place there is no need to make such inferences as he has done from this verse.

å
 
    

* &4 ή˶ ˸θϧ˵ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϊ˴ Β˵ ˸όϧ˴ ϻ ˴˷ ΃˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϩ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϨϨ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ ˯΍˴Ϯγ ˴ Δ˳ Ϥ˴ Ϡ˶ϛ˴ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ΍˸Ϯϟ˴Ύ˴όΗ˴ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˴ ˸ϫ΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ˸Ϟϗ˵ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˱Ό˸ϴη ˴ Ϫ˶ Α˶ ϙ ˴ Ύ˱π˸όΑ˴ Ύ˴Ϩπ ˵ ˸όΑ˴ ά˴ Ψ ˶ Θ˴˷ϳ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˶˸δϣ˵ Ύ˷ϧ˴ ΄˴Α˶ ˸΍ϭ˵ΪϬ˴ ˸η΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟϮ˵Ϙϓ˴ ΍˸Ϯϟ˴˷˴ϮΗ˴ ϥ˶Έϓ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˶ ϭ˵Ω Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ύ˱ΑΎ˴Α˸έ΃˴{64} Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϣ˴ ϴ˶ϫ΍˴ή˸Α·˶ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷Ο ˵ Ύ˴ΤΗ˵ Ϣ˴ ϟ˶ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˴ ˸ϫ΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ Ϙ˶ ˸όΗ˴ ϼ ˴ ϓ˴ ΃˴ ϩ˶ Ϊ˶ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϟ ˵ ϴ˶Πϧ˶Ϲ΍˴ϭ Γ˵ ΍˴έ˸ϮΘ˴˷ϟ΍ Ζ ˶ ϟ˴ΰ˶ ϧ˵΃ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϡ{65} Ύ˴Ϥϴ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷Ο ˵ Ύ˴ΤΗ˵ Ϣ˴ Ϡ˶ϓ˴ ˲Ϣ˸Ϡϋ ˶ Ϫ˶ Α˶ Ϣ˵Ϝϟ˴ Ύ˴Ϥϴ˶ϓ ˸ϢΘ˵ ˸ΠΟ ˴ Ύ˴Σ ˯ϻ˵Άϫ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃Ύ˴ϫ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴˸όΗ˴ ϻ ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ Ϣ˵ Ϡ˴˸όϳ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˲Ϣ˸Ϡϋ ˶ Ϫ˶ Α˶ Ϣ˵Ϝϟ˴ β ˴ ˸ϴϟ˴{66} Ύ˱ϤϠ˶˸δϣ˵˷ Ύ˱ϔϴ˶ϨΣ ˴ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ϧ˶Ϝ˴ϟϭ˴ Ύ˷ϴ˱ ϧ˶ ΍˴ή˸μϧ˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˷ϳ˱ Ω˶ Ϯ˵Ϭϳ˴ Ϣ˵ ϴ˶ϫ΍˴ή˸Α·˶ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ύ˴ϣ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϛή˶ ˸θϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ {67} ϲ ˵˷ ϟ˶ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍˴ϭ ϲ ˵˷ Β˶ Ϩ˴˷ϟ΍ ΍˴άϫ˴ ϭ˴ ϩ˵ Ϯ˵όΒ˴ ˷Η˴ ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϠ˴˷ϟ˴ Ϣ˴ ϴ˶ϫ΍˴ή˸ΑΈ˶Α˶ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ ϰ˴ϟ˸ϭ΃˴ ϥ ˴˷ ˶· Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍{68} ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷Ϡ˵π ˶ ϳ˵ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϧ˴ Ϯ˷Ϡ˵π ˶ ϳ˵ ˸Ϯϟ˴ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ˸ϫ΃˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶˷ ˲Δϔ˴ ΋˶ Ύ˷σ ˴ Ε˷Ω˴ ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήό˵ ˸θϳ˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ δ ˴ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶{69} Ϟ ˴ ˸ϫ΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ΪϬ˴ ˸θΗ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳ΂˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϔ˵ ˸ϜΗ˴ Ϣ˴ ϟ˶ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍{70} ϖ ˴˷ Τ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤΘ˵ ˸ϜΗ˴ ϭ˴ Ϟ ˶σ ˶ Ύ˴Β˸ϟΎ˶Α ϖ ˴˷ Τ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵δΒ˶ ˸ϠΗ˴ Ϣ˴ ϟ˶ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˴ ˸ϫ΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴˸όΗ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ {71} ˲Δϔ˴ ΋˶ Ύ˷σ ˴ Ζ˴ϟΎ˴ϗϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˵ ˸ϛ΍˴ϭ έ˶ Ύ˴ϬϨ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϫ˴ ˸Οϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϝ ˴ ΰ˶ ϧ˵΃ ϱ ˴ ά˶ ϟ˴˷Ύ˶Α ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ΁ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ˸ϫ΃˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶˷ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵όΟ ˶ ˸ήϳ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ Ϡ˴˷ό˴ ϟ˴ ϩ˵ ή˴ Χ ˶ ΁{72} ϣ˴ Ϟ ˴ ˸Μϣ˶˷ ˲ΪΣ ˴ ˴΃ ϰ˴Η˸Άϳ˵ ϥ˴΃ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϯ˴Ϊϫ˵ ϯ˴ΪϬ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸Ϟϗ˵ ˸Ϣ˵ϜϨ˴ ϳ˶Ω ϊ˴ Β˶ Η˴ Ϧ˴Ϥϟ˶ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆΗ˵ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϭ΃˴ ˸Ϣ˵Θϴ˶Ηϭ˵΃ Ύ ˲Ϣϴ˶Ϡϋ ˴ ˲ϊγ ˶ ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣ Ϫ˶ ϴ˶Η˸Άϳ˵ Ϫ˶ ˷Ϡ˴ϟ΍ Ϊ˶ ϴ˴ Α˶ Ϟ ˴ ˸πϔ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸Ϟϗ˵ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˶˷έ˴ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ ˸Ϣϛ˵ Ϯ˷Ο ˵ Ύ˴Τϳ˵ {73} ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣ Ϫ˶ Θ˶ Ϥ˴ ˸Σή˴ Α˶ κ ˵˷ Θ˴ ˸Ψϳ˴ Ϣ˶ ϴ˶ψό˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ˸πϔ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϭ˵Ϋ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ{74} Α˶ Ϫ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˴ ˸΄Η˴ ϥ˶· ˸Ϧϣ˴ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ˸ϫ΃˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶ ϭ˴ ϻ ˴˷ έ˳ Ύ˴Ϩϳ˶ΪΑ˶ ˵Ϫ˸Ϩϣ˴ ˸΄Η˴ ϥ˶· ˸Ϧϣ˴˷ Ϣ˵Ϭ˸Ϩϣ˶ ϭ˴ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϴϟ˴·˶ ϩ˶ Ω˶˷ Ά˴ ϳ˵ έ˳ Ύ˴τϨ˶Ϙ ˲Ϟϴ˶Βγ ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˷ϴ˶ ϣ˶˷ Ϸ ˵ ΍ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴Ϩ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ β ˴ ˸ϴϟ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϧ˴˷΄˴Α˶ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ Ύ˱Ϥ΋˶ Ύ˴ϗ Ϫ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ Ζ ˴ ˸ϣΩ˵ Ύ˴ϣ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϴϟ˴·˶ ϩ˶ Ω˶˷ Ά˴ ϳ˵ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϭ˴ Ώ ˴ ά˶ Ϝ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϟϮ˵Ϙϳ˴ ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴˸όϳ˴ {75} Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϘΘ˴˷Ϥ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ΐ ˵˷ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ Έ˶ϓ˴ ϰ˴ϘΗ˴˷΍˴ϭ ϩ˶ Ϊ˶ ˸Ϭό˴ Α˶ ϰ˴ϓ˸ϭ΃˴ ˸Ϧϣ˴ ϰ˴ϠΑ˴ {76} ˸ϢϬ˶ ˶ϧΎ˴Ϥ˸ϳ΃˴ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϊ˶ ˸Ϭό˴ Α˶ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήΘ˴ ˸θϳ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ˷ϥ ˴ ·˶ ϟ˴·˶ ή˵ ψ ˵ Ϩ˴ϳ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ Ϥ˵ Ϡ˶˷Ϝ˴ ϳ˵ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ Γ˶ ή˴ Χ ˶ ϵ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ ϕ ˴ ϼ˴Χ ϻ ˴ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴˸ϭ΃˵ ϼ ˱ ϴ˶Ϡϗ˴ Ύ˱ϨϤ˴ Λ˴ ˲Ϣϴ˶ϟ΃˴ ˲Ώ΍˴άϋ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ϴ˷ϛ˶ ΰ˴ ϳ˵ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ Δ˶ ϣ˴ Ύ˴ϴϘ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ˸ϴ {77} ϳ˴ ϭ˴ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϩ˵ Ϯ˵Βδ ˴ ˸ΤΘ˴ ϟ˶ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟΎ˶Α Ϣ˵ϬΘ˴ Ϩ˴ δ ˶ ˸ϟ΃˴ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵Ϯ˸Ϡϳ˴ Ύ˱Ϙϳ˶ήϔ˴ ϟ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ϭ˴ Ϊ˶ Ϩ˶ϋ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϟϮ˵Ϙ Ϊ˶ Ϩ˶ϋ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴˸όϳ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϭ˴ ˴Ώά˶ Ϝ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϟϮ˵Ϙϳ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍{78} {64} Say: O followers of the Book! come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught with Him, and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah; but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. {65} O followers of the Book! why do you dispute about Ibrahim, when the Taurat and the Injeel were not revealed till after him; do you not then understand? {66} Behold! you are they who disputed about that of which you had knowledge; why then do you dispute about that of which you have no knowledge? And Allah knows while you do not know. {67} Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian but he was (an) upright (man), a Muslim, and he was not one of the polytheists. {68} Most surely the nearest of people to Ibrahim are those who followed him and this Prophet and those who believe and Allah is the guardian of the believers. {69} A party of the followers of the Book desire that they should lead you astray, and they lead not astray but themselves, and they do not perceive. {70} O followers of the Book! Why do you disbelieve in the communications of Allah while you witness (them)? {71} O followers of the Book! Why do you confound the truth with the falsehood and hide the truth while you know? {72} And a party of the followers of the Book say: Avow belief in that which has been revealed to those who believe, in the first part of the day, and disbelieve at the end of it, perhaps they go back on their religion. {73} And do not believe but in him who follows your religion. Say: Surely the (true) guidance is the guidance of Allah-- that one may be given (by

Him) the like of what you were given; or they would contend with you by an argument before your Lord. Say: Surely grace is in the hand of Allah, He gives it to whom He pleases; and Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing. {74} He specially chooses for His mercy whom He pleases; and Allah is the Lord of mighty grace. {75} And among the followers of the Book there are some such that if you entrust one (of them) with a heap of wealth, he shall pay it back to you; and among them there are some such that if you entrust one (of them) with a dinar he shall not pay it back to you except so long as you remain firm in demanding it; this is because they say: There is not upon us in the matter of the unlearned people any way (to reproach); and they tell a lie against Allah while they know. {76} Yea, whoever fulfills his promise and guards (against evil)-- then surely Allah loves those who guard (against evil). {77} (As for) those who take a small price for the covenant of Allah and their own oaths-- surely they shall have no portion in the hereafter, and Allah will not speak to them, nor will He look upon them on the day of resurrection nor will He purify them, and they shall have a painful chastisement. {78} Most surely there is a party amongst those who distort the Book with their tongue that you may consider it to be (a part) of the Book, and they say, It is from Allah, while it is not from Allah, and they tell a lie against Allah whilst they know. å
  Now begins the second phase of the exposition of the People of the Book, particularly the Christians, and some related matters. The preceding verses described the condition of the People of the Book generally, beginning with the verse 3:19 (Surely the religion with Allah is Islam), taking a turn at the verse 3:23 (Have you not considered those who are given a portion of the Book?). Then it focused its attention on the Christians beginning with the verse 3:33 (Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh), guiding the believers earlier, in the verse 3:28, not to take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers (Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers). This was the first phase. Now, the same subjects are explained in other words in a different style. First, it comments on the People of the Book in general. Apart from the verses under discussion, it throws light on various other relevant matters in other places; for example: Say: "O People of the Book! Why do you disbelieve in the signs of Allah? " (3:98); Say: "O People of the Book! Why do you hinder him who believes from the way of Allah?" (3:99). Secondly, it exposes the condition of the Christians

and their belief concerning 'Isa (a.s.): It is not meet for a man that Allah should give him the Book, and the wisdom and prophethood, then he should say to men: "Be my servants" (3:79). Then the talk turns to the matters related to the believers calling them to submission and unity and warning them of befriending the unbelievers and being intimate with them in preference to the believers. All these things are explained in numerous verses in various places. ([ )! Say: "O People of the Book! Come to a word, common between us and you: This call is addressed to all the People of the Book in general. The invitation to "come to a word" really means to unite on the meaning of the word by acting upon it. The call to the word is based on the idiom found in Arabic and other languages, as for example, they say: The nation is united on this word. It implies the meanings ofbelief, acknowledgment, recognition and propagation. The verse therefore means: Come let us adhere to this word, co-operating with one another in its propagation and acting on its demands. as-Sawa' is a masdar, although it is commonly used as an adjective to denote a thing both sides of which are equal. "common between us and you" means that you and we both are equally bound to acknowledge it and to act on it. Obviously, the use of this adjective for "word" is metaphorical. What is actually equal is its acknowledgment and the resulting action. Again action is related to the import of the word, not the word itself. Moreover, the call for unity about the word in itself has metaphorical connotation. In this way, this sentence has many fine points of rhetorics: Calling to unite on a meaning, then using the "word" for the meaning and then ascribing the adjective "common" to the "word". Also, it has been said that the "common word" refers to that which the Qur'an, the Torah and the Injil commonly invite to with one voice - and that is the belief of monotheism. If this suggestion is correct then the next words, "that we shall not worship any but Allah...", would serve as the correct explanation of the word common between the Muslims and the People of the Book; it would invite the latter to leave aside their own interpretation of the Oneness of God ± the interpretation used to fit this pristine "word" on their own desire; for example, their belief that God was incarnated, took a son, was one but had three persons; their worship of their rabbis, priests and bishops. The meaning in that case would be as follows: Come to a word common between us and you, and that is the belief in One God; and if we unite on it then we would have to discard and reject all that is associated with Allah, and would not take others for lords besides Him.

But the ending of the verse, "but if they turn back, then say: 'Bear witness that we are Muslims (Submitting ones)'", supports the first meaning given by us. In short, the verse calls to this word that "we shall not worship any but Allah", as it is the demand of Islam, the total submission, which is the religion with Allah. Although submission is also a concomitant belief in the Oneness of God, the verse calls the People of the Book not to the theoretical, but practical, monotheism; that is, to discard worshipping anyone but Allah. (Think over it). ([ )! "that we shall not worship any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate anything with Him, and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah": It is the explanation of "the common word", and it is what submission to Allah demands. The words, "we shall not worship any but Allah", reject the worship of any other than Allah; it is not their aim to prove or affirm the worship of Allah. We have already mentioned in the explanation of the "creed" ± There is no god except Allah ± that the phrase, "except Allah", is not an exception but al-badal (= appositional substantive standing for another substantive) of "god"; consequently, the sentence aims at rejecting partners for Allah, not at affirming the existence of Allah. According to the Qur'an, existence of Allah and His being the Truth needs no proof, it is a self-evident reality. This sentence calls them not to associate anyone to Allah in worship. But it does not nullify the other types of polytheism emanating from the belief that Allah had a son or the idea of trinity and things like that. That is why the call continues: "and (that) we shall not associate anything with Him, and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah." The fact is that merely saying that a worship is meant for Allah does not make it the worship of Allah, unless it is done with pure and sincere faith, unless the heart is purged of all beliefs and superstitions springing from polytheism. Otherwise, the worship would be for a god who had a partner. And a worship devoted to one of the alleged partners in godhead ± even if it is done for him exclusively ± would still be a product of polytheism. Why? because such a worship, by its very definition is a share devoted to one of the two or more partners; as such it acknowledges the right of the other partner or partners, and is therefore the worship of those partners too. On the other hand, the Prophet calls them, by order of Allah, to the pure monotheism, "that we shall not worship any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate anything with Him, and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah." It is this call which combines in itself all the aims and objectives of prophet-hood; it is this which the prophets taught their men, and which they propagated in the human society.

We have described (while explaining the verse 2:213, Mankind was but one people) that prophethood is a God-inspired awakening, a true advancement, the purpose of which is to spread the word of religion. The religion, in its reality, is equilibrium in the society's march of life; and a well-balanced society creates wellbalanced individual in life. In this way, each and everyone is accorded his due position which the nature has meant him to have. Thus, the society gets the freedom and the felicity of natural perfectness based on justice and equity; and likewise the individual gets complete freedom to enjoy the life in all its aspects, as he thinks fit and as he likes ± except when it is likely to harm the society's life. And all these freedoms and enjoyments are conditional to servitude and submission to Allah, subservient to the unseen authority and power. We may summarize the prophets' message in these words: They want human species - individually and collectively - to march forward according to the dictate of their nature which adheres to the belief of monotheism. That belief in its turn demands that man should base all his individual and social actions and activities on submission to Allah, and that he should spread justice and equity. In other words, all should be given equal rights in life, and all should have equal freedom of good intention and good deed. This goal cannot be achieved until and unless the roots of conflict and unlawful transgression are completely destroyed; so that no strong person exploits or enslaves a weak man, no one dominates another, and no powerless person serves the interests of someone powerful. There is no god but Allah; there is no Lord except Allah; and there is no rule for anyone except Allah. This is what this verse says: "that we shall not worship any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate anything with Him, and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah. There are many verses of the same connotation. For example, Allah quotes Yusuf (a.s) as saying: O my two mates of the prison! are sundry lords better or Allah, the One, the Supreme? You do not worship besides Him but names which you have named, you and your fathers; Allah has not sent down any authority for them; judgment is only Allah's; He has commanded that you shall not worship aught but Him; this is the right religion (12:39 ± 40). Also, Allah says: They have taken their doctors of law and their monks for lords besides Allah, and (also) the Messiah son of Maryam, and they were not enjoined but, that they should worship one God only, there is no god but He (9:31). And the same is the importance of many admonitions addressed to their peoples by

the prophets like: Nuh, Hud, Salih, Ibrahim, Shu'ayb, Musa and 'Isa (peace be on them all). For example: Nuh; My Lord! surely they have disobeyed me and followed him whose wealth and children have added to him nothing but loss (71:21). Hud: Do you build on every height a monument? Vain is it that you do. And you make strong fortresses that perhaps you may abide. And when you lay hands (on men) you lay hands (like) tyrants (26:128 ± 130). Salih: And do not obey the bidding of the extravagant ones (26:151). Ibrahim: When he said to his father and his people: "What are these images to whose worship you cleave?" They said: "We found our fathers worshipping them." He said: "Certainly you have been, (both) you and your fathers, in manifest error" (21:52 ± 54). And Allah said to Musa and Harun: Go both to Pharaoh, surely he has become inordinate: ...so go you both to him and say: "Surely we are two messengers of your Lord; therefore send the Children of Israel with us and do not torment them. .."(20:43 ± 47). And lastly 'Isa said to his people: "...and so that I may make clear to you part of what you differ in; so fear Allah and obey me"(43:63). The natural religion is that which negates transgression and mischief, and eradicates injustice and unlawful dominations - the unjust dominations which destroy the foundation of happiness and uproot the basis of truth and reality. It was this fact which the Prophet alluded to when he said in the last pilgrimage (and alMas'udi has mentioned it in his Muruju 'dh-dhahab, in the events of the year 10 of Hijrah): "Indeed the time has come full circle to its (original) form (as it was) the day when Allah created the heavens and the earth." Perhaps he (s.a.w.) meant that the men have come back to the rule of nature because the Islamic character had become firmly rooted among them. The sentence, "that we shall not worship any but Allah..." not only covers all the aims and objectives of prophethood, but also explains the reason of this commandment. "that we shall not worship any but Allah": Godhead is that which everything worships, is bewildered about and loved ± in every way. God is the origin and fountainhead of every perfection in all the things; in spite of their magnitude in number, they are related to one another and all are one in that each component looks to God for its needs; He is the source of every perfection desired by these

things. This reality leads us to the Oneness of God. As the created things are interrelated, the Creator can be no more than one. He is the Owner in Whose Hand is the management of everything. Therefore, it is obligatory to worship Allah, because He is the One and Only God, there is no partner or colleague to Him. And it is obligatory not to ascribe any partner to Him in worship. In other words, this universe with all that it contains cannot submit except to One Creator. These creatures are joined in a uniform system, they are united in their existence: naturally there cannot be more than one Lord for them, because there is not more than one Creator for them. "and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah": Human beings, in spite of their great number, are parts of one reality, that is, human species and humanity. All those merits and abilities which the hand of creation has put in them in equal measure demand that they must have equal rights in life, and must be accorded equal treatment in all those matters. On the other hand, there are differences in the conditions of the individuals and in their ability to procure and acquire some advantages and prerogatives of life; they are the gifts of general humanity which are bestowed to some particular individuals or groups here and there; such prerogatives also should be allowed to the mankind ± but only in the way it demands. For example, sexual intercourse, pregnancy and medical treatment, all are the affairs ofthe humanity in general; yet sexual intercourse is the prerogative of an adult human being, male or female, while pregnancy is exclusively reserved for the female; and medical treatment is accorded only to a sick person. In short, the members of the human society are components of a single reality ± the components being similar to each other. No one has a right to impose his will on another, until and unless he takes on himself a similar burden on behalf of the other. And this is what co-operation in acquisition of life's advantages means. But if the society or individual surrenders to an individual, if the whole or a part of the humanity submits to another part; raising him from the level of equality to that of superiority, giving him domination and arbitrary powers, making him an autocratic despot ± he rules as he likes, is obeyed in whatever he says, and is taken as a lord whose will has to be complied with ± then it negates the nature and destroys the foundation of humanity. Moreover, Lordship exclusively belongs to Allah, there is no lord but He. Thus, if a man puts himself under the authority of another man like himself, allowing that master to do with his follower whatever he wants, then it means that the said

master has been taken as a lord besides Allah. It is such a proposition which can never be accepted by him who has surrendered himself to Allah. It is now clear that the words of Allah, "and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah"', throw light on two realities: One, the human beings are parts of a single reality, the parts being similar to each other. Two, Lordship is the exclusive prerogative of Godhead. ([ )! but if they turn back, then say: "Bear witness that we are Muslims (Submitting ones)": It is a call to them to witness that the Prophet and his followers are on a religion which Allah is pleased with, and it is Islam. Allah says: Surely the religion with Allah is Islam (3:19). This declaration will cut their argument and dispute, because no proof prevails against the truth and the people of the truth. This sentence points to the fact that monotheism in worship is a concomitant to Islam. ([ )! O People of the Book! why do you dispute about Ibrahim, when the Torah and the Injil were not revealed till after him? Do you not then understand?: Apparently it is governed by the imperative verb, "say", placed in the preceding verse; and so are the verses 70 ± 71, coming after four verses. Thus, it will be an order to the Prophet to say these things to the People of the Book. On the other hand, the verse coming after two verses (Most surely the nearest of people to Ibrahim are those who followed him and this Prophet and those who believe...),gives an association which shows that the verse under discussion too may be a direct talk of Allah, and not of the Prophet (by Allah's Command). The People of the Book disputed among themselves about Ibrahim (a.s.). Probably it was, in the beginning, an argument by which each group wanted to show its veracity. The Jews might be saying: Ibrahim, whom Allah has praised so much, was from us; a claim which the Christians might have countered by saying: Ibrahim was on truth, and the truth has been manifested by the advent of 'Isa. Then the arguments might have degenerated into bigotry and obstinacy. Then the Jews claimed that Ibrahim was a Jew; and the Christians, that he was a Christian. However, it is a known fact that Judaism and Christianity came on the scene after the revelation of the Torah and the Injilrespectively; and these Books were revealed long after Ibrahim (a.s.). How could it be possible for him to be a Jew (a follower of the religion brought by Musa, a.s.)? Or a Christian (a follower of the shari'ah of 'Isa, a.s.)? All that can be said about Ibrahim (a.s.) is this: He was on truth, sincerely adhering to right, away from wrong, submitting himself to Allah. These verses, therefore, have a

connotation similar to the verse: Or do you say that Ibrahim and Isma'il and Ishaq and Ya'qub and the tribes were Jews or Christians? Are you better knowing or Allah? And who is more unjust than he who conceals a testimony that he has from Allah? (2:140). QUR'AN: Behold! you are they who disputed about that of which you had knowledge; why then do you dispute about that of which you have no knowledge? And Allah knows while you do not know: The verse affirms that they possessed a knowledge in respect of the disputation which they indulged in; and negates another knowledge and ascribes it to Allah. The exegetes have variously explained the knowledge which they had, and that which they did not. According to them it may mean as follows: 'You had disputed about Ibrahim and you had some knowledge about him, for example, that he existed at a certain time and was a prophet. Why then do you dispute about a matter of which you have no knowledge at all ± claiming that he was a Jew or a Christian? The fact is that Allah knows while you do not know.' Alternatively, the knowledge that has been affirmed may refer to the little knowledge they had about 'Isa. The verse thus says: 'You have disputed about 'Isa while you had some knowledge about him and his affairs. Why do you then dispute about a subject of which you have no knowledge, claiming that Ibrahim was a Jew or a Christian?' The above two explanations, given by the exegetes, do not conform with the apparent context of the verse. The first is wrong because the People of the Book had never contended with each other about the existence or prophethood of Ibrahim (a.s.). The second, because neither party was on right concerning their disputation about 'Isa (a.s.). Both were mistaken in their respective beliefs, making erroneous claims about him. How then can their disputation about 'Isa be called a disputation of which they had knowledge? In any case, the verse says that they disputed about something of which they had knowledge and also about that of which they had no knowledge. The question arises as to what was the disputation about which they had had knowledge? Moreover, it apparently shows that both disputes were among the People of the Book themselves. It does not refer to any argument between them and the Muslims; otherwise, the Muslims would obviously have been in wrong in that matter of which the People of the Book had knowledge. The appropriate explanation would be as follows ± and Allah knows better: It is well known that there was a never ending dispute between the Jews and the Christians which covered all the subjects in which they differed. The main point of contention was the 'Isa's prophet-hood and the claims made by the Christians

concerning his status ± that he was God and son of God, and the belief of trinity. The Christians disputed with the Jews about his being a prophet sent by God ± and the Christians had its knowledge. The Jews disputed with the Christians and refuted his godhead, his sonship and the trinity ± and they talked with knowledge about it. These were the disputations about which they had got knowledge. As for the disputation about that of which they had no knowledge, it was their contention that Ibrahim was a Jew or a Christian. When the Qur'an says that they had no knowledge of this matter, it does not mean that they were unaware of the fact that the Torah and the Injil were revealed after Ibrahim ± as it was an obvious thing. Nor that they were oblivious of the fact that a preceding man cannot be a follower of one coming after him, because the admonition at the end of the preceding verse (Do you not then understand?) does not leave room for this suggestion; it shows that it is such an obvious thing that a mere hint is enough to focus attention on it. They knew that Ibrahim preceded the Torah and the Injil, but they were oblivious of its logical corollary that he therefore could not be a Jew or a Christian, that he would be on the Divine Religion, that is, submission to Allah. The Jews also said: There cannot be more than one true religion and that is the Judaism. Thus, Ibrahim would inevitably be a Jew. The same argument was used by the Christians to Christianize Ibrahim. The error they committed in this argument sprang from ignorance, not obliviousness. The fact is that the religion of Allah is one - and that is Islam, the submission to Allah. It is one, progressing towards perfection, with passage of time and in keeping with mankind's progress as humanity advances to perfection. The Judaism and the Christianity are two branches of the perfection of Islam - the root religion. The prophets (peace be on them all!) were the builders of that building, each of them had a hand in it, laying down the foundation and raising such a lofty edifice. No doubt, Ibrahim (a.s.) was the founder of Islam - i.e., submission to Allah - and it was the basic and true religion; then the true religion appeared with the name of Judaism and then Christianity; these were two of the branches of its perfection, two of the stages of its completion. What the Jews and the Christians did not know was that these propositions do not make Ibrahim a Jew or a Christian. He would remain, as before, an upright Muslim; his name would be always linked with that of Islam, the religion which he himself had founded. That Islam is the root of Judaism and Christianity; but it is neither Judaism nor Christianity. The root is not attributed to its branches; it is the branch that should be related to the root. To say that Ibrahim (a.s.) was a Muslim and not a Jew or a Christian does not

imply a claim that he was the follower of the Prophet of Islam, acting according to the Qur'anic shari'ah. Nobody should rush to say that as Ibrahim (a.s.) had preceded the revelation of the Torah and the Injil and therefore could not be counted as a Jew or a Christian, so had he preceded the revelation of the Qur'an and the advent of Islam, therefore, in a completely identical manner, he should not be called a Muslim. As a matter of fact, the use of 'Islam' for the Qur'anic shari'ah is a terminology which came up after the revelation of the Qur'an, when the fame of the religion brought by Muhammad (s.a.w.) had spread far and wide. The Islam which is attributed to Ibrahim means submission to Allah, humbling oneself before His Lordship. The two uses are different, and consequently there is no room for any objection whatsoever. The People of the Book were unaware of the true meaning of the basic religion; they did not know that it was a reality which had various levels, and which had evolved, passing through stages, to the summit of its perfection. It was this ignorance of theirs to which Allah refers when He says: "And Allah knows while you do not know. Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian..." This meaning is also supported by the next verse: "Most surely the nearest of people to Ibrahim are those who followed him and this Prophet and those who believe;" as well as the verses 84 - 85 coming later: Say: "We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us, and what was revealed to Ibrahim and Isma'il and Ishaq and Ya'qub and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and 'Isa and to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit. " And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers. (We shall explain it in its place.) ([ )! Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian, but he was (an) upright (man), a Muslim, and he was not one of the polytheists: This verse has been explained above. Some exegetes have explained it as follows: The Jews and the Christians claimed that Ibrahim (a.s.) was one of them, on their religion. Likewise, the idolworshipping Arabs claimed that they were the followers of ad-din al-hanif (= the upright religion) the religion of Ibrahim (a.s.); even the People of the Book came to call them al-hunafa' and thus al-hanifiyyah (uprightness: religion of Ibrahim) was misconstrued to mean idol-worship. When Allah praised Ibrahim (a.s.) by saying that "he was (hanifan) upright", it was necessary to explain the word, so that people should not take it in the sense of idol-worship. That is why Allah added the

words, "a Muslim, and he was not one of the polytheists;" he followed the religion which Allah is pleased with, and that is Islam, submission to Allah, and he was not a polytheist like the Arabs of the days of Ignorance. ([ )! Most surely the nearest of people to Ibrahim are those who followed him and this Prophet and those who believe; and Allah is the Guardian of the believers: This verse gives the reason behind the foregoing talk, and explains the reality of the subject matter. The meaning is as follows (and Allah knows better). If we look at relationship between this great Prophet, Ibrahim, and those who came after him, obviously he cannot be counted as a follower of later generations; rather, we have to decide who is nearest of all to him. Only he can be nearest of all to a prophet - coming with a shari'ah and a Book - who follows the truth like him and accepts the religion which he brought. According to this criterion, the nearest to Ibrahim (a.s.) is this Prophet (s. a. w.a.) and those who believe. They are on the Islam for which Allah had chosen Ibrahim. Likewise, those who were his followers were nearest to him - not those who disbelieve in the communications of Allah and confound the truth with falsehood. The words, "those who followed him," are an allusion against the People of the Book, indirectly telling the Jews and the Christians that they were not the nearest to Ibrahim because they did not follow him in submitting to Allah. The phrase, "and this Prophet and those who believe," distinguishing the Prophet and his followers from the followers of Ibrahim (a.s.); this was done to show the exalted position of the Prophet; he was too great to be called someone's follower. The same consideration is reflected in other verses; for example, These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance (6:90). Note that Allah did not say, 'therefore follow them'. The sentence, "and Allah is the Guardian of the believers", complete this reasoning and explanation. Ibrahim was a waliyy (= guardian) of Allah, and his al-wilayah (= guardianship) was a part of Allah's guardianship; and Allah is the Guardian of the believers, not of the others who disbelieve in His Signs and confuse the right with wrong, the truth with falsehood. ([ ): A party of the People of the Book desire that they should lead you astray, and they lead not astray but themselves, and they do not perceive: "atTa'ifah" (party; lit.: rover, walker about). The people, and especially Arabs, used to live -in the beginning - a nomadic life; their tribes and clans used to wander around

with their cattles looking for water and pasture, from season to season; they travelled in groups as a safety measure against attack and assassination. They were then called "a wandering party"; gradually the noun, 'party' was dropped, and the adjective at-ta'if ah (wanderer, rover, walker about) took its place. How is it that the People of the Book lead not astray but themselves? The first and foremost human virtue is inclination towards truth and its acceptance. A desire to divert the people away from the truth, to turn them towards falsity (being a psychological trait) is a depravity of soul -and how evil this depravity is! It is a sin, a crime, a transgression against truth; and what is there after the truth but lie and error? Thus, when they desire to lead the believers astray (when those believers are on truth), they in fact lead themselves astray although they do not perceive it. And even if they got hold of a believer and led him astray by planting some doubts in his heart, they would be leading themselves astray before him. Man does not do anything - good or bad - but for himself. Allah says: Whoever docs good, it is for his own self, and whoever does evil, it is against it (45:46). As for those who go astray because of someone's misguidance, it is not so much a result of that deceiver's influence, as the misdeed and wrong choice of the straying person himself - by permission of Allah. The Qur'an says: Whoever disbelieves, he shall be responsible for his disbelief, and whoever does good, they prepare (good) for their own souls (30:44); And whatever affliction befalls you. it is on account of what your hands have wrought, and (yet) He pardons most (of your faults). And you cannot escape in the earth, and you shall not have a guardian or a lie/per besides Allah (42:30-31). Some details about the effects and characteristics of human actions have been given in the second volume (Arabic text), under the verse: ...these it is whose deeds are forfeited in this world and the hereafter (2:217) This explanation is among those Qur'anic realities which spring from at-tawhid (= monotheism) of action, and that active belief in its turn is based on the realities of Lordship and Kingdom. Only in this way, we can explain the exclusiveness found in the words of Allah: "and they lead not astray but themselves, and they do not perceive." As for the explanation given by others, they do not help in understanding this exclusiveness; that is why we have not mentioned them here at all. ([ )! O People of the Book! Why do you disbelieve in the communications of Allah while you witness (them)?: It has already been explained that disbelieving in communications of Allah is not the same as disbelieving in Allah Himself. Disbelief in Allah entails open rejection of monotheism, as the idol-worshippers and

atheists do; while disbelief in communications means rejection of the Divine Knowledge after it is clarified and explained. The People of the Book do believe that the universe hasOne God. What they disbelieve in are described in the books revealed to them and to others, like the prophethood of Muhammad (s.a.w.), the fact that 'Isa was the servant and the messenger of Allah, that Ibrahim was neither a Jew nor a Christian, that the hand of Allah is open, that Allah is Self-sufficient and other such things. The People of the Book, in Qur'anic language, are disbelievers in communications of Allah, not in Allah Himself. Of course, there is the verse which goes against it: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, from among those who were given the Book, until they pay the jizyah (tributary tax) with their hands while they are in a state of subjection (9:29). It clearly says that those People of the Book did not believe in Allah, i.e., they disbelieved in Allah. But it goes on mentioning their non-prohibition of prohibited things and their deviation from the religion of truth; and it shows that when the verse attributes disbelief to them it really uses a concomitant to allude to the related characteristic. In other words, when they disbelieve in communications of Allah, it follows that they do not believe even in Allah and the latter day although they may not realize it. But it does not speak about open and direct disbelief in Allah. "while you witness (them)":"ash-Shahadah"(= presence; knowledge through external senses; witness). It shows that their disbelief in communications refers to their rejection of the Prophet; they did not accept that the Prophet was the promised Prophet whose advent was foretold in the Torah and Injil although they clearly saw that the signs and descriptions mentioned therein perfectly fitted on the Prophet. Somebody has said that the word, "communications", is general and comprehensive; it covers all the communications and there is no reason why it should be restricted to the signs of the Prophet; the word therefore refers to their rejection of all the true signs and communications. å2

Ô)! The explanation given by us clearly shows the invalidity of this interpretation. ([ )! O People of the Book! Why do you confound the truth with the falsehood and hide the truth while you know?: "al-Labs" (to create doubt; to confuse; to confound). Why do you manifest the truth in the form of falsehood? The words, "while you know", show or at least allude, that the confusion and the hiding refers to their confounding and hiding the religious knowledge and realities;

and not to the verses of scriptures; that is, it does not speak about the verses which they had altered, hidden or misinterpreted. These two verses, beginning with, "O People of the Book! Why do you disbelieve..." and ending with, "while you know?", complete the talk which began with the words, "A party of the People of the Book desire ..." The whole community has been admonished for the wrong-doings of some of its members, because they were all united in race, tribe and character, and all accepted what some of them were doing. Such usage is commonly found in the Qur'an. ([ )! And a party of the People of the Book say: "Avow belief in that which has been revealed to those who believe (in) the first part of the day, and disbelieve (at) the end of it, perhaps they go back (on their religion): "Wajha 'n-nahar" (= lit. face of the day) means the first part of the day, because it has been used in contrast with "the end of it"; also the face of a thing is what it appears to others with, and as far as the day is concerned, it is its early part. The context of this saying shows that something was revealed to the Prophet in the early hours of the day which conformed with tenets of the People of the Book, and another revelation came at the end of the day which was against their belief. And this prompted them to say these words. Therefore, the clause, "that which has been revealed to those who believe", refers to a particular Qur'anic revelation which agreed with the belief and practice of the People of the Book. The words, "the first part of the day", are an adverbial phrase of time, and it is related not to "Avow belief", but to "has been revealed" because it is nearer. The words, "and disbelieve (at) the end of it," mean: disbelieve in that which has been revealed (to those who believe) at the end of the day; it is an allegorical expression putting the adverbial phrase of time in place of the thing which happened at that time; a similar device has been used in the verse where it says: Nay, (it was) planning of night and day (34:33). Accordingly, it supports what has been narrated from the Imams of the Ahlulbayt (a.s.), relating the circumstances in which this verse was revealed. This idea was propagated by the Jews at the time when the qiblah was changed. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had prayed the Morning Prayer towards Baytu '1-Maqdis which was the qiblah of the Jews. Then the qiblah was changed towards the Ka'bah in the noon prayer. Then a group of the Jews said: Believe in that which was revealed to those who believe in the early hours of the day, that is, praying towards Baytu '1Maqdis, and disbelieve in that which has been revealed at the end of it, that is, facing towards the Ka'bah. This explanation is further supported by their assertion which has been quoted in the next verse: "And do not believe but in him who

follows your religion;" that is, do not trust anyone who does not follow your religion and does not believe in it, lest you disclose to him some of your secrets and the good tidings which were revealed to you about the promised Prophet - one of the signs foretold of the Prophet was that he would change the qiblah towards the Ka'bah. Another interpretation: Some exegetes have said that the phrase, "the first part of the day" is related to the verb "Avow belief"; and, "the end of it," is an adverbial phrase, (in which "in" is deleted and understood) and it is related to the verb "disbelieve". Accordingly, the meaning would be as follows: Some of them should pretend to believe in the Qur'an and attach themselves with the Muslims; then they should renounce Islam at the end of the day saying that they had believed in the morning because they were deceived by apparent signs of truth of Islam but they had to renounce it by the end of the day because they had seen many things which proved its falsity; and because the good tidings of the prophethood and signs of veracity which they were told by the previous prophets did not fit on this Prophet. This was a devious plan to deceive the believers, so that the believers would be overwhelmed by doubts about their religion, and weakened in their conviction; in this way their power would break down and their mission fail. This meaning in itself is not far-fatched, and especially from the Jews who had left no stone unturned to defeat Islam, to extinguish its light by any possible means. But the wording of the verse does not fit this interpretation. We shall write some related things under the traditions, Allah willing. Someone has explained it as follows: Avow belief in their praying towards the Ka'bah in the first part of the day and disbelieve in it at the end of the day; perhaps they would go back on their religion. A fourth explanation: Pretend to believe in the first part of the day by agreeing that the signs of the promised prophet were present in the Prophet; and disbelieve at the end of it saying that those attributes did not fit on him; this would put doubts in the believers' minds and perhaps they would renounce their religion. There is no proof for these two interpretations; and whatever the meaning, there is no ambiguity in the verse. QUR'AN: And do not believe but in him who follows your religion: The context shows that this too is the saying of the People of the Book, completing their talk which started with the words, "Avow belief in that which has been revealed to those who believe." And likewise the words, "that one may be given (by Him) the

like of what you were given; or they would contend with you by an argument before your Lord," are continuation of their speech. And therefore the sentence, "Say: 'Surely the guidance is the guidance of Allah,'" is a parenthetical sentence in reply of their talk beginning with, "Avow belief," and ending with, "who follows your religion." The change of style supports this view. Similarly the words, "'Say: 'Surely grace is in the hand of Allah...,'" are in reply of their talk, "that one may be given (by Him) the like of what you were given." In this way, all the segments of this talk are inter-woven and the meanings of the two preceding verses inter-related with one another. Also, the two verses stand face to face with the verses describing the Jews' obstinacy, disputation and deception. The meaning therefore is as follows, and Allah knows better: A party of the People of the Book, that is the Jews, said one to another: Attest the truth of the Prophet and the believers regarding their prayer towards Baytu 'lMaqdis in the first part of the day and do not accept their truth when they prayed towards Ka'bah in the afternoon. Do not trust others when you talk with them, lest they inform the believers that the changing of qiblah to the Ka'bah was foretold as a sign of the truth of the Promised Prophet For. if you accepted the affair of the Ka'bah and disclosed what you knew about it (that it was a sign of the Prophet's truth), then you would have to face two dangers: (1) The believers would get a qiblah of their own, like that of yours: it would destroy your supremacy and neutralize your precedence in the matter of qiblah; (2)the believers would contend with you before your Lord establishing a proof against you that although you knew about the new qiblah and were witnesses of its truth, you did not accept the Islam. Allah replied to their talk - that they should believe what was revealed in the early part of the day and disbelieve what happened at the end of it, and their admonition to one another to hide the matter of qiblah so that the believers would not know the truth - that the guidance which the believers needed was the true guidance and it was the guidance of Allah, and not yours. The believers do not need your guidance; you may follow the believers' guidance if you like and reject it if you so desire; you may proclaim the truth if you wish, and hide it if you want. Then Allah replies to their fear that one might be given by Allah the like of what they were given. He says that the grace is in the hand of Allah, He gives it to whom He pleases. It is not in the Jews' hands so that they could reserve it for their own selves, blocking the way to the others. Allah has made no comment on their conspiracy to hide the

truth so that the believers would be unable to argue with them before their Lord; it was such a conspicuously fallacious presumption that needed no reply. The same disdainful silence is maintained in another verse exposing the same fallacy: And when they meet those who believe they say: "We believe," and when they are alone one with another, they say: "Do you talk to them of what Allah has disclosed to you that they may argue with you by this before your Lord7 Do you not then understand?" What! Do they not know that Allah knows what they conceal and what they proclaim? (2:76 - 77). The exclamatory "What!" in the sentence, "What! Do they not know", shows that it is not a reply to the Jews; it is just an indication that their talk goes against correct understanding, for they know that their hiding or proclaiming makes no difference in Allah's knowledge. It will be seen from the above explanation that the words, "And do not believe", mean 'do not trust anyone', 'do not expect anyone to keep your secret'. It has the same connotation as the verse: and believes the believers (9:61). The words, "him who follows your religion," mean 'the Jews'. Their aim was to prevent the disclosure of what they knew regarding the truth of the change of qiblah to the Ka'bah. Their knowledge of this truth was also referred to in the verses: turn then thy face towards the Sacred Mosque... and those who have been given the Book most surely know that it is the truth from their Lord;... Those whom we have given the Book recognize him as they recognize their sons; and a party of them most surely conceal the truth while they know (it) (2:144-146). The exegetes have written various explanations for these verses. One of them says that the whole verse. "And do not believe . ., Ample-giving, Knowing", is a direct speech of Allah, not a quotation of the Jews' talk; and the second person plural pronouns "And do not believe", "What you were given", "they would contend with you", "before your Lord" - are all addressed to the believers; while the second person singular pronoun m "Say " refers to the Prophet. Some others agree with this explanation with one difference: They say that the second person plural pronouns in the above mentioned words are addressed to the Jews, and the speech admonishes and rebukes them. Still others have said that the words, "And do not believe but in him who follows your religion", are the quotation of the Jews' talk: while the words. "Say. 'Surely the guidance is the guidance of Allah - that one may be given (by Him)...'", are spoken by Allah in reply to what the Jews had said. Likewise, there is a difference about the meaning of "grace" whether it means religion, worldly blessings, dominance or something else. These interpretations, in spite of their bewildering number, are far removed from the connotation given by the context, as we have already shown. That is why we

have not spent much time on them. QURAN: Say. "Surely grace is in the hand of Allah, He gives it to whom He pleases; and Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing"; "al-Fadl" (surplus; that which is in excess). This word is used in commendatory sense, while al-fudul is used as a derogatory term. ar-Raghib says: Every voluntary gratis benefaction is called alfadl; as Allah says: and ask Allah of His grace (4:32); this is Allah's grace (5:54); and Allah is the Lord of mighty grace (2:105); Say: "In the grace of Allah "(10:58); and were it not for the grace of Allah (4:83). Accordingly the sentence, "Say: "Surely grace is in the hand of Allah'", is a sort of abbreviated syllogism from which the first premise has been omitted. The full deductive syllogism shall be as follows: Say: This revelation and Divine bestowal (which you are trying to reserve for yourself by pretending to believe and disbelieve and admonishing each other to hide the truth) is not a thing which we mortals can impose on Allah, it is really a grace. Grace is in the hand of Allah (to Whom belong the Kingdom and the Command). Therefore, He has the power to give it to whom He pleases. And Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing. This verse does not leave any room for the Jews to reserve the Divine Grace for themselves (despite their mistaken belief reflected in their words and deeds). Why should some people enjoy the grace of Allah to the deprivation of others (as the Jews wanted to do with religion and qiblah)? One may imagine only three ways for it. 1. Either the grace of Allah would fall under the influence of someone else, who then would manipulate the Divine Will, diverting it to one side, preventing it from going in another direction. But the fact is otherwise. Because "Surely grace is in the hand of Allah, He gives it to whom He pleases." 2. Or, the bounty is in short supply, is insufficient to reach all the aspirants. In that case it would need some outside factor to choose a few and reject the others. But the fact is otherwise. Because Allah is Ample-giving; All-powerful, Whose grace knows no limit. 3. Or, it could be that the grace - even if it was unlimited and in the hand of Allah could not reach a certain group be cause that group was hidden from Allah, was unknown to Him. Thus the privileged group plans devious ways to hide the other groups and keep them concealed from

Allah, in order to deprive them of the Divine Grace. But the fact is otherwise. Because Allah is All-knowing; ignorance cannot reach Him; nothing can be hidden from Him. QUR'AN: He specially chooses for His mercy whom He pleases; and Allah is the Lord of mighty grace: As the grace is in the hand of Allah, He gives it to whom He pleases; and as He is Ample-giving, Knowing, it is in His power to choose some of the servants for some of His favours. It is for Him to manage His property as He likes. The fact, that His grace and His bestowal of bounties are unrestricted, or that nobody can put any restraint on Him, does not make it necessary for Him to bestow His grace on each and every person indiscriminately. Otherwise, it would again be a restraint on His absolute power. It is His prerogative to specially choose for His grace whomever He pleases. The verse ends on the sentence, "and Allah is the Lord of mighty grace". In a way it explains the reason of all that has been mentioned above. The grace is mighty. Consequently it must be in His hand to give it to whom He pleases. Also, Allah should be Ample-giving in His grace, knowing the condition of His servants, well aware of which type of grace would be more suitable to a given person. And therefore it should be His prerogative to specially choose for His grace whomever He pleases. In the sentence, "He specially chooses tor His mercy whom He pleases," the word, "grace" has been replaced by "mercy". It shows that the grace, being a free gift, a discretional bounty, is a branch of mercy. Allah says: And My mercy encompasses all things (7:156); and were it not for Allah's grace upon you and His mercy, not one of you would have ever been pure (24:21); Say: "If you control the treasures of the mercy of Lord, then you would withhold (them) from fear of spending" (17:100). ([)! And among the People of the Book there are some such that if you entrust one (of them) with a heap of wealth, he shall pay it back to you: and among them are some such that if you entrust one (of them) with a dinar he shall not pay it back to you except that you remain standing over him: this is because they say: "There is not upon us in the matter of the unlearned people any way (to reproach)": The verse points to the glaring differences seen in the characters of various People of the Book, for example, in keeping the trust and fulfilling the agreements. Their dishonesty and breach of trust is m itself a national disgrace; this characteristic has permeated their society as a well accepted feature. Unfortunately, it is based on

their ideology which is reflected in the statement: "There is not upon us in the matter of the unlearned people any way (to reproach)." They called themselves the People of the Book, and called others gentiles, unlearned people. The above quoted statement means that no gentile (non-Israelite) can have any way against an Israelite. Even more disturbing was their claim that that behaviour was approved by religion. It is to this aspect that the next sentence refers: "and they tell a lie against Allah while they know..." They believed - as they do even today that they were the chosen people; Divine Grace was their exclusive property; others had no share in Allah's favour; Allah had given them Prophethood, the Book and the Kingdom; therefore they had precedence and excellence over all races, and had a right to subjugate the others. This misconception gave rise to various misunderstandings. For example, they came to believe that the sociological and financial rights and obligations (like prohibition of interest, of devouring others' property and usurping people's rights) were applicable within their own circle only. A Jew should not devour another Jew's property unjustly; an Israelite should not usurp the rights of his own people. In short, only the People of the Book had got a way to reproach against the People of the Book. As for the gentiles, the non-Israelites, they had no way of reproach against the People of the Book. The Jews thought they could deal with nonIsraelites anyway they liked; they could do with others whatever they wanted. In their eyes the gentiles were no better than animals and they dealt with them as they did with animals. Of course, the conception was not found in the books that are said to be revealed, like the Torah, etc. They had taken this idea from their rabbis and blindly followed them. Moreover, the religion of Musa was meant for the Children of Israel only; others were neither invited nor allowed to enter it. Thus it became a racial religion. This gave rise to a belief that this excellence and Divine Grace was something based on race for which the Children of Israel were exclusively chosen. Being born of Israel parents was the essence of dignity, the root of excellence, the basis of supremacy. The one who was related to Israel had absolute precedence over all others. When such arrogant spirit governs the structure of a nation, it incites them to create mischief on the earth, and to annihilate the essence of humanity found in a society. Of course, sometimes it becomes necessary in a human society to deprive some individuals or groups of some common rights. But what should be the criterion for such deprivation? A healthy society believes that whoever tries to negate others' rights or to damage or destroy the society itself, should be deprived of his own

rights. From Islamic point of view the only criterion of rights is acceptance of Islam or coming under the protection of Islamic State. One who is neither a Muslim nor a dhimmi (one under the protection of Islamic State), has no right in the life. This criterion conforms with the dictate of nature; and you have seen that the human society also recognizes such test in a general way. Now, we come back to the verse under discussion, "among the People of the Book." Apparently, it should have been 'among them'. Why was the noun used in place of the pronoun? It was done to remove a possible misunderstanding: the preceding two verses had spoken about: "A party of the People of the Book"; if these verses had said, 'among them', it could give an impression that it was speaking about a group of the previously mentioned, "A party of the People of the Book". You will see that after removing this possible cause of misunderstanding, the next verse uses pronoun when it says: "Most surely there is a party amongst those who distort the Book with their tongues." Also, mentioning of the attribute - i.e., their being the People of the Book - points to a sort of reason. That is, such words and deeds - their saying that there is not upon us in the matter of the unlearned people any way to reproach, and their swallowing the people's wealth in this way - would not have looked so strange if they had been uttered by unlearned people, who did not know anything about prophethood and revelation. But these were the People of the Book; they had the Book which contained the God's Commandments; and they knew very well that the Book did not give them any such latitude, nor did it allow them to take other people's wealth and property just because they were gentiles, non-Israelites. Such statements and deeds were more strange and more disgraceful because they were uttered and done by the People of the Book. Therefore, they deserved more severe condemnation and rebuke. "al-Qintar" (100 ratl; figuratively used for huge amounts); "ad-dinar" (a coin). Apart from their rhetorical beauties, their parallel setting in the context of trustworthiness shows that these words have been used for great and small amounts respectively. The verse means that there are some among them who faithfully keep the amount entrusted to them, no matter how great and valuable it may be; while there are others among them who would embezzle it even if it is a trivial and worthless thing. The second person singular pronoun in the phrase, "if you entrust one (of them) with a heap of wealth, he shall pay it back to you", does not refer to any particular person; it is a sort of indefinite pronoun showing general applicability of the

statement. In other words, the sentence means: If someone - anyone - gives him something in trust he shall pay it back to him, no matter how great the amount may be. "illa ma dumta qa'iman: It is said that "ma" has changed the verb into al-masdar (infinitive verb); and the sentence means, "except that you remain standing over him". The word, "standing", points to urgency and insistence; when the claimant remains standing on his feet without sitting, it shows his impatience and inability to wait. Someone has said that "ma" is an adverb of time; but it makes no sense. "this is because they say: 'There is not upon us in the matter of the unlearned people any way (to reproach)'": Apparently, the context shows that the pronoun, "this", refers to the whole description written before, that is, the fact that some of them keep their trust even if it is a huge amount, and others do not pay it back even if it is a small thing; this difference has arisen from their belief that there is on them no way to reproach in the matter of the unlearned people. This idea has created among them a great disparity in ethical and spiritual standard although they know that Allah has not ordained any such thing in His Book, nor is He pleased with such practices of theirs. Alternatively, it may be referring to the second group only, which is mentioned by the sentence: "and among them there are some such that if you entrust one (of them) with a dinar he shall not pay it back to you." In this case, the first (i.e., trustworthy) group may have been mentioned here just to give the complete picture, to fulfill the demand of justice. Consequently, the plural pronouns in, "they say", and, "they know", may refer to, "the People of of-the Book", or to, "some such that if you entrust one (of them) with a dinar". In the latter case, the first person pronoun in, "upon us", may refer to all, "the People of the Book", or to a certain group of them. The translation will differ in each case, but all the possibilities are correct and credible. (Think it over.) ([ )! and they tell a lie against Allah while they know: It refutes their claim that there was not upon them any way to reproach in the matter of the unlearned people. Also, it proves that they used to justify their behaviour on religious grounds, claiming that it was a Divine Revelation, as we have mentioned earlier. ([ ): Yea, whoever fulfills his promise and guards (against evil) - then surely Allah loves those who guard (against evil): It answers their argument and affirms what they wanted to negate with their statement that there was no way to reproach upon them regarding the non-Israelites. Fulfilment of promise means acting on it

and guarding against its breach. "at-Tawfiyah" (= to give completely); "al-istifa'" (to take completely). The promise refers to the covenant which Allah had taken from His servants that they would believe in Him and worship Him. This meaning is supported by the next verse which says: "(as for) those who take a small price for the covenant of Allah and their (own) oaths." Or, it may mean all promises in general, including the covenant of Allah. The sentence, "then surely Allah loves those who guard (against evil)," is a syllogism from which a premise has been omitted for brevity. Its completed form would be as follows: then surely Allah loves him, because he guards against evil, and Allah loves those who guard against evil. The idea is that Allah bestows honour and dignity on His pious servants by loving them, and not by giving them licence to deceive, exploit and oppress His other servants. The verse indicates that the divinely bestowed dignity is not so easily obtainable; it is not a common - place thing which could be attained by just verbal expression of belonging, or which may be used for racial or national supremacy by crafty and wily persons. The important condition for attainment of Divine Dignity is piety and fulfilment of the covenant made with Allah. When these conditions are fulfilled the said dignity is achieved. That dignity means Allah's love, friendship and guardianship, which are not given except to His pious servants. It results in Divine help and happy life, which in its turn brings them prosperity and betters their condition in this world, and raises their rank in the hereafter. This is the meaning of dignity which Allah bestows. It does not give rise to imposition of a certain race or nation on the shoulders of His servants, good and bad alike, giving the supposed "master race" freedom to do whatever they want and to say whatever they like. Thus, one day they would claim, "there is not upon us in the matter of the unlearned people any way (to reproach)"; saying next day that they were the friends of Allah to the exclusion of the other people1; and yet another day, that they were the sons of Allah and His beloved ones2. Thus, it leads them to create mischief in the earth and to destroy the tilth and the stock. 1. Say: "O you who are Jews, if you think that you are the friends of Allah to the exclusion of other people..." (Qur'an, 62:6).(Author's note) 2. And the Jews and the Christians say: "We are the sons of Allah and His beloved ones" (Qur'an, 5:18). (Author's note)

([ ): (As for) those who take a small price for covenant of Allah and their (own) oaths: It explains the reason of the preceding statement. The Divine Dignity is exclusively reserved for those who fulfill the covenant of Allah and guard against evil - are pious; because the others - those who take a small price for the covenant of Allah and their own oaths - have no honour, no dignity at all. The fact is that whoever breaks the covenant of Allah and forsakes piety - not guarding himself against evil - does so just for the enjoyment of the vanities of this world, giving preference to immediate desires over everlasting happiness. He exchanges the covenant of Allah and the piety with a few worldly trinkets. That is why it has been likened to a trade deal: Covenant of Allah is the item sold; and insignificant worldly provision, its small price. "al-Ishtira'" (= to sell); "they take a small price for the covenant of Allah and their (own) oaths", that is, they exchange the covenant and oaths for provisions of this world. QUR'AN: Surely they shall have no portion in the hereafter, and Allah will not speak to them... they shall have a painful chastisement: "al-Khalaq" (= portion, share); "at-tazkiyah" (= to make grow, good growing; to purify). The descriptions of this group stand face to face with the attributes of the first group (Yea, whoever fulfills his promise and guards [against evil]...); and the consequences of their behaviour are all negative. Keeping it in view, we find that: First: The verse points to them with the demonstrative pronoun, ula'ika (= those, they), which is used for a distant object. It shows that they are far removed from nearness to Allah. Conversely, the pious ones who fulfill their covenant are brought nearer to Allah because He loves them. Second: When Allah loves someone, he is given a portion in the hereafter; Allah will speak to him and look upon him on the Day of Resurrection, will purify him and forgive him, that is, will remove chastisement from him. Allah has mentioned three traits for those who break the covenant of Allah and their own oaths. First: They shall have no portion in the hereafter. "al-Akhirah (the hereafter): it stands for ad-daru'l-akhirah (the abode in the hereafter; the everlasting abode); it is used for life after death. In the same way, ad-dunya (the world) stands for addaru'd-dunya (worldly abode), which is used for the life before death. They shall have no portion in the hereafter, because they themselves had preferred this world's share. It shows that "a small price" refers to this world. Of course, we

have explained it above as the worldly provision; it was done because Allah has used adjective "small" for it and the same adjective has been used for the worldly provision in the verse: Say: "The provision of this world is small" (4:77). In other word, the provision of the world is the world (itself). Second: Allah will not speak to them, nor will he look upon them on the Day of Resurrection. It stands vis-a-vis the love which Allah has for His pious servants; in love, the lover wants to enjoy nearness with the beloved, by looking at him and talking to him when they are together. As Allah does not love this group, He will not speak to them nor look upon them on the Day of Resurrection, the day when they will be brought in His presence. The verse first mentions not speaking and then not looking upon; the description is in descending order; speaking shows more intimacy than looking upon; it is as though the verse wants to say: Allah shall not confer upon them any honour, neither great nor small. Third: Allah will not purify them and they shall have a painful chastisement: The statements are unrestricted and unconditional. It implies that they shall remain unpurified and in chastisement both in this world and in the hereafter. ([ )! Most surely there is a party amongst them who distort the Book with their tongues that you may consider it to be (a part) of the Book; "al-Layy" (to spin, to entwine); when used with the head or tongue as its object, it means inclining, bending or tilting it. Allah says: they turn back their heads (63: 5); distorting (the word) with their tongues (4:46). Apparently, it means that they recite the lies which they have invented against Allah in the same tone and style which they use for the Book, in order to confuse the people, making them believe that it was a part of the Book while it is not so. The word "Book" has been repeated thrice in this sentence, in order to remove all possible ambiguity. The first "Book" refers to that which they wrote with their own hands and attributed to Allah; the second refers to the "Book" which was revealed by Allah; the third refers to the same Divine Revelation but the word was repeated to remove ambiguity and to indicate that the "Book", being the Book of Allah, was too high and sublime to contain such forgeries - it is because the word "Book" has a connotation that points to sublimity. The same was the cause of repeating the Divine Name, Allah, in the sentence, "and they say, it is from Allah, while it is not from Allah". It means it is not from Allah Who is the true God and Who does not say except truth, as He Himself says: and the truth do I speak (38:84).

The verse ends with the words, "and they tell a lie against Allah whilst they know": It is refutation after refutation of their ascribing their forgeries to Divine Revelation. They were confusing the people by their distorted recitation; Allah refuted it and said, "while it is not (a part) of the Book". Then they used to say, "it is from Allah"; Allah refuted them first by saying, "while it is not from Allah"; and then by declaring that "they tell a lie against Allah". This repeated denial points to two new factors: (1) Telling lies is their ingrained habit and persistent trait. (2) It is not because of any confusion or ignorance that they have told such lies; they know that it is a lie and yet they say it.  $  as-Suyuti writes in ad-Durru 'l-manthur under the verse: Say: "O People of the Book! come to a word, common between us and you...": "Ibn Jarir has narrated through his chains from as-Suddi that he said: 'Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) called them - that is, the delegation of the Christians of Najran - and said: "O People of the Book! come to a word, common between us and you . .." '" 
 ! The same book quotes another tradition of the same meaning through Ibn Jarir from Muhammad ibn Ja'far ibn az-Zubayr. The tradition apparently means that this verse was revealed about the Christians of Najran. We have written a tradition in the beginning of the chapter, that its early part (upto eighty odd verses), was revealed about the Christians of Najran; and this verse is included in that number. Some traditions say that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) invited the Jews of Medina to a common word, until they accepted to pay jizyah. However, it is not in conflict with its revelation about the delegation of Najran. al-Bukhari narrates through his chains from Ibn 'Abbas from Abu Sufyan a long hadith in which he, inter alia, mentions the letter sent by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) to Heraclius, the Roman emperor. Abu Sufyan says: "Then he (i.e., Heraclius) asked for the letter of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w. a.) and read it; and it was written therein: 'In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. From Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah to Heraclius, the emperor of Rome. Peace be on him who follows guidance. After this, I invite you to Islam. Accept Islam, and

you will be saved (in the hereafter). Accept Islam and Allah will give you double reward. But if you turn back, then the sin of your people also will be on your shoulders. 'O People of the Book! come to a word, common between us and you, that we shall not worship any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate anything with Him, and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah'; but if they turn back, then say: 'Bear witness that we are Muslims (Submitting ones)...'" (as-Sahih, al-Bukhari) 
 ! It has also been narrated by Muslim in his as-Sahih; and by asSuyuti in ad-Durru 'l-manthur from an-Nasa'i, Abdu 'r-Razzaq and Ibn Abf Hatim, all from Ibn 'Abbas. And it has been said that also the letter sent by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) to Muqawqis, the Chief of the Copts, contained these very words of Allah, "O People of the Book! come to a word, common between us and you..." There is a Cufic writing reputedly the original letter of the Prophet, its text conforming with his letter to Heraclius; and its photos are easily available throughout the Muslims world. However, the historians say that the Messenger of Allah (s.a. w.a.) wrote the letters which he sent through various envoys to many kings and rulers (like: Heraclius, Kisra and an-Najashi) in the sixth year of hijrah. It proves that this verse was revealed in the sixth year or even earlier. On the other hand, the historians (like: atTabari, Ibnu '1-Athir and al-Maqrizi) have written that the delegation of the Christians of Najran had come to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) in the tenth year of hijrah, while others (like: Abu 'l-Fida' in al-Biddyah wa 'n-nihayah and alHalabi in as-Sirah al-Halabiyyah) say that it was in the ninth year. If so, then the verse would have been revealed in the ninth of tenth year of hijrah. Sometimes, it is said that it was revealed in the early years of hijrah as the traditions written hereafter will show. Others say that it was revealed twice, as al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar has reported. Nevertheless, the verses of the chapter are connected with each other in a single context, as we had pointed out in the beginning of the chapter; and it supports the view that the verse was revealed long before the ninth year. Consequently, the

delegation must have come in the sixth year of hijrah or even earlier. It is difficult to believe that the Prophet would write letters to rulers of Rome, Egypt and Fars and ignore the people of Najran who were nearer. There is a point to note in the above quoted tradition. The letter begins with the formula, "In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful". Keeping it in view, we may know the worth of the tradition copied earlier (in the story of Najran's delegation), from al-Bayhaqi's Dala'ilu 'n-nubuwwah. He narrates: "The Messenger of Allah (s. a.w.a.) wrote to the people of Najran, before the (chapter of) 'Tasin Sulayman' (i.e., the Ant) was revealed: 'In the name of Allah, the God of Ibrahim and Ishaq and Ya'qub. From Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah to the Bishop of Najran and the people of Najran. If you accept Islam, then I extol before you Allah, the God of Ibrahim and Ishaq and Ya'qub. After that I call you to the worship of Allah leaving aside the worship of the servants (of Allah), and I invite you to (come under) the guardianship of Allah instead of the guardianship of the servants. But if you refuse (it), then (you should pay) the head-tax; and if you refuse (even this), then I declare war against you. And peace (be on you).'" Now, the chapter of the Ant is a Meccan one; and its textual evidence almost clearly prove that it was revealed before hijrah; how can that period be juxtaposed with the event of Najran? Apart from that, the purported letter contains some other things which cannot be explained, like the demand of jizyah and ultimatum of war and other such things. And Allah knows better. at-Tabarani narrates from Ibn 'Abbas: "Verily the letter.of the Messenger of Allah to the unbelievers was: 'come to a word common between us and you ...'" (adDurru 'l-manthur) It is written in the same book about the words of Allah, O People of the Book! why do you dispute about Ibrahim...: "Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir and al-Bayhaqi (in his Dala'ilu 'n-nubuwwah) have narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: 'The Christians of Najran and rabbis of the Jews came to the Messenger of Allah (s. a. w.a.) and disputed with one another near him. The rabbis said: "Ibrahim was but a Jew"; and the Christians said: "Ibrahim was but a Christian". Thereupon, Allah revealed

about them: O People of the Book! why do you dispute about Ibrahim, when the Torah and the Injil were not revealed till after him?... and Allah is the Guardian of the believers. Then Abu Rafi' al-Qurazi (a Jew from Banu Qurayzah) said: "Do you demand from us, O Muhammad! that we should worship you as the Christians, worship 'Isa son of Maryam?" And one of the Najranites said: "Is it what you wish, 0 Muhammad?" And the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: "I seek protection of Allah that I should worship other than Allah or enjoin worship of other than Him. Not for this He has sent me or enjoined me." Then Allah revealed concerning their talk: It is not meet for a man that Allah should give him the Book and Judgment and Prophethood, then he should say to men: "Be my servants rather than Allah's"; but rather (he would say): "Be worshippers of the Lord because of your teaching the Book and your reading (it yourselves)." Or that he should enjoin you that you should take the angels and the prophets for lords; What! would He enjoin you with unbelief after you are Muslims? (3:79 - 80). Thereafter Allah mentioned the covenant He had made with them and their forefathers that they should believe in the Prophet when he came to them, and to their acceptance of this fact; so He said: And when Allah made a covenant through the prophets: "Certainly what I have given you of the Book and Wisdom - then an Apostle comes to you verifying that which is with you, you must believe in him, and you must aid him. " He said: "Do you affirm and accept My compact in this (matter) ? " They said: "We do affirm." He said: "Then bear witness, and 1 (too) am of the bearers of witness with you"(3:81).'" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) 
 says: According to the text and context of the verses öIt is not meet for a man that Allah should give him the Book and Judgment and Prophethood. ..) are applicable on 'Isa son of Maryam (a.s.) more meaningfully and in an easier way than on the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), as we shall explain when writing on these verses. Perhaps what the tradition says concerning the revelation of these verses about the Messenger of Allah (s.a. w.a.) is just an inference of Ibn 'Abbas. Moreover, when the Qur'an deals with such talks, it invariably always brings it in the form of question and answer or as a quotation with its refutation. al-Kalbi has narrated the story of the hijrah to Abyssinia through Abu Salih from Ibn Abbas; and it has also been narrated by Muhammad ibn Ishaq from Ibn Shahab through his chains, that he said: "When Ja'far ibn Abi Talib with a group of the

Companions of the Prophet migrated to Abyssinia and settled there; and the Prophet migrated to Medina and there happened in Badr what happened, the Quraysh assembled in Daru 'n-Nad-wah (the Town Hall) and said to each other: 'You may avenge those who have been killed at Badr with those Companions of Muhammad who are with an-Najashi (Negus). Collect some money and send it as a present to an-Najashi; perhaps he would hand over your tribesmen to you; and there should go two of your wise men as your envoys to him.' "They sent 'Amr ibn al-'As and 'Umarah ibn Abi Mu'ayt with presents (of) skins, etc. They sailed the sea and arrived at Abyssinia. When they came to an-Najashi, they prostrated before him and greeted him; and said: 'Our people are sincere and thankful to you, and they love your courtiers. They have sent us to you to warn you against these people who have come to you for, they follow an imposter who has stood up, and claiming to be a Messenger of Allah; and none of us has followed him except a few simpletons. And we made life difficult for them and compelled them to take shelter in a narrow mountain valley of our land, with nobody visiting them, until hunger and thirst (nearly) destroyed them. When the situation became too tough for him, he sent his cousin to you, in order to create mischief here ² in your religion, kingdom and subjects. Therefore, beware of them and hand them over to us; it will save you the trouble of dealing with them.' Also, they said: 'And it is a sign (of their mischief) that when they come here they will not prostrate before you, nor will they greet you in the way the people greet you; (it is because of their) disliking your religion and customs.' "Then an-Najashi called them (i.e., the Muslims). When they came, Ja'far called at the door: 'The party of Allah asks permission to come before you.' an-Najashi said: 'Tell this caller to repeat his words.' Ja'far did, and an-Najashi said: 'Yes; let them enter with safety of Allah and His protection.' 'Amr looked at his colleague and said: 'Do you not hear how they jabbered about the party of Allah and how the King responded to them?' And they were displeased with it. "Then (the Muslims) entered and did not prostrate before him. 'Amr ibn al-'As said: 'Do you not see that they deem themselves too great to prostrate before you?' anNajashi said to them: 'What prevents you from prostrating before me and greeting me in the way all those do who come to me from furthest regions?' They replied:

'We do sajdah (prostration) to Allah Who created you and gave (this) kingdom to you. Of course, we were using the customary greeting when we were idolaters; then Allah raised among us a truthful Prophet, and he taught us the greeting which Allah is pleased with, and that is, "Peace", the greeting of the people of the Garden.' an-Najashi knew that it was true and that it was in the Torah and Injil. Then he said: 'Who among you had called, "The party of Allah asks permission to come before you?"' Ja'far said: 'I.' Then he (Ja'far) said: 'You are a king from the People of the Book, and it is not proper to talk much before you, nor to do any injustice. I would like to answer on behalf of my Companions; therefore, order these two people that one of them should speak and the other should just listen; and you should listen to our talk.' 'Amr said to Ja'far: 'Speak.' Ja'far said to an-Najashi: 'Ask these two people whether we are slaves or free people. If we are slaves (and) have fled from our masters, then you should return us to them.' an-Najashi said: 'Are they slaves or free people?' He ('Amr) said: 'Nay; (they are) free and noble people.' an-Najashi said: 'They are saved from slavery.' Ja'far said: 'Ask them if we have shed any blood unjustly, so that they want its requital from us?' Amr said: 'No; not a single drop.' Ja'far said: 'Ask them, if we have taken other people's property without right, so that we have to repay it?' an-Najashi said: 'Even if it is a heap of money I shall repay it.' 'Amr said: 'No; not even a small amount.' anNajashi said: 'Then what do you want from them?' ('Amr) said: 'We and they were together on one religion, the religion of our forefathers; and they have left it and followed another religion. Therefore, our people have sent us so that you may hand them over to us.' an-Najashi said: 'What was the religion you followed and what is that which they have now accepted?' Ja'far said: 'As for the religion we followed before, it was the religion of the Satan; we disbelieved in Allah and worshipped the stone. And as for the religion to which we have turned, it is the religion of Allah, the Islam; it has been brought to us from Allah by a Messenger, coming with a Book like the Book of the son of Maryam and conforming to it.' an-Najashi said: 'O Ja'far! you have spoken a very great thing.' "Then an-Najashi ordered the gong to be rung. It was done and every priest and monk gathered near him. When all were assembled, an-Najashi said: 'I adjure you by Allah Who revealed the Injil to 'Isa, do you find (any news of) a prophet messenger between 'Isa and the Day of Resurrection?' They said: 'By God! Yes. He has given us the good news of him and said: "Whoever shall believe in him shall

believe in me, and whoever shall disbelieve in him shall disbelieve in me."' anNajashi said to Ja'far: 'What does this man say to you? What does he enjoin you to do? And what does he forbid you from?' (Ja'far) said: 'He recites to us the Book of Allah and enjoins us to do good and forbids us the evil; he enjoins us to be good to our neighbours and relatives and to the orphans, (and) tells us that we should worship Allah, the One, (Who) has no partner.' (an-Najashi) said to him: 'Recite to me from what he recites to you.' Then (Ja'far) recited to him the Chapters of 'The Spider' and 'The Greeks' . The eyes of an-Najashi and his Companions overflowed with tears, and they said: 'Recite to us some more from this good talk.' Then Ja'far recited to them the Chapter of 'The Cave'. (At this stage) 'Amr, intending to incite (the anger of) an-Najashi against them, said: 'These people abuse 'Isa and his mother.' an-Najashi said (to Ja'far): 'Well, what do you say about 'Isa and his mother?' Then he (Ja'far) recited the Chapter of 'Maryam' . When he came to the story of Maryam and 'Isa, an-Najashi raised his tooth-stick just a small bit (enough to disturb one's eyes) and said: 'By God! The Messiah did not say more then what you have said.' Then he said turning towards Ja'far and his Companions: 'Go you are free in my land; you are safe from ill-treatment, and it will be a crime to give you any trouble.' Again, he said: 'Be of good cheer; do not be afraid; there is no downfall today for the party of Ibrahim.' 'Amr said: 'O an-Najashi! and who are 
party of Ibrahim?' (an-Najashi) said: 'This group and their companion (i.e., the Prophet) whence they have come here, and those who follow them.' The polytheists denied it and claimed (themselves to be on) the religion of Ibrahim. Then an-Najashi gave back to 'Amr and his companion the presents they had brought (to him), and said: 'Surely your present is just a bribe; you take it back because God gave this kingdom to me and He did not take any bribe from me.' Ja'far said: 'Then we returned (from the court), and we were under the best protection.' And Allah revealed to the Messenger (s.a.w.) (who was in Medina) the verse about their dispute about Ibrahim: Most surely the nearest of people to Ibrahim are those who followed him and this prophet and those who believe; and Allah is the Guardian of the believers." (at-Tafsir, al-Khazin) 
 ! This story has been narrated with other chains, and also from the Ahlulbayt (a.s.). We have copied it here in spite of its length, and although it has nothing to do with the circumstances in which the verses under discussion were revealed, because it contains important information about the trials of the first

migrants among the Muslims. It has been narrated from as-Sadiq (a.s.) about the words of Allah, Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian, that he said: "The Leader of the Faithful, said: 'Neither a Jew praying to the West nor a Christian praying to the East; but he was an upright Muslim on the religion of Muhammad (s.a.w.).'" (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! We have explained in the Commentary the meaning of his being on the religion of Muhammad, blessing of Allah be on them and their progenies! This tradition looks at the direction of prayer when the qiblah was changed to the Ka'bah (and the Ka'bah is almost to the south of Medina). The Jews and the Christians denied its validity; and felt themselves obliged to turn towards the west (where Baytu'1-Maqdis is situated), or the east (to which the Christian face). This has been counted as a deviation of these two groups from the middle course. This aspect is supported by wordings of the verse: And thus We have made you a medium nation (2:143). However, it is just an interesting and fine literary inference, and nothing more. Explaining this verse, as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "Pure, sincere, totally free from idolworship." (al-Kafi) The Leader of the Faithful said explaining the verse: Most surely the nearest of people to Ibrahim are those who followed...: "Surely the nearest of the people to the prophets is he who practices most faithfully what they have brought." Then he recited this verse and said: "Surely the friend of Muhammad is he who obeys Allah, even if his relationship is far from him; and surely the enemy of Muhammad is he who disobeys Allah, even if he has a near relationship with him." (Majma'u 'lbayan) as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "They are the Imams and their followers." (al-Kafi; at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashl) 'Umar ibn Udhaynah narrates from the same Imam that he said: "You, by Allah, are from the progeny of Muhammad." I said: "From themselves? May I be your ransom!" He said: "Yes, by Allah, from their own selves." He said it three times; then he looked at me and I looked at him and he said: "O 'Umar! surely Allah says

in His Book: Most surely the nearest of people to Ibrahim...''(at-Tafsir, al-Qummi; at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) There is a tradition narrated from al-Baqir (a.s.) that he said about this verse: And a party of the People of the Book say: "Avow belief...": "Verily, when the Messenger of Allah (s.a. w.a.) came to Medina he was praying towards Baytu '1-Maqdis, (and) the people (i.e., the Jews) were pleased with it. When Allah turned him from Baytu '1-Maqdis towards His Sacred House, the Jews were annoyed. And the change of qiblah had happened in the noon prayer. So they said: 'Muhammad prayed the morning prayer facing towards our qiblah; therefore, believe in that which was revealed to Muhammad in the first part of the day; and disbelieve the latter part'; they meant (disbelieve in) the qiblah when the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) faced towards the Sacred Mosque." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) 
 ! As you see, the tradition takes the adverbial phrase, (in) the first part of the day, as related to the verb, was revealed; and not to the verb, Avow belief. And we have explained it in the Commentary. Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim have narrated through al-'Awfi from Ibn 'Abbas, that he said about the verse: And a party of the People of the Book say: "Avow belief...": "A party of the Jews said: 'Avow belief when you meet the Companions of Muhammad in the first part of the day; and when it is the end of it then pray (according to) your own prayer; perhaps they, that is, the believers, would say: "These are the People of the Book and they are more knowledgeable than us." Perhaps they would then turn away from their religion.'" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) 
 ! This meaning has been narrated in the same book from as-Suddi and Mujahid also. al-Baqir (a.s.) said about the verse 2:27: "It has been revealed about the covenant: (As for) those who take a small price for the covenant of Allah and their own oaths ² surely they shall have no portion in the hereafter, and Allah will not speak to them, nor will He look upon them on the Day of Resurrection nor will He purify them, and they shall have a painful chastisement. And ' portion ' means share. So he who shall have no share in the hereafter, with what will he enter the Garden?"

(al-Kafi) ash-Shaykh at-Tusi narrates through his chains from 'Adiyy ibn 'Adiyy from his father that he said: "Imra'u '1-Qays and a man from Hadramawt brought their dispute concerning a land to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). (The Prophet) said: 'Do you have a proof?' He said: 'No.' (The Prophet) said: 'Then (it will be decided) by his (i.e., the opposite party's) oath.' He said: 'Then, by Allah, he will take away my land.' (The Prophet) said: 'If he takes your land by his (false) oath, he shall be among those that Allah will not look upon him on the Day of Resurrection nor will He purify him and he shall have a painful chastisement.' (Hearing this) the man was frightened and gave the land back to him." (al-Amali, ash-Shaykh) 
 ! As you see, the tradition does not show that the verse was revealed about this event. Several traditions have been narrated through the Sunni chains that it was revealed about this event. But those traditions give conflicting reports. Some like the above, say, that the dispute was between Imra'u '1-Qays and a man from Hadramawt; others say that the conflict was between al-Ash'ath ibn alQays and a Jew concerning a land; yet, another tradition says that it was revealed about an unbeliever, who had offered in the market a merchandise for sale, and in order to deceive a Muslim customer, swore by Allah that he was offered for it a price which in reality he was not offered. Then the verse was revealed. You have seen in the Commentary that obviously the verse explains the reason of the preceding verse. In this background utmost that is possible is to take these traditions as an application of the verse on that happening; but they cannot be accepted as an account of the circumstances in which the verse was revealed.

å
 
    

&' 43 ϟ˶˷ ΍˱ΩΎ˴Βϋ ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧϮ˵ϛ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ Ϡ˶ϟ ϝ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϙϳ˴ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ Γ˴ Ϯ˴˷ Β˵ Ϩ˵˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϣ˴ ˸ϜΤ ˵ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϫ˵ ϴ˴ Η˶ ˸Άϳ˵ ϥ˴΃ ή˳ θ ˴ Β˴ ϟ˶ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ύ˴ϣ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧϮ˵ϛ Ϧ˶Ϝϟ˴ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˶ ϭ˵Ω Ϧ˶ϣ ϲ Ϩ˵ϛ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ ϭ˴ Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˶˷ό˴ Η˵ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ ˴Ϧϴ˷ϴ˶ ϧ˶ Ύ˷Α˴ έ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵γέ˵ ˸ΪΗ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ {79} Ύ˱ΑΎ˴Α˸έ΃˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˷ϴ˶ Β˶ Ϩ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Δ˴ Ϝ˴ ΋˶ ϼ˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍ϭ˵άΨ ˶ Θ˴˷Η˴ ϥ˴΃ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ή˴ ϣ˵ ˸΄˴ϳ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˶˸δϣ˵˷ Ϣ˵Θϧ˴΃ ˸Ϋ·˶ Ϊ˴ ˸όΑ˴ ή˶ ˸ϔϜ˵ ˸ϟΎ˶Α Ϣ˵ϛή˵ ˵ϣ˸΄ϳ˴ ΃˴{80}

{79} It is not meet for a mortal that Allah should give him the Book and the wisdom and prophethood, then he should say to men: Be my servants rather than Allah's; but rather (he would say): Be worshippers of the Lord because of your teaching the Book and your reading (it yourselves). {80} And neither would he enjoin you that you should take the angels and the prophets for lords; what! would he enjoin you with unbelief after you are Muslims? å
  The verses come after those related to the affairs of 'Isa (a. s.); it implies that it is the second stage of the argument exonerating 'fsa from the responsibility of what the Christians believe about him. We may summarize the whole argument as follows: 'Isa (a.s.) was not as you think about him. Neither was he Lord nor had he claimed Lordship for himself. (1) He was not Lord, because he was a mortal creature; was conceived in his mother's womb who gave birth to him and brought him up in a cradle. Of course, just like Adam (a.s.), he had no father, thus his likeness was with Allah as the likeness of Adam. (2) Nor had he claimed to be Lord, because he was a prophet, and was given the Book, the Judgment and Prophethood; and a prophet, having that status, cannot transgress the limit of servitude, nor can he divest himself of submission to Allah. How can a prophet tell people: Take me as your Lord, be my servants rather than Allah's? Or, how can he allow it for any other creature of Allah? A prophet would never enjoin men to take the angels or the prophets for lords. He would not give to any servant of Allah more than his due, nor would he deny prophethood of any prophet of Allah divesting him of his status and dignity. QUR'AN: It is not meet for a man that Allah should give him the Book and the Judgment and Prophethood, then he should say to men: "Be my servants rather than Allah's": "al-Bashar" (man) is synonymous with "al-insan"; it is used for singular as well as plural; one man is al-bashar and also a group of men is al-bashar. Ma kana li basharin (it is not meet for a man); li in li-basharin denotes ownership; that is, it does not belong to him; it is not meet for him; he has no right to it. The same expression has been used in some other places; for example, It does not

beseem us that we should talk of it (24:16); And it is not attributable to a prophet that he should act unfaithfully (3:161). The clause, "that Allah should give him the Book and the Judgment and Prophethood", is the subject of kana (was; is). It prepares the ground for the next statement; "then he should say to men; 'Be my servants rather than Allah's.'" Apparently, the sentence could be shortened by omitting the introductory clause, "that Allah should give him the Book..."; yet, it was inserted to give a new connotation to the phrase, "It is not meet for a man". Let us see what happens if the sentence is rewritten, omitting the introductory clause; then the verse would run as follows: It is not meet for a man that he should say to men. The meaning then would be as follows: He was not given that right, although possibly he could say so if he transgressed the limit and became insolent. But there is no room for such inference in the sentence as it now stands. The verse in the present form means as follows: When Allah gives a man knowledge and gnosis of reality, and brings him up with Divine Care, that man can never transgress the boundary of servitude; nor does he feel free to interfere in what does not belong to him, or to dispose what he has no right to; as Allah describes the declaration of 'Isa (a.s.), in the verse: And when Allah will say: "O 'Isa son of Maryam! did you say to men, 'take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah'", he will say: "Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say)" (5:116). The verse says, "that Allah should give him...", instead of saying: a man whom Allah gave the Book and the Judgment and Prophethood. The reason for it is clear from the above explanation. The latter wording points only to the basic legislative prohibition of such transgression. On the other hand, the present construction, "that Allah should give him...", shows that such behaviour is definitely impossible. The Divine Guidance and upbringing cannot fail to attain its goal, as Allah says: These are they whom We gave the Book and the Judgment and the Prophet-hood, therefore if these (i.e., the tribesmen of the Messenger of Allah, s.a.w.) disbelieve in it, We have (already) entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it (6:89). In short, the verse says that it is not possible for a man to join these Divine Favours with calling the men to his own worship. It is not possible when he is given a Book, the Judgment and Prophethood that he should say to men: Be my servants rather than Allah's. In this context the verse resembles to a certain extent the verses: The Messiah does by no means disdain that he should be a servant of Allah, nor do the angels who are near to Him... and as for those who disdain and are

proud, He will chastise them with a painful chastisement. And they shall not find for themselves besides Allah a guardian or a helper (4:172 - 173). The implication is that the Messiah and the angels who arenear to Allah are too high in prestige and too great in status to disdain the worship of Allah; because disdaining His worship brings painful chastisement on the culprit; and far be it from Allah to chastise His honoured prophets or the near angels. 25
 ! The verse uses the word, thumma (then) in the phrase, "then he should say to men"; this conjunctive denotes some delay; and the delay does not conform with the joining you have mentioned. [
! What we have said about joining the Divine Favours with calling men to disbelief gives the gist of the matter. Together-ness and combination can happen with simultaneous things as well as with two things appearing consecutively - that too is a sort of combination. "Be my servants rather than Allah's": al-Ibad like al-'abid is plural of al-'abd (slave; servant); the difference between the two plurals is in usage; al-'ibad, mostly used in relation to Allah, for example, 'ibadu'llah (slaves/servants of Allah); while al-'abid is generally used when related to man; they say, 'abidu 'n-nas (slaves/servants of men), and not 'ibadu 'n-nas. The proviso, "rather than Allah's", has been added after the words, "my servants", as a matter of necessity. Allah does not accept any worship unless it is purely for His own person. Allah says: Now, surely, sincere religion (obedience) is for Allah (alone); and (as for) those who take guardians besides Him, (saying), "We do not worship them save that they may make us nearer to Allah", surely Allah will judge between them in that in which they differ; surely Allah does not guide him aright who is a liar, ungrateful (39:3). Thus, Allah has rejected outright the worship of those who join worship of others with His worship, even if the others are worshipped merely as interceders and intermediaries, and only with intention of reaching near Allah through them. Moreover, the reality of worship does not come into existence until some independence is admitted for the worshipped - even in polytheism. The partner, per se, has some independence; while in reality it is only to Allah that absolute Lordship and Godhead belongs. Therefore, His Lordship cannot be complete, nor can His worship be correct except with negation of independence from every other thing in every possible way. The worship of someone else is worship of other than Allah, even if Allah is worshipped with him.

QUR'AN: but rather (he would say): "Be worshippers of the Lord because of your teaching the Book and your reading (it yourselves)": "ar-Rabbani" (translated here as worshippers of the Lord) is derived from ar-Rabb (the Lord), to which "a" and "n" have been added for augmentation of meaning; as for example, they use: allihyani for one having a luxuriant beard. Thus ar-rabbani means the one having special relationship with the Lord, and spending his life in His servitude and worship. Bi in bi-ma is causative, and means "because"; while ma is for al-masdar and has changed the past tenses into infinitive verbs; that is why we have translated it in the following way: "but rather (he would say): 'Be worshippers of the Lord because of your teaching the Book and your reading (it yourselves).' ad-Dirasah (to study) is more specific than at-ta 'allum (to learn; to study), as the former is generally used for studying from book by reading and reciting. ar-Raghib says: "Darasa 'd-dar (vestiges of the house remained); it implies that the house itself was obliterated; and for this reason ad-durus is translated as obliteration. Likewise, darasa l-kitab (or, darasa l- 'ilm) means, he got trace of book (or, knowledge) memorizing it; he grasped its meaning. As it is attained by regular recitation, such recitation is called memorization. Allah says: and they have read what is in it (7: 169); because of your teaching the Book and reading; And We have not given them any books which they read (44:44)." The theme is that a man having such a high status will call you only to attainment of faith and to believe in the teachings of the Book which you learn and teach - the Book that contains the fundamental Divine Knowledge; he will enjoin you to acquire noble character and good traits found in the Book; and to practice and do good deeds to which you call the people. He will do so, in order that you attach yourselves exclusively to your Lord, and thus become divine scholars. Bi-ma kuntum (lit., because you were), being a past tense, shows that the action had already taken place; that the audience was already teaching and reading the Book. It gives a hint that, possibly, it is an allusion to the Christians, who said that 'Isa had told them that he was the son of God and His Word (with all the differences in the meaning of sonship). The fact is that the Children of Israel had been given a revealed Book which they taught and read; then they differed in it - a difference that was accompanied by textual changes and alterations. Isa (a.s.) was sent only to explain to them a part of what they differed in and to allow them part of that which was forbidden them; in short, to call them to fulfil their obligations concerning the learning and teaching - that they should attach themselves exclusively to their Lord in reading and teaching His Book.

Although the verse may somehow be applied to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) because his mission covered the People of the Book too, who used to teach and read the Book of Allah - but 'Isa (a.s.) was before the Prophet and the verse applies to him in a more befitting manner; also because he was sent exclusively to the Children of Israel, unlike the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). So far as other ulu l- 'azm. prophets (who came with a Book), i.e., Nuh, Ibrahim and Mi'Isa are concerned, the verse obviously cannot be applied to them. QUR'AN: Or that he should enjoin you that you should take the angels and the prophets for lord: The verb "aw ya'murakum" (or that he should enjoin you), because of the vowel "a" after ya'mur (according to the well-known and common recital), is in conjunction with "he should say". A group of the People of the Book had taken the angels for lords. For instance, the Sabaeans worshipped the angels and attributed that custom to the authority of religion Likewise the Arabs, while claiming to follow the religion of Ibrahim (a.s.), said that the angels were Allah's daughters. As for taking the prophets for lords, the Jews, for instance, said that 'Uzayr was the son of Allah - as the Qur'an quotes them -- although Musa (a.s.) had not allowed it to them, nor was there in the Torah anything other than monotheism. Had Musa (a.s.) allowed it to them he would be enjoining it - far be it from him! The style of the verse, "then he should say to men: 'Be my servants rather than Allah's'", differs in two ways from that of the next verse, "Or that he should enjoin you that you should take the angels and the prophets for lords": (1) The subject matter in the former is worship of other than Allah, and in the latter it is taking them for lords. (2) The enjoined people in the former are described in third person, "men", while the latter addresses them directly in second person. Let us look at both changes: First: The former verse adversely alludes to the Christians concerning their worship of 'Isa. As is known, they believe in his godhead openly, saying that he had invited them to his own worship. Thus they have clearly ascribed this call to 'Isa that he said to them: 'Be my servants'. On the other hand, taking the angels and the prophets for lords (in the meaning used in the case of others than Tsa) is opposed to the belief of monotheism only by implication, not clearly. That is why the latter verse uses the word, "lords", instead of gods.

Second: Both expressions ('Be my servants'; that he should enjoin you) deal with a subject which was relevant to the audience of these verses, that is, the People of the Book and the Arabs. The first verse has used the word, "should say"; and "saying" implies a face to face talk. But the people present at the time of the Prophet were not present at the material time, that is, when 'Isa was supposed to say it. It is for this reason that the verse says, "he should say to men", instead of saying, he should say to you. On the other hand, the second verse uses the word "enjoin"; enjoining does not necessarily require face to face talk; it may be done even when the enjoined one is absent. An order given to, or a matter connected with, the ancestors is applied to the later generations if the latter identify themselves with the former. As for "saying" - because it employs transmission of voice - it denotes oral conversation and presence of the audience (except when it is used simply in the meaning of instruction). It is therefore evident that basically these verses require second person plurals (as in, or that he should enjoin you ...); but exception was made in the first verse owing to special reasons. QUR'AN: What! would he enjoin you with unbelief after you are Muslims (Submitting Ones)?: Apparently, the question is directed to all who followed a prophet like the People of the Book, or claimed to do so like the Arabs of the days of Ignorance who believed that they were on the religion of Ibrahim. The talk is based on a hypothetical proposition and the meaning is as follows: If it is true that you do follow this man who was given the Book, the Judgment and Prophethood, then you have already submitted to Allah, acquiring the characteristics of Islam; then how will it be possible for that prophet to enjoin you with disbelief, diverting you from the very path to which he had guided you by the order of Allah? It is clear from the above explanation that in this verse, Islam refers to the religion of monotheism; the religion which Allah sent all the prophets with. This view is supported by other verses preceding and following this verse, in which the word, "Islam", has been used in this very meaning: Surely the religion with Allah is Islam (3:19); Is it then other than Allah's religion that they seek (to follow) ...And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers (3:83 - 85). An exegete has said that the two verses under discussion refer to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). His view is based on a tradition (quoted earlier) describing the circumstances of its revelation which says that Abu Rafi' al-Qurazi and a Najranite

Christian said to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.): "Do you want us to worship you? O Muhammad!" Then Allah revealed: 'It is not meet for a man that Allah should give him... after you are Muslims?' Then the said exegete has argued by the last phrase, 'after you are Muslims'; "because Islam is the religion brought by Muhammad (s.a.w.)." å2

Ô)! He has confused the Islam of Qur'anic terminology (the religion of monotheism which was preached by all the prophets) with the Islam of the Muslims' terminology - a term which came into use after the time of revelation. (We have explained it earlier). å  7+ ,%
+
å
 "
%   $
 
  Mary, daughter of Imran was the mother of the Messiah ('Isa (Jesus)). When her mother was pregnant with her, she made a vow that she would release what was in her womb to be devoted to the service of the Temple. She believed that she was pregnant with a male child; but when she brought it forth and came to know that it was a female, she was d'Isappointed and dejected. Then she named her Mary, that is, servant. Her father, Imran, had died before she was born; so the mother brought her to the Temple for handing her over to the priests ± Zakariyya was one of them. They contended with one another to get the privilege of her custody; then they agreed to decide it by lot, in which Zakariyya's name was drawn; and he became her guardian. When she reached the age of puberty, Zakariyya made for her a partition to protect her from men's eyes. She used to worship Allah therein and nobody entered that sanctuary except Zakariyya. Whenever Zakariyya entered the sanctuary to see her, he found her with food. He said: "O Mary! Whence comes this to you?" She said: "It is from Allah, and surely Allah gives sustenance to whom He pleases, without measure. Mary was a truthful woman and was sinless by Allah's protection; purified, chosen and spoken to; the angels spoke to her and purified her. She was obedient to the Lord and a sign of Allah for the worlds. (vide 3:35-44; 19:16; 21:91; 66:12 in the Qur'an) Then Allah sent to her His spirit when she had hidden herself behind a curtain, and he appeared to her as a well-made man. He said to her that he was a messenger of her Lord so that he should give her, by permission of Allah, a pure boy without a

father. He also gave her the good news of the manifest miracles which were to happen on the hand of her son; and informed her that Allah would surely strengthen him by the Holy Spirit, and would teach him the Book, the Wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel. He also told her that her son would be the messenger to the Children of Israel and would have clear signs. After informing her of the boy's status and story, he breathed into her the spirit and she became pregnant with 'Isa (Jesus) (peace be on him), as a woman conceives her child. (vide 3:33-50 in the Qur'an) Then she withdrew herself with him to a remote place. And the throes of childbirth compelled her to betake herself to the trunk of a palm-tree. She said: "Oh, would that I have died before this, and had been a thing quite forgotten!" Then the child called out to her from beneath her: "Grieve not; surely your Lord made a stream to flow beneath you; And shake towards you the trunk of the palm-tree; it will drop on you fresh ripe dates: So eat and drink and refresh the eye. Then if you see my man, say: 'Surely I have vowed a fast to the Beneficent Allah, so I shall not speak to any man today.'" And she came to her people with him, carrying him (with her). (vide 19:20-27;) His conception, birth, talk and all related affairs were similar to those of other men. When her people saw her in such a condition, they were enraged, and blamed and taunted her ± as was natural in case of an unmarried woman conceiving and bringing forth a child. They said: "O Mary, surely you have done a strange thing. O sister of Aaron! Your father was not a bad man, nor was your mother an unchaste woman." But she pointed to him. They said: "How should we speak to one who is a child in the cradle?" He ('Isa (Jesus)) said: "Surely I am a servant of Allah; He has given me the book and made me a prophet: And he has made me blessed wherever I may be, and He has enjoined on me prayer and charity so long as I live: And dutiful to my mother, and He has not made me insolent, unblessed: And peace on me on the day I was born, and on the day I die, and on the day I am raised to life." (vide 19:27-33) This talk of 'Isa (Jesus) was a sort of prologue which pointed to his future mission ± that he would rise against oppression and injustice, revive and reform the laws of Moses (peace be on him), renovate what was obliterated from the revealed knowledge and make clear to them what they had differed in. 'Isa (Jesus) grew up and became a young man. He and his mother used to eat and drink in normal way with all the necessary concomitants and accidents of human life up to the end.

Then 'Isa (Jesus) was made a messenger to the Children of Israel. He stood up calling them to the religion of monotheism and told them: "I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, that I create for you out of dust like the form of a bird, and I breathe into it and it and becomes a bird, with Allah's permission, and I heal the blind and the leper, and bring the dead to life, with Allah's permission, and I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your homes. Most surely there is a sign in this for you. Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore, worship Him only." He called them to his new Law, which verified the Law of Moses; But he abrogated some parts of it, allowing them some things which were forbidden in the Torah as a punishment to the Jews. 'Isa (Jesus) used to say: "Surely I have come to you with wisdom, so that I make clear to you a part of what you differ in. O Children of Israel! Surely I am the messenger of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Torah and giving the good news of a messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmad." He showed the miracles which he had mentioned, e.g. creation of a bird, raising the dead to life, healing the blind and leper, and giving the news of the unseen - all by Allah's permission. He continued like that calling them to monotheism and his new Law until he was convinced that they would not believe in him. Seeing their insolence, enmity and hatred, and the arrogance of their priests and rabbis, he turned away from them and selected his apostles (from the small band that had believed in him) to be his helpers to Allah. Then the Jews rose against him with the intention to kill him. But Allah took him away completely and raised him. The Jews were put in confusion; some thought that they had killed him, others that they had crucified him; but in fact it was made to appear to them like that. (vide 3:45-58; 4:157-158; 5:110-111; 43:63-65; 61:614) "î  

 'Isa (Jesus) was a servant of Allah and a prophet (vide 19:30); a messenger to the Children of Israel (vide 3:49); was one of the five most high prophets, bringing a new law and a Book, i.e., Gospel (vide 5:46; 33:7; 42:13); Allah named him the Messiah, 'Isa (Jesus) (vide 3:45); he was the Word of Allah, and a Spirit from Him

(vide 4:171); an Imam (vide 33:7); one of the witnesses of deeds (vide 4:159; 5:117); he brought the good news of the Messenger of Allah (vide 61:6); was worthy of regard in this world and the hereafter, and one of those who are made near to Allah (vide 3:45); was one of the chosen progenies (vide 3:33); one of the selected and righteous ones (vide 6:85-87); was made blessed wherever he might be, and purified; was a sign to the people, a mercy from Allah, and dutiful to his mother; greeted himself with peace (vide 19:19-33); and was among those whom Allah taught the Book and the Wisdom (vide 3:48). These twenty-two characteristics from the stations of friendship and guardianship of Allah, give the gist of the attributes, which Allah has used to praise this honored prophet and to raise his rank. These may be divided into two categories: (1) The acquired ones, like servitude, righteousness and nearness to Allah; (2) Those bestowed by Allah as His special grace. Note: We have explained each characteristics in relevant places of this book according to our understanding. Anyone, wanting more details should look up in those volumes. "0 $ $  $1 The Qur'an says that 'Isa (Jesus) was Allah's servant and messenger; and that he did not claim for himself what the Christians ascribe to him, nor did he tell them anything other than conveying the Divine Message. Allah says: And when Allah will say: "O 'Isa (Jesus) son of Mary! Did you say to men, 'Take me and my mother for two Allahs besides Allah'", he will say: "Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind; surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things. I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: That worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take me completely, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things. If Thou shouldst chastise them, then surely they are Thy servants; and if Thou shouldst forgive them, then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise." Allah will say: "This is the day when their truth shall benefit the truthful ones" (5:116-119).

This wonderful reply contains the essence of servitude and shows outstanding manner; it is a mirror of 'Isa (Jesus)' attitude and behavior towards his Lord; it shows how he looked at himself in relation to his Creator and what he thought of the people and their deeds. He says that he looked himself just as a servant of his Lord, who had nothing to do other than obeying the Lord; he does not proceed except when directed to, and does not stop unless told to. And he was not ordered except to call people to the worship of Allah and he did not tell them except what he was enjoined with: That worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. And as far as his relationship with his people is concerned he shall be the witness for their deeds, and that is that; it is none of his business what Allah does with them about them ± whether He forgives them or chastises them. 
 ! If so, then how would you justify what you had written in the topic of intercession, that 'Isa (Jesus) shall be among the intercessors on the Day of Resurrection, he shall intercede and his intercession shall be honored and accepted?  
! The Qur'an says expressly ± or almost expressly ± that he is an intercessor. Allah says: And those whom they call upon besides Him have no authority for intercession, but he who bears witness of the truth and they know (43:86); and on the Day of Resurrection he ('Isa (Jesus)) shall be a witness against them (4:159); and when I taught you the Book and the Wisdom and Torah and the Gospel (5:110). This intercession is something quite different from the atonement which the Christians believe in. The theory of atonement invalidates the system of reward and punishment, and consequently negates the absolute sovereignty of Allah ± as we shall explain later on. It is the idea of atonement which the above mentioned talk of 'Isa (Jesus) refutes. But this verse has nothing to do with intercession ± it neither confirms it nor rejects it. Had it wanted to confirm it ± inspite of its inconsistency (because the situation demands self-abasement, not relaxedness) with context ± it should have said: If Thou shouldst forgive them, then surely Thou art the Forgiving, the Merciful. And if it wanted to refute it, it should not have mentioned his being a witness for the people. Looking at what the people have said about 'Isa (Jesus), we find that they are divided after him into various sects, and disintegrated to perhaps more than seventy denominations. This number looks at fundamental and major divisions only, because minor differences are too numerous to count.

Nevertheless, The Qur'an concerns itself only with what they say about 'Isa (Jesus) and his mother, because it affects the foundation of monotheism which is the only goal to which the Qur'an calls and the natural straight religion leads. The Book of Allah is not concerned with other relatively minor points, e.g., the problem of alteration of the Book and that of atonement. The beliefs which the Qur'an ascribes to them (or quotes them) are as follows: 1.c and the Christian say: "The Messiah is the son of Allah" (9:30); And they say: "The Beneficent Allah has taken to Himself a son" (21:26); 2.c Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah, is the Messiah, son of Mary" (5:72); 3.c Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah is the third of the three" (5:73); 4.c and say not, Three (4:171). (4:171). Apparently, these verses contain different phrases, describe different beliefs. (That is why some people apply various verses to various sects, for example, the Melkites who believe in real sonship; the Nestorians who explain descendence and sonship as radiance of light on a transparent body like crystal; and the Jacobites who explain it in terms of change and transformation, that is, the Allah was transformed into flesh and blood.) But evidently the Qur'an does not look at the peculiarities of their diverse sects. It is concerned only with one belief which is common between all of them ± that 'Isa (Jesus) is the son of Allah and of one substance with Allah, with the resulting belief of trinity ± although they differ very much in its explanation (which has led to extreme conflicts and discords). That this explanation is correct is supported by the fact that the Qur'an brings one and the same argument to refute the views of all of them. It may be explained as follows: The present Torah and Gospels all together clearly mention the Oneness of Allah;

on the other hand the Gospel clearly mentions the sonship declaring that the Son is the Father and none else. They do not interpret the postulated sonship in the terms of distinction, honor and excellence, although many verses of the Gospels clearly give this meaning. For example: "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and prosecute you. That you may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matthew, 5:44 - 48) "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." (Matthew, 5:16) "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which art in heaven." (Matthew, 6:1) "After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed by thy name." (Matthew, 6:9) "For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you." (Matthew, 6:14) "Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful." (Luke, 6:36) Also, he said to Mary Magdalene: "go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God and your God." (John, 20:17) These and other similar sentences of the Gospels refer to Allah as the Father of 'Isa (Jesus) as well as others, all in the sense of distinction and honor. There are some sayings in the Gospels which allude to the union of the Son with the Father. For example: "These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the

hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee." (John, 17:1) Then he went on praying for his disciples and finally said: "Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also, which shall believe on me through their word. That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one; I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me." (John, 17:20 - 23) However, there are other verses which apparently cannot be explained in the terms of distinction and honor. For example: "Thomas saith unto him (i.e. Jesus), Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and ye hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us thy Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me." (John, 5:11) "For I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me." (John, 8:42) "I and my Father are one." (John, 10:30) "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Matthew, 28:19) "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him: and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men." (John, 1:1 - 4)

These and other similar statements of the Gospels have led the Christians to the belief of trinity in unity. The belief of trinity is an attempt to reconcile the belief that the Christ is the Son of God with the belief in one God which the Christ himself had taught. For example, Mark, 12:29 quotes him as saying: "The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord." The believers in the trinity say (although it does not impart any intelligible meaning): God is one substance with three Persons. The word person denotes an attribute with which a thing appears to others; and the attribute is none other than the thing itself. The three Persons are: The Person of existence, the Person of knowledge, i.e. the Word, and the Person of life, i.e. the Spirit. These three Persons are the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. The first is the Person of existence; the second, the Person of knowledge (the Word); and the third, the Person of Life. The Son who is the Word and the Person of Knowledge descended from his Father (i.e. the Person of existence) accompanied by the Holy Ghost (i.e. the Person of Life) that gives light to all things. Then they differ among themselves in explanation of this vague statement; and ever-occurring conflicts have divided them to more than seventy sects and denominations. We shall mention some of them to the extent that is necessary in the framework of this book. Think over the above description; then look at what the Qur'an ascribes to the Christians, or quotes them as saying: and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the son of Allah" (9:30); Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah, He is the Messiah, son of Maryam: (5:72): Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah is the third (Person) of the three" (5:73); and say not, "three"; Desist (4:171). Then you will realize that all these statements point to a single idea, i.e. the trinity in unity which is the common factor of all the sects which sprang up in the Christianity (as we have said above). Why did the Qur'an concentrate on this common factor? It was because the same objections apply to all their beliefs regarding 'Isa (Jesus) - in spite of their diversity and numerousness. The arguments put by the Qur'an are applicable to all their interpretations with equal force, as will be explained later. *" ,

  , 


   Coming to the belief of trinity, the Qur'an refutes it in two ways:

First: The general method, i.e. showing that it is impossible for Allah to take a son for Himself, no matter whether the presumed son be 'Isa (a.s.) or someone else. Second: The particular method, i.e. describing that 'Isa (a.s.) son of Maryam was neither a son of God nor God; that he was but a servant created by Allah. First Method: What is the quiddity of sonship and birth? What do these words really mean? A living material thing (like man, animal or vegetable) separates from itself a portion of its own matter, then gradually develops it until it becomes another individual of the same species similar to its parent; the offspring has the same characteristics and traits as the parent body had. An animal separates semen from its body, or a plant removes a seed from from itself, then it preserves and grows the semen or seed gradually until it becomes another animal or plant similar to its parent. This is what sonship and birth mean. It is no secret that such a thing is impossible for Allah: First: Because it needs a physical material body; and Allah is far above matter and its concomitants without which matter cannot exist like motion, time, space and other such things. Second: To Allah belongs absolute Divinity and Lordship; consequently, He has absolute authority over, and total management of, all things in His hand. Every thing is in need of Him to bring it into existence, and depends on Him for its continuity. It is just impossible to imagine a thing similar to Allah in "species" - a thing having the identity, attributes and characteristics similar to those of Allah and independent of Him. Third: If Allah could beget or give birth to a son, it would entail graduality of action for Allah. In other words, He would be governed by the laws of matter and movement; and it is contradiction in term, because whatever takes place by His Will comes into being at once without delay, without graduality. The above explanations are inferred from the words of Allah: And they say: ''Allah has taken to Himself a son." Glory be to Him; rather, whatever is in the heavens and the earth is HIs; all are obedient to Him. The Originator of the heavens and the earth; and when He decrees an affair, He only says to it, "Be", and it is (2:116117). As we have explained above, the words, Glory be to Him, are a complete proof;

the clause, whatever is in the heavens and the earth is His; all are obedient to Him, is another proof; and the verse, The Originator of the heavens and the earth; and when He decrees an affair, He only says to it "Be", and it is, is a third proof. It is also possible to take the clause, The Originator of the heavens and the earth, as a allegorical expression in which the attribute of the object has been transferred to the subject. In other words, the clause may denote that the heavens and the earth are original in their creation and design; Allah has created them without any previous model. Therefore, He cannot beget anyone, otherwise it would be a creation on His own model. (After all the Christians believe that the Son is one with the Father). In that case this clause would be an independent proof by itself. The Christians generally use the sentence, 'the Messiah is the Son of God', in a somewhat allegorical sense, and not in its literal meaning. They expand the meaning of sonship. Probably, it means separation of a thing from another of similar quiddity without physical and material division and without graduality. This interpretation may remove the problems of body, materiality and graduality. Yet, the problem of similarity will remain unsolved. The problem of similarity may be described thus: Evidently, to believe in God the Father and God the Son is to believe in number, in real plurality, even if we suppose that the Father and the Son are one in "species" or quiddity, both belong to the homosapien species; but they are in fact more than one because they are two individual human beings. Now, if we suppose that God is one, then all other things (including the Son) would be "no-God"; they would be owned by God and dependent on Him; consequently the putative son would not be a God like Him. On the other hand, if we suppose a son similar to God, free of, not dependent on, Him, then it would invalidate and negate the Oneness of God. This exposition is found in the following words of Allah: and say not, "Three". Desist, it is better for you; Allah is only one God; far be it from His glory that He should have a son; whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is His; and Allah is sufficient for a Protector (4:171). Second Method: 'Isa (a.s.) son of Maryam could not be a son of God sharing Godhead with Him, because he was a human being having all the concomitants of humanity. The Messiah (a.s.) was conceived by Maryam and grew up in her womb; then she brought him forth as women give birth to their children, and brought him up, as a

child is brought up by his mother. He grew up proceeding through normal stages: from infancy to childhood, from youth to middle age. All this time, his condition was like any other normal human being in march of life. He was governed by all normal accidents and conditions undergone by other men. He was hungry and satiated; felt joy and sorrow; was pleased and displeased; affected by delight and pain, comfort and discomfort; he ate and drank, slept and woke up, was tired and rested etc. This was the condition of 'Isa (a.s.) when he was among the people. Doubtlessly a person having such characteristics is just like a mortal man like any other member of his species. As such he, like all other human beings, was a creature made by Allah. Now, let us look at the miracles and supernatural things that happened on his hand, like giving life to dead bodies, creating the birds and healing the blind and leper. Also, there are extraordinary signs related to his birth, that is, his conception without father. All these things are supernatural, against the normal custom which people are familiar with; yet they are unfamiliar because of their rarity, not because they are impossible. There was Adam who by evidence of the heavenly Books was created from dust and had no father. And here are the prophets, for example: Salih, Ibrahim and Musa (peace be upon them) on whose hand so many miraculous signs had appeared (which are mentioned in revealed scriptures). But nobody thinks that those miracles negated their humanity or proved their divinity. This method has been used in the verses: Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah is the third (Person) of the three"; and there is no god but One God,«. The Messiah, son of Maryam is but an apostle; apostles before him have indeed passed away; and his mother was a truthful woman, they both used to eat food. See how We make the signs clear to them, then behold how they are turned away (5:73 ± 75). Eating food has been specially selected for mention in preference to other activities, because it rather more forcefully proves his materiality and shows his neediness and wants, which cannot be combined with Godhead. Obviously a person who by his nature feels hunger and thirst and satisfies it with a morsel of food and a cup of water, is nothing but an embodiment of poverty and need ± a need that cannot be removed without help of some extraneous agent. How can such a man be God? What is the meaning of such divinity? A man surrounded by needs, depending for their fulfillment on something outside his own being, is deficient in himself, and managed by some other than himself. He cannot be self-sufficient

god; rather he shall be a creature who is looked after by the Lord ± the Lord Who has His creatures' affairs in His Own Hand. The verse 5:17 may possibly be explained in this light: Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah ± He is the Messiah, son of Maryam". Say: "Who then could control any thing as against Allah when He wished to destroy the Messiah, son of Maryam and his mother and all those on the earth?" And Allah's is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is between them; He creates what He pleases; and Allah has power over all things. The same is the case with the verse (coming after 5:75 quoted above) addressing the Christians: Say: "Do you worship besides Allah that which does not control for you any harm, or any profit?" And Allah ± He is the Hearing, the Knowing (5:76). The basis and theme of such arguments is this: 'Isa (a.s.), as is seen from his condition and affairs, lived according to, and was governed by, the natural law which permeates a man's life. He had all the attributes, did all the deeds, and underwent all the conditions which a human being does; like eating, drinking, fulfilling all other human needs, showing all the characteristics of the human race. Also this material involvement, these physical attributes were real; not an illusion or imagination. 'Isa (a.s.), was a real man who had those natural attributes, conditions and actions. The Gospels contain many verses in which he calls himself man and son of man; are full of the stories of his eating, drinking, sleeping, walking, travelling, tiring, speaking and many such things, which cannot be explained away, nor can they be interpreted otherwise. This being the case, the position of the Messiah would be the same as that of other human beings; he did not own or control any affair of the others, and he could be destroyed like others. The same is the implication of his prayers and invocations; no doubt that he worshipped Allah, his intention being to reach nearer to Allah; with humbleness and humility to the sublimity and majesty of Allah; certainly it was not for the purpose of teaching others how to pray or for any other such aim. The verse 4:172 arguing against 'Isa's supposed divinity points to his prayer: Allah says: The Messiah by no means disdain that he should be a servant of Allah, nor do the angels who are near to Him, and whoever disdains His worship and is proud, He will gather them all together to Himself. 'Isa's service and worship is the first and foremost proof that he was not God and that he no share in Godhead which is reserved for the One other than him. How can a man put himself in the position of servitude to himself? How can he be the slave of himself? How can a thing be selfsufficient in the same framework in which it is dependent on someone else? The

answer is clear: In no way. Likewise, the worship of the angels clearly shows that they are not Allah's daughters. Nor is the Holy Ghost a God, because they are all worshippers of Allah and obedient to Him. Allah says: And they say: "The Beneficent God has taken to Himself a son." Glory be to Him. Nay! They are honored servants; they do not precede Him in speech and (only) according to His commandment do they act. He knows what is before them and what is behind them, and they do not intercede except for him whom He approves, and for fear of Him they tremble (21:26 ± 28). Moreover, the Gospels contain verses showing that the Spirit or Ghost is obedient to Allah and His messengers, following their commands, acting on their orders. There is no sense in saying that a thing orders itself or obeys itself, or that it accepts and acts on the orders of its own creatures (i.e., messengers). In the same way as 'Isa's worship of Allah proves that 'Isa was not Allah, his call to the people to worship Allah proves it; as the verse points to it: Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah, He is the Messiah, son of Maryam". And the Messiah said: "O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord, surely whoever associates (others) with Allah, then Allah has forbidden to him the garden, and his abode is the fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust" (5:72). The method of argument used in this verse is self-evident. Although the Gospels do not contain such comprehensive sentence as, "worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord", they are full of sayings calling people to Allah and to His worship; he repeatedly declares that Allah is his Lord in Whose Hand is the management of his affairs; he openly says that Allah is the Lord of the people; and never invites them to his own worship ± in spite of his reported saying: "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30). If we accept that it is a correct reporting, then, all things taken together, it must mean: my obedience is Allah's obedience; thus, it shall have the same connotation as the verse of the Qur'an: Whoever obeys the Messenger, he indeed obeys Allah (4:80). G"   

  [
$


The Christians believe that Jesus Christ atoned for their sins with his blood; and that is why they call him the Redeemer, the Savior. They explain this belief as follows: "Adam disobeyed Allah by partaking of the forbidden tree; it was a sin which

remained with Adam, and it is inherited by his progeny who came into this world burdened by that original sin; and the recompense of sin is punishment in the next world, the eternal perdition, the everlasting ruin ± which cannot be warded off. And Allah is Merciful and Just ± both at the same time. "This situation created a knotty problem which defied all solutions: If Allah were to punish Adam and his progeny for their sin, it would have been against the mercy for which He had created them; and if He were to forgive them, it would have been against His Justice. Justice demands that a sinner should be punished for his sins and errors, just as a good-doer and obedient person should be rewarded for his good deeds. "This problem remained unsolved until Allah solved it through Christ. Christ ± the Son of God who was Himself God ± entered the womb of a descendent of Adam, that is the Virgin Maryam, and was born from her as a human being is born. In this way, he was a complete man, because he was a son of man; and at the same time, was complete God, because he was the Son of God. "And the Son of God, being God Himself, was sinless and protected from every sin and error. "He lived among his people for sometime, mixing and dealing with them; he joined them in eating and drinking, talked and walked with them and befriended them. Thereafter he surrendered to his enemies enabling them to kill him the worst killing ± killing by crucifixion, because one who is crucified is, according to the Divine Scriptures, cursed by God. "He took upon Himself the Divine curse and crucifixion, with all the condemnations, sufferings and chastisement which it entails. In this way he redeemed the people through his sacrifice, in order that they might be saved from the chastisement of the hereafter and the eternal perdition. Thus, he is the atonement for the sin of the believers, nay, for the sins of the whole world." This is what the Christians believe. The Christians have made this theory (i.e. the crucifixion and atonement) the foundation of their religion. It is the Alpha and Omega of their call and mission ± in the same manner as the Qur'an has founded the Islam and its mission on monotheism; as Allah says addressing His Messenger (s.a.w.): Say: "This is my way: I invite (you) unto Allah: with clear sight (are) I and he who follows me; and

glory be to Allah; and I am not of the polytheists" (12:108). It is the Christians' belief in spite of the fact that Christ (as the Gospels clearly say, and we have mentioned earlier) used to admonish them first of all to believe in one God and to love Him. The Muslims as well as many non-Muslims have shown the Christians the defects and invalidity of the above-mentioned belief of Christianity. Countless books and booklets have been written and numerous pamphlets and articles published, showing that this theory is not only contrary to logic and reason, but it also contradictory to the Books of the Old and the New Testaments. What we are concerned with here ± and what comes within the purview of this book of ours ± is to show how this idea is opposed to the basic Qur'anic teachings, and to explain the difference between intercession (as confirmed by the Qur'an) and atonement (as claimed by the Christians). Moreover, the Qur'an clearly says that it talks with the people explaining the things in such a way as to bring it to the level of their understanding, to make it easier for them to grasp its realities. It explains what helps them to distinguish the truth from falsehood, so that they may accept that and reject this. It enables him to differentiate between virtue and evil, between beneficial and harmful, so that he may take the one and leave the other. The fact that the Qur'an keeps in view the level of the healthy reason and understanding is abundantly clear to all who study the Divine Book. Now let us have a critical look at the above-mentioned Christian theory of atonement.  ! They say that Adam committed a sin by eating from the forbidden tree. But the Qur'an refutes this idea in two ways: 1.c The said prohibition was not like a binding order given by a master to his slave; it was only an advisory counsel aiming at the good of the person so advised ± in order that he may live more comfortably. Such an advice does not bring any judicial reward or punishment whether one acts upon it or ignores it. It is not different from the order or prohibition of an advisor to the one who seeks his advice, or the directions given by a physician to his patient. What happens in such situations is this: If the person concerned acts upon the advice, he achieves what is good and beneficial to him in this life; and if he neglects such advice, he may come to harm in this world. When

Adam ate from the forbidden tree, the only harm he suffered was his removal from the Garden, and thus he lost the comfort and happiness he had been enjoying there. But there was no question at all of any punishment of hereafter, because he had not disobeyed any compulsory legislative order, which could have resulted in "punishment". (For detail see the Commentary of the verses 2:35 ± 39) 2.c Adam (a.s.) was a prophet. The Qur'an clearly says that the prophets were sinless; they were protected by Allah from committing sins and transgressing the "orders" of Allah. Logical reasons supports this belief and the Qur'an proves it. (See our discourse on sinlessness of the prophets) %
 $! They say that the said sin remained with Adam. But the Qur'an rejects this idea when it says: Then his (Adams) Lord chose him, so He turned to him (with mercy) and guided (him) (20:122); Then Adam received (some) words from his Lord, so He turned to him mercifully; surely He is Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful (2:37). The reason also supports, nay, proves it. Retribution of sin is a frightening and formidable thing which the reason - or the master - thinks necessary for him who disobeys the command or shows obstinacy; it is from fear of punishment that legislations and laws are obeyed. Had there been no reward and punishment, the mastership could not be enforced and no order or prohibition would be obeyed. The master has the right and power to punish the sinners for their sins as well as to give rewards to the obedient ones for their obedience. Likewise, it lies within his power to exercise his discretion in a way he thinks fit, within the jurisdiction of his mastership. He has every right to pass over and overlook the disobedience and mistakes of wrong-doers by forgiving and pardoning them their sins and wrongs. This power of forgiveness is a part of management and rule as much as is the authority to mete out punishment. There is no doubt in any mind that forgiveness and pardon, in certain cases, is good and commendable when the forgiver has full power to punish; even today reasonable persons practice it and put it into effect. In this background, there is no reason why a wrong done by a man should remain attached to him forever. Otherwise, forgiveness and pardon would have no meaning at all. One forgives and pardons for erasing a mistake, for nullifying the effect of a sin; and if we say that the mistake and sin remains attached and cannot be removed, then forgiveness and pardon are meaningless. Moreover, the Divine Revelation is full of descriptions of forgiveness and pardon; also the Old and New Testaments speak of it. Not only that, even the aforementioned "Christian dogma" speaks about it. In short, the claim that a certain sin

or mistake had been attached to a man, which could not be erased or forgiven even after repentance and expression of sorrow, even after returning to the Lord with sincerity, is a thing which no reason would accept, nor would any straight thinking person agree with.  $! They say that the sin of Adam has remained attached not only to him but even to his progeny up to the Day of Resurrection. It means that the punishment of a crime of one person was extended to the others too who had no hand in that sin. In other words, a slave commits a sin and the master widens the circle of punishment to include even those who were in no way connected with that sin! (We are not speaking about a situation where someone had committed a sin and his descendants were pleased with his action; because in that case all would be counted as sinners.) What the Christians say puts the burden of sin on those who had nothing to do with that supposed sin. And the Qur'an rejects it when it says: That no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another.- and that there is not for man (aught) except what he strives for (53:38-39). Sound reason supports this dictum, because it is an evil to penalize someone for a sin he has not committed. (vide the discourse on the "Deeds", under the verses 2: 216 - 218.)  ! Their argument is based on a misconception that every mistake and sin without any exception - throws the man into eternal perdition. In other words, sins do not differ in size and magnitude - all are great and capital. But the Qur'an teaches us that the sins and errors are of various categories: some are great, others small; some may be forgiven, others like polytheism shall not be forgiven except after repentance. Allah says: If you avoid the great sins which you are forbidden, We will expiate from you your (small) sins and cause you to enter an honorable (place of)entering (4:31); Surely Allah does not forgive that anything should be associated with Him, and forgives what is besides that to whomsoever He pleases (4:48). Thus Allah has taught us that some of the forbidden things, that is, sins and mistakes, are great, and others are, by implication, small; some are not forgivable while others are forgiven. In any case, sins vary in their seriousness, and not every sin puts the sinner in eternal perdition or ever burning fire. Reason also refuses to lump all sins together, to put all mistakes in one category. A slap on face is different from murder; a lustful eye and fornication are not one; and so on. Never in the long human history have people treated all sins and errors alike. Sane persons in every age have prescribed different punishments for different crimes. How can it be possible to bracket all sins together without any discrimination, when there is so clear difference among them? In view of this.accepted difference, only a few of them may cause eternal perdition, never-ending

chastisement (for example) associating others with Allah, as the Qur'an has said: Obviously going against the prohibition of partaking of a tree cannot be put in the category of disbelief in Allah or polytheism or things like that. Thus there is no reason why it should cause an eternal punishment. (vide the above-mentioned discourse on Deeds). ! Let us look at what they have said about the problem of the conflict between the Divine attributes of mercy and justice; how a plan was devised to overcome that difficulty; and how Christ came down and then ascended to heaven to effect that scheme - with all the ramifications they have mentioned. Ponder on this statement and its concomitants, and see what type of god they believe in. Here you will find a Creator God Who is the beginning and the end of this created universe and all its components. But all His actions emanate from a will and a knowledge which are found in Him; and His will depends on an academic preference - in the same way as a man opts for a course of action after weighing its pros and cons according to his knowledge. Likewise, God ponders on the positive and negative sides of a thing and then decides whether to do it or not. Sometimes He makes a wrong choice and repents for it; at other times He meditates upon a problem without finding its correct solution; often He remains unaware of many affairs. In short, in their eyes, God in His attributes and actions is not different from a man. Whatever He does, He does it after thinking and meditating over it, directing His endeavors to the advantages of that action. His decision is thus governed and controlled by some extraneous factors, that is, the said advantages. He may find His way to the correct decision, also He may take a wrong decision; there may be error, misunderstanding or forgetfulness in the course He has taken. Sometimes He knows, at other times He does not; often He overpowers, and frequently is Himself overpowered. His power, like His knowledge, is limited. When all this is believed about Him, then it should be equally possible for Him to be subjected to all the conditions which prevail in a human being who decides to do a work after pondering on its pros and cons: God will thus experience joy and grief, vainglory and shame, happiness and sorrow and things like that. Needless to say that such a being would be a physical and material one, governed by the laws of movement, change and gradual completion. A thing having these attributes must be a transient being, a created thing; it cannot be the Self-existing God Who is the Creator of all things. If you study the Old and New Testaments, you will know that all that we have said above is true; and that they believe in a god who has a body and has all the attributes found in a body, and especially in a man.

As for the Qur'an, it declares the Lord's glory in all these matters, showing that He is far above such myths and superstitions, as it says: Glory be to Allah (for freedom) from what they describe (37:159). We have many incontestable rational proofs to show that Allah is One in Whom all the attributes of perfection are united. His are the existence without any hint of inexistence, absolute power without any shade of weakness, all-encompassing knowledge without any taint of ignorance, absolute life without any possibility of death or destruction. This being the case, there can never come any change in His existence, power, knowledge or life. Consequently, He cannot be a body or a thing related to body, because body and the things connected to it are surrounded by change and alteration, subdued by incorporeality, neediness and shortcomings. As He is not a body, nor related to body, He is not subjected to varying circumstances or changing conditions; He is far above forgetfulness or obliviousness, mistake or repentance, undecidedness or uncertainty, reaction or despondency, weakness or defeat - and things like that. We have fully explained the rational arguments (related) to these topics in this book in relevant places- those who want a thorough study should look for them under relevant verses. A discerning reader may easily judge between the two beliefs: Here is the Qur'an, declaring the glory of the Lord of the universe; it affirms for Him every attribute of perfection, and asserts His freedom from every imperfection; and declares that He is too great to be comprehended by our understanding - beset as it is by limitations and imperfections. And there are the Old and New Testaments describing God in terms which can only be found in the Greek, Indian and Chinese mythologies of the ancient times; and ascribing to Him such things which primitive man imagined and which his superstition Jed him to believe. %#! They say that Allah sent His Son, Christ, and told him to enter into the womb of a woman - in order that he could be born a man while he was a god. It is the same unintelligible theory which has been strongly refuted by the Qur'an; there is no need to repeat here the earlier-explained Qur'anic arguments against it. Also the reason does not support this theory. First look at the attributes which are essential for the Self-existing Being. His existence is eternal, without beginning or end; there can be no change in Him; His existence knows no limit; He encompasses everything, but Himself is above the limits of time, space and their concomitants. Then think over the creation of man from the time he was a sperm to the stage when it is a fetus in a womb - no matter which interpretation you accept

for this human birth of god: that of the Melchites, or the Nestorians, or the Jacobites or some other groups. In the end you will have to admit that there is no relationship between a thing that has a physical body with all its accidents and concomitants and a Being that has neither a body nor any of its concomitants or accidents (like time, space, movement etc.). How can one even think of unity between the two in any way? The fact is that this theory does not agree with self-evident rational propositions. That is why St. Paul and other leaders of Christianity hold philosophy in contempt and spurn and disdain rational arguments. St. Paul writes: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?... For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom. But we preach Christ crucified." (Corinthians 1) We find a lot of pronouncements - in similar vein - in his as well as in others' writings. This line was adopted only for propagation of their ideas and missionary activities. Anyone pondering on these epistles and books and studying the way they address the people may easily understand the motive behind it. The above discourse also exposes the flaw in their statement that: "God is sinless and protected from sins and errors." The God they have imagined is not safe from errors at all,- He errs in His perceptions and He errs in His actions. Of course, He does not disobey anyone because none is superior to Him. That is why the question of sin and disobedience does not arise at all, so far as God is concerned. Consequently, it is irrelevant, nay, unimaginable, to say that He is "protected from sins". %
+
! They say that God became man and then lived with his people as a man lives in society until he surrendered to his enemies. It means that the Self-existent God may acquire for Himself some properties especially reserved for transient and incorporeal creatures - only then He can be God and man all at the same time. If so, then He can also become any of His other creatures; He may acquire for Himself the reality of any of the species created by Him. One day He may appear as a man, the next day as a horse; sometimes as a bird, at other times as an insect, and so on. He may even acquire more than one reality at a time, that is, He may come to this world as a combination of several species, for example, He may appear as perfect man and perfect horse and perfect insect, all at the same time.

Likewise, He may do any action done by His creatures because He may appear as a certain species and then would do the actions reserved for that species. Going a step further, it would be possible for Him to do two opposite things together like justice and injustice, or to acquire opposite attributes for Himself, for example, knowledge and ignorance, power and lack of power, life and death, want and freedom from want. Glory be to Allah Who is far above such absurdities! (This snag is different from the one explained in the Sixth Objection.) Ô,! They say that he suffered until he was crucified and took upon himself the curse, because a crucified person is cursed. What do they really mean when they say that he took the curse upon himself? What is the meaning of curse? In common usage and language curse means removal from Divine Mercy and Honor. Does that supposed curse imply the same meaning? Or is it something else? If it has the same meaning which is known to the language and common usage, then how can God remove Himself from His own mercy? Or, how can anyone else remove Him away from His own mercy? What is mercy? It is a positive bestowal, a grant of favors and bounties, a bequeathal of specialties of existence. When one is cursed - taken away from Divine Mercy - it results in poverty, disgrace or effects like that - in this world or the next or in both. This being the case, what is the sense of saying that God was effected by curse? Choose any meaning for curse, it cannot apply to God - the God Who is Self-sufficient and fulfils the needs of everything. The Qur'anic teaching is diametrically opposed to this truly amazing theory of the New Testament. Allah says: O men! you are the ones who stand in need of Allah, and Allah is He Who is Self-sufficient, the Praised One (35:15). Also the names and attributes of Allah mentioned in the Qur'an make it clear that it is impossible for any type of need or want, shortcoming or defect, loss or extinction, evil or abomination, disgrace or stigma to reach the sublime majesty of Allah. î
! God suffered disgrace and took the curse upon Himself only because He became one with man. Otherwise, He in His own Self is too high to be affected by such things. [
! Did God, by becoming one with man, take upon Himself that curse and those sufferings in real sense of the word? Or, was it all just a metaphor, only an allegory? If it was in real sense, our objection stands. And if it was only in a metaphorical sense, then the original "problem" would remain unsolved-, the birth of Christ would not solve the conflict between Divine Mercy and Divine Justice. If it was not God - but someone else - who suffered all those indignities and curse the so-called scheme of atonement would remain unfulfilled. Obviously, the said plan was based on the idea that God Himself should be the ransom for human

beings. ) ! They say that 'Isa (Jesus) atoned for the sins of the believers, nay, for the sins of the whole world. This talk shows that they do not understand the real meaning of sin and error, nor do they comprehend how the sins bring the next world's punishment, or how that punishment is affected. Also, they have not grasped the relationship between sins and errors on one side and Divine Legislation on the other, nor do they know the stand of the shari'ah about it. But the Qur'an clearly describes all these things and teaches us these realities - as we have explained in the Commentaries of verses 2:26 (Surely Allah is not ashamed to set forth any parable . . .) and 2: 213 (Mankind was but one nation ...). We have described there that the orders and laws (which might be the subject of disobedience) and the sins and errors all are mentally posited things based on subjective consideration. They have been made for the protection of society's welfare; and the punishment of its disobedience is the unpleasant result which has been prescribed with a single aim in view - to discourage and prevent a responsible man from indulging into sin, from disobeying the law. This is the view of the sages who have laid the foundation of human society. But the Qur'anic teaching leads us to a still higher level in this respect (and the rational reasoning supports it, as we have explained). It says that when a man obeys the shari'ah prescribed for him by Allah, his psyche acquires some noble and praiseworthy inner traits; and if he disobeys the said shari'ah, he acquires unworthy-, hideous and evil traits. It is these deeply ingrained traits and characteristics which prepare for him the rewards or punishments of the next life, respectively. That reward and punishment is represented by the Paradise and the Hell, respectively - and their respective reality is nearness to Allah or distance from Him. Thus the merit and demerit of deeds are based on things which actually exist and have a system. Unlike our social laws they are not based on any imaginary thing emanating from subjective consideration. Also it is not a secret that the Divine Legislation perfects and completes the Divine Creation. It brings the creative guidance to its final destination. In other words, Allah brings every thing to the perfection of its existence, to the final goal of its being. And among the perfection of human existence are a good social system in this world, and a happy, bounteous life in the hereafter. The way to that perfection is religion, which enacts and promulgates laws for society's reform and development, and contains directions for reaching nearer to Allah (and these directives are called acts of worship). When a man follows the laws of religion, his life and livelihood are improved, and his soul becomes ready to receive Allah's

bounties; and he is qualified - in his self and in his actions - for the Divine Honor in the hereafter. All of this emanates from the light put in his heart, and the purity that is found in his self. This in short is the reality. Man gets nearer to Allah or goes far away from Him. This nearness and distance are the foundations of his eternal happiness and unhappiness, respectively - and also for his social development (or otherwise) in this life. And religion is the only factor that brings about his nearness and distance. All these are real things, not based on imaginary assumptions or subjective considerations. Now suppose that one putative sin of Adam - his partaking of the forbidden tree brought eternal perdition on him, and not only on him, but on all his descendants also; and that there was no remedy for it, no relief from that ruination - except atonement through Christ. Then what was the use of sending religion - any religion - before Christ? And what was the use of ordaining it with Christ? And what is the use of promulgating it after Christ? Let us put it this way: Eternal perdition and punishment in hereafter was a firmly decreed fate of man - because of the said sin; it could not be removed or averted from him either through good deeds or through repentance; the only effective remedy was the atonement through Christ's suffering and crucifixion. Then why did Allah promulgate the laws, revealed the books, and sent the prophets and messengers? What was the sense behind all this exercise? Were not all those promises and threats, all those good tidings and warnings devoid of truth? What could all those endeavors avail mankind when the whole species was doomed to perdition, and when eternal punishment was their firmly-decreed fate? Also, suppose there were people who perfected themselves by sincerely following the previous shari'ah (and there were countless prophets and also men of God in previous ummah who were like that, for example, the honored prophets lbrahim, Musa and others); they lived perfectly and died before the time of atonement. Now what would you say about them? Did they end their life in infelicity and perdition? Or in felicity and happiness? What did they face when they met death and went to the next world? Did death bring them to chastisement and ruination? Or to Divine bounties and happy life? Moreover, Christ clearly says that he was sent only to save the sinners and wrongdoers, and that good-doers and righteous have no need of such help Frankly speaking, no valid reason can be given for promulgating the Divine Laws,

for ordaining the religious values - before the supposed atonement was affected through Christ; it was but a vain, senseless and aimless exercise. Nor can any good and correct reason be advanced for this "strange" action of God. The only thing that can be said is this: God knew very well that, unless the problem of Adam's sin was solved, no law promulgated by Him would do any good. Yet He went on promulgating those laws just to be on safe side, hoping that one of these days He would get a chance to solve this problem and then He would be able to harvest the fruits of those legislation! Thus He legislated the laws and promulgated them through the prophets - hiding the truth from the prophets and their people alike. He did not tell them that there was a big problem which - if it remained unsolved - would nullify all the efforts of the whole group of the prophets and the believers, and which would render all the laws ineffective and useless. On the contrary, He pretended that the legislation and the prophetic missions were very serious, very important and very real things. Thus God deceived the people, and deceived Himself too. He deceived the people by promising that their safety and happiness was guaranteed if they faithfully followed the shari'ah. And He deceived Himself because, once the atonement was affected, legislation of the shari'ah would become irrelevant, without having any effect on the people's felicity - in the same way as it was without any effect as long as the problem of Adam's sin was not solved. This was the case before affectation of the said atonement. Corning to the time when atonement was affected, and to the later days, ineffectiveness and futility of the shari'ah, of prophetic mission and of Divine Guidance is much more self-evident. What is the use or benefit ofbelieving in divinely-sent realities and doing good deeds now that the problem of the original sin has been solved, and the atonement has brought forgiveness and mercy to all men, believers and unbelievers, righteous and unrighteous, all alike, without any difference between the most impeccable righteous one and the most incorrigible impious one: Both were to suffer eternal perdition when the original sin was not redeemed and both are to share in the Divine Mercy now that it has been redeemed through the said atonement. (Remember that no good deed could remove that stigma, if there were no atonement.) 25
 ! The atonement would benefit only those who believe in Christ. Therefore, the prophetic mission did have its use and benefit, as Christ has said in the Gospel.

[
! First of all, it contradicts the saying of St. John referred to earlier. Secondly, it destroys all the edifice built so far, because nobody - right from Adam to the Last Day - would enter the sanctuary of safety and deliverance except a very small group, that is, those who believe in Christ and the Holy Ghost; and not even all the Christians but only a certain group among all those widely differing denominations - all other denominations would be thrown into eternal perdition. I wish I knew what would happen to the honored prophets (who came) before Christ, and to the believers of their ummah! What would be the status of their mission, of the books they brought and of the wisdom they taught? Was it true? Or just a lie? The Gospels verify the Torah and its mission, and there is no mention at all ofthe Ghost and the atonement in the Torah. Does the Gospel verify a true book? Or does it verify a pack of lies? î
! As we know, the previously revealed books give the good tidings of Christ. This was a sort of a general call by them towards Christ, although they did not give any detail about his coming and atoning the sin. God was always telling His prophets about the advent of Christ in order that they might believe in him and be happy with what he would do. [
! First: To make such claims for the prophets before Musa is to shoot in the dark, to venture into terra incognito. Moreover, if there was any good news, it was not an invitation to believe in, and follow, him. Secondly, that good tiding does not solve the problem of futility of the shari'ah; if Christ delivered all those who believed in him, then was it not useless and futile to invite people to follow the laws of the shari'ah and to practice good ethics and morality? Even Christ exhorted people to follow the rules of religion and be of good conduct; and the Gospels are full of his sermons to this effect. Thirdly, the basic problem still remains. They had talked about the original sin and the unfulfilment of the Divine Purpose, and that purpose is still unfulfilled. God had created mankind to bestow His mercy on all of them, to cover all of them with His favor and bounties, felicity and happiness. But what is the result? Almost all of them - with the exception of a small group - are going to be punished, suffering under the wrath of God, thrown into eternal perdition. These are just a few of the rational reasons showing the absurdity and invalidity of this theory. The Qur'an too supports these reasons. Allah says: Our Lord is He Who gave to everything its creation, then guided it (to its goal) (20:50). He has made it clear that everything is guided to its goal and to what its existence demands. The guidance is of two kinds: creative and legislative. It is the established way of Allah

to bestow every relevant guidance on everything, and it includes the religious guidance bestowed on man. Then Allah says - and it is the first religious guidance given to Adam and those who were sent down with him from the Garden: We said: "Get down you there from all together; if there comes to you a guidance from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, no fear shall come upon them, nor shall they grieve, And (as to) those who disbelieve in and belie our signs, they are the inmates of the fire, in it they shall abide" (2:38-39). It gives in a nut-shell what various laws were to promulgate in detail up to the Day of Resurrection; it contains legislation as well as promise and threat - all in clear terms without ambiguity. Again He says: ...and the truth do I speak (38:84); The word is not changed with Me, nor am I in the least unjust to the servants (50:29). Allah declares that He has no hesitation or misgiving about what He decides, He does not break what He has joined; whatever He decides, He enforces; and what He says, He enacts; His action does not deviate from the line He has prescribed for it. He does not waver or hesitate when He wills; nor is it befitting to His knowledge that He should intend a thing and then some demerit should appear in that course of action which He did not know before and thus He should decide not to do it. Nor can anyone else hinder His plan: It is not that He should will a thing, deciding to do it and then some rational defect should prevent Him from doing it, or some snag should appear in its execution and He should abandon the plan - because all such things, if they ever happened, would show helplessness of God. Allah says: and Allah is predominant over His affairs (12:21); surely Allah attains His purpose (65:3); and Musa is reported as saying: The knowledge thereof is with my Lord in a book: errs not my Lord, nor does He forget (20: 52); and Allah says about the Day of Judgment: This day every soul shall be rewarded for what it has earned; no injustice (shall be done) this day; surely Allah is quick in reckoning (40:17). These and similar other verses clearly show that Allah, after creating His creatures, has not neglected to look after their affairs, nor is He ignorant of what they would do, nor is He sorry for what He has done. As He is constantly looking after their welfare, He has ordained for them His laws - a serious and important legislation which He has ordained not because He is afraid of something or expects to gain something through it. He shall reward every doer for his action - if good, then good- and if evil, then evil. In all these affairs nobody can overpower Him, nor can anyone impose his will on Him -- because He has no partner or colleague. There will be neither any ransom nor any redemption to save anyone; nor can anyone intercede for someone without Allah's permission. Because all such

propositions are against His absolute ownership which He has over His creatures. 
! Let us look at the story of atonement. What is atonement or ransom? A man - or a thing related to him - is involved in some crimes or sin, as a result of which he faces the possibilities of harm or destruction of life or valuable property; and therefore he offers something less important in order to save his life or the more valuable property. A man taken prisoner redeems himself with offer of some money; crimes are redeemed with money paid as fine. The thing given for this purpose is called ransom, fine or redemption. Atonement, in short, is a deal, which transfers the right of the claimant from the person so redeemed to the thing given in ransom or redemption - and thus the redeemed one is saved from captivity or from the evil consequences of the crime he had committed. This description shows that atonement and redemption is simply unimaginable in the matters related to Allah. The Divine Authority - unlike human authority, which is merely an abstracted idea, a subjective consideration - is the real authority, which cannot be changed or transferred. Things, in their species and with their effects, actions and reactions, have been created by Allah and continue to exist because of Him. It is a reality, a fact; and reality and fact cannot change into nonreality, non-fact. Such a proposition cannot be imagined - let alone its ever coming into being. Allah's ownership, authority and rights are not like those of us human beings. We are bound with social norms and laws. Our social rights, authority and ownership are merely subjective considerations, abstracted ideas based on our imaginations; their status and worth is in our own hands; we may establish a right today and abolish it tomorrow - as our interest and outlook change concerning our life and livelihood. For details see Commentaries of the verses 1: 4 (the Master of the Day of Judgment), and 3:26 (Say:'O Allah, Master of the Kingdom...'). Allah has specifically refuted the idea of atonement in the following verse: So today ransom shall not be accepted from you nor from those who disbelieved; your abode is the fire (57:15). And as explained earlier, the same is the import of the words of the Messiah quoted by Allah in the Qur'an: And when Allah will say: "O 'Isa son of Maryam! did you say to men, 'Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah'", he will say: "Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); ...I did not say to them save that what Thou didst enjoin me with: 'That worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord', and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take me (away) completely, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things. If Thou shouldst chastise them, then surely they are The servants; and if Thou shouldst forgive them, then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise" (5:116-118). His

words: "and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them. . .", have the following import: 'I had nothing to do with them except what Thou hadst entrusted me to do, that is, conveying Thy message to them and being a witness over them as long as I was among them; whether Thou shouldst chastise them or shouldst forgive them, entirely depends on Thy discretion; I have nothing to do with it. I do not have any authority on Thy will, with which I could save them from Thy chastisement or sentence them to punishment.' It clearly refutes the idea of ransom and atonement. Had there been any ransoming or redeeming, it would have been wrong for him to wash his hands of the fate of his ummah, telling Allah that it was His (Allah's) discretion whether to punish them or forgive them, and that he ('Isa - a. s.) had nothing to do with it. Of similar connotation are the following verses: And be on your guard against the Day when one soul shall not avail another in the least, neither shall intercession on its behalf be accepted, nor shall any compensation be taken from it, nor shall they be helped (2:48). ... before the day comes in which there is no bargaining, neither any friendship nor intercession... (2: 254). The day on which you will turn back retreating; there shall be no savior for you from Allah... (40:33). Obviously, the "compensation" (in the first verse), the "bargaining" (of the second) and the "savior" (of the third) all apply to the idea of atonement and redemption; the verses in refuting these things refute the belief of atonement. Of course, the Qur'an accepts the Messiah as one of the intercessors - but not as an atonement. We have explained about "Intercession" under the verse 2:48 (And be on your guard against the day when one soul shall not avail another ...). We have explained there that intercession shows the nearness of the intercessor and his good standing with the master, without there being any transfer of authority from the master to the intercessors; without affecting in any way the ownership or power of the master; without nullifying or abrogating the, master's commandment which the sinner had disobeyed; and without negating the system of recompense, reward and punishment. Intercession is but a sort of prayer and request by the intercessor that the master - in this case, the Lord - should manage the affairs of His creature with mercy. The intercessor accepts the Master's right to punish the sinner (because he

had sinned and the law of recompense makes him liable to punishment), but asks the Master to exercise His power of forgiveness - because He has the right to forgive as He has the right to punish. The intercessor thus requests the Master to exercise His right of pardon and forgiveness, when the sinner has become liable for punishment, without in any way affecting the Master's ownership or authority. But atonement is something else; it is a deal, a bargain, which transfers the Master's authority from the sinner to the ransom given in his place, and removes the sinner from the Master's power as soon as the Master accepts the ransom in his place. That the Messiah is an intercessor is proved by the following verse: And those whom they call upon besides Him have no authority for intercession, but he who bears witness of the truth and they know (43: 86). It clearly says that the people excepted would have the authority to intercede. 'Isa (a.s.) is among those whom they call besides Allah. But he has the authority of intercession because he is included in the exception: Allah confirms in the Qur'an that He had taught him ('Isa) the Book and the Wisdom, and that he ('Isa) shall be among the witnesses on the Day of Judgment. Allah says: And He will teach him the Book and the Wisdom (3:48), and (quotes him as saying: and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them (5:117). He also says-. and on the Day of' Resurrection he shall be a witness against them (4:159). All these verses read together prove that 'Isa (a.s.) is one of the intercessors. We have described it in detail under the following verse-. And be on your guard against the day when one soul shall not a ail another in the least... (2:48). "
2 , 



 Who are the unbelievers whom Allah refers to when He says: they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before? Surely it does not refer to the idolaters of pre-Islamic Arabia, who said that the angels were the daughters of God. Because the People of the Book believed God to have a son long before they came into contact with the Arabs - and especially so the Jews; while the words, who disblieved before, apparently refer to the unbelievers who were before the Jews and the Christians. Moreover, the Arabs themselves were not the originators of idol-worship ± it was brought to them from abroad. [It is said that the first man to place idols in the Ka'bah and to call the people to their worship was 'Amr ibn Luhayy, a contemporary of Shipar Dhu 'l -Aktaf. He became the chief of his people in Mecca and took over the management of the House. Then he journeyed to the

Syrian city, al-Balqa', and found the people there worshipping idols. He enquired about it. They said: "These are the Lords, we have made them in the images of the celestial deities and human sages; we seek help from them and we get help; we pray to them for rain and we get rain." 'Amr requested them to give him one of the idols; they gave him the Hubal. He brought it to Mecca and putting it on the Ka'bah, he invited the Meccans to worship it. He also had with him Asaf and Na'ilah in the image of a couple, s . he called people to them too in order to come nearer to Allah through them. This has been written by ash-Shahristani in his alMilal wa 'n-nihal, as well as by others. It is very interesting to see that the Qur'an uses names of some idols of Arabia in the story of Nuh (a.s.);where it quotes his complaint against his people: And they say: ';By no means leave your gods, nor leave Wadd, nor Suwa; nor Yaghuth, and Ya'uq and Nasr" (71:23). (Author's Note)] Moreover, the idolaters of Rome, Greece, Egypt, Syria and India were nearer to the People of the Book (who lived in Palestine and its neighborhood), and it was easier for the Jews and the Christians to adopt those people's beliefs and rituals, and the influencing factors were more conducive to it. Therefore the unbelievers of earlier times (whose ideas concerning sonship of God, the People of the Book imitated) referred to by the Qur'an were the ancient idolaters of India and China, as well as those of Rome, Greece and North Africa. The history shows close resemblance of such Jewish and Christians beliefs with the myths of those nations - like sonship, fathership, trinity, as well as the stories of crucifixion and atonement etc. These are the historical facts to which the Qur'an has drawn our attention. Similarly, the following verse points to this historical fact: Say: "0 People of the Book! be not unduly immoderate in your religion, and do not follow the low desires of the people who went astray before and led many astray and went astray from the right path- (5: 77). This verse shows that their immoderation in religion, their excessive love of some creatures which led them to raise them to godhead, had come to them from some previous nations who had gone astray before them, and in whose footsteps the Jews and the Christians were following. The phrase: the people who went astray before, does not refer to their scholars or monks. The phrase is unrestricted and unconditional; it does not say, 'the people among you'. or 'led many among you astray'. Nor does it point to the Arabs of the days of ignorance - as we have explained earlier.

Moreover, it describes those people as having led many people astray; in other words, they were leaders of falsehood, whose words were listened to and whose directions were followed. Arabs did not have such a position in those days; they were just a small group of unlettered people, and did not have any knowledge, civilization and development in which - or because of which other people could follow them. But the case of Iran, Rome and India etc., was different; they were highly civilized and developed nations. Clearly the verse points to the idol -worshippers of China, India and the western countries, as we have explained. &"0./
-î


./-
 ,1 Although traditions count the Zoroastrians among the People of the book (and it means they must have had a special Book of their own, or should have belonged to one of the Books mentioned by the Qur'an, for example, the Book of Nuh, the Scriptures of Ibrahim, Torah of Musa, Injil of 'Isa and Zabur of Dawud), but the Qur'an does not make any reference to them, nor does it mention any book of theirs; the Avastha which they have is not mentioned in the Our'an at all. and they do not acknowledge any of the other Books. When the Qur'an uses the term, the People of the Book, it means the Jews and the Christians, because of the Books which Allah had revealed to them. The Jewish Scripture contains 35 [The Hebrew Old Testament contains 39 Books, as the list given by the author himself shows. Roman Catholic Church follows the Greek 0. T. which includes some more books and passages. (tr.)] Books: five are together called the Torah of Musa [Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. (Author's Note)]; twelve are called the Kings [Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 11 Samuel, 1 Kings, 11 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 11 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehermah and Esther. (Author's Note)]; then there are the Books of Job and Psalms of Dawud; then come three Books of Sulayman [Proverbs, Ecclesiastics and Song of Solomon. (Author's Note)]; and lastly seventeen Books called the Prophets [Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. (Author's Note)]. The Qur'an has not mentioned any of them except the Torah of Musa and the Zabur of Dawud.

The Christians' Scriptures are as follows: The four Gospels (of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John); the Acts of the Apostles, and several Epistles [There are fourteen Epistles of Paul, one of James, two of Peter, three of John and one of Jude. (Author's Note)], and lastly the Revelation of John. The Qur'an does not mention any of these Christians' Books. But it says that there was a Divine Book revealed to 'Isa son of Maryam, which was named Injil; it was a single Book, not many. Although the Christians do not know it, nor do they acknowledge its existence, there are sentences in the writings of their leaders which contain admission that 'Isa did have a Book, Injil by name. [Paul writes to Gelatians: "I marvel that we are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another Gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the Gospel of Christ." (Gal., 1:6-7) an-Najjar has given in his Qusasu 'l-anbia', this and similar other quotations from the Epistles of Paul to prove that there was there a book ± other than the four Gospels - which was called the Injil of the Messiah. (Author's Note) Nevertheless, the Qur'an gives a hint that a portion of genuine Torah is still preserved in the Scriptures of the Jews, as is a part of genuine Injil still extant in the Scriptures of the Christians. Allah says: And how do they make you a judge and they have the Torah wherein is Allah's judgment? (5:43); And of those who say: "We are Christians", We did take their covenant, but they forgot a portion of what they were admonished with... (5:14). Both verses clearly imply what we have said. ÿ(*% )*å7[%)
[2 7%2[å8î2)2Ô0 "
7 
î

 ! The Israelites were descendants of Israel, that is, Ya'qub. In the beginning they lived a nomadic tribal life; then the Pharaohs brought them to Egypt, where they treated them as captive slaves. This continued until Allah delivered them through Musa from the Pharaoh and his deeds. During Musa's time they followed the line of their Leader, that is, Musa (a.s.), and thereafter Yusha (a.s.) (Joshua). For sometime thereafter their affairs were in the hands of the judges like Ehud and Gideon etc. Then began the era of the Kings; the first of the Kings was Saul (Talut of the Qur'an); and then came Dawud and Sulayman (a.s,).

After Sulayman the Kingdom was divided, and their power weakened. Still there came on throne more than thirty Kings like Rehoboam, Abijam, Jeroboam, Jehoshaphat, Jehoram and others. The division continued to sap the nation's strength until they were vanquished by the Babylonian King, Nebuchadnezzar, who subdued Jerusalem, that is, Baytu'1Maqdis around 600 B.C. Later the Jews revolted; so he sent his army, which besieged them, and on re-conquering the city, ransacked it, plundering the King's treasures as well as those of the Temple. The Babylonians gathered the Jews and took about ten thousand souls - wealthy people, strong youths and art'Isans - in captivity to Babylonia, leaving only weak persons and beggars in Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah (the last Israelite King) to govern them as his vassal. Ten years passed, Zedekiah gathered some strength and established some contact with the Pharaoh of the time. Then he revolted against Nebuchadnezzar. This enraged the latter who himself led his army against the Jews and besieged their towns. They fortified themselves and the siege continued for about one and a half year; the besieged population faced famine and epidemic. Still the siege continued until Nebuchadnezzer conquered all the forts in the year 586 B.C.; he massacred the Jews, turned their towns into ruins, demolished the Temple and destroyed every religious symbol. When he left, the Temple was only a mound of dust and rubble; and the Torah and the Ark in which it was kept were irretrievably lost. The things continued like that for about fifty years. The Jews were captives in Babylonia; their Book (Torah) was lost and there was nowhere any trace of it; their Temple was a ruin, their towns middens of rubble. Then Cyrus, the Persian King, appeared on the scene. He vanquished Babylonians, conquered Babylonia and stayed there for a short time. He released the Israelite captives, and appointed Ezra as their leader; Ezra was authorized by him to rewrite the Torah for them, rebuild their Temple and re-establish their original rites and rituals. Ezra led the Israelites back to Jerusalem in 457 B.C. Thereafter he compiled and edited the books attributed to Musa - and it is what is known today as the Torah. If you think over these events you will see that the chain of the narrators of today's Torah is broken, and not connected upto Musa (a.s.) - except through a single person, that is, Ezra. But first of all, we do not know who Ezra was; secondly, we do not know how much he knew of the Torah or how deep his knowledge was;

thirdly, we do not know how honest and trustworthy he was; fourthly, we do not know from where he collected what he compiled as the books of the Torah; and lastly, we do not know with Which authentic source he compared his collection to correct the mistakes which might have crept into the text. This unfortunate episode has given rise to another disturbing theory. Some western scholars now deny the existence of Musa (a.s.) and the events related to him. They say that he is a mythical being who never existed. (The same theories have been advanced about 'Isa son of Maryam. But we the Muslims cannot entertain such ideas, because the Qur'an in very clear terms confirms his existence (peace be on him). "
%   $
-
 The Jews pay particular attention to their history. They have recorded main events through which they have passed. Nevertheless, if you "hunt through their books and literature you will not come across any mention of 'Isa son of Maryam. Jewish literature throws no light on his birth or mission, nor does it say anything about his character of life story. It is silent about the miracles appearing on his hand; and,does not say how his life on the earth was ended - did he die a natural death? Was he killed or crucified? Or, was there something else? Why this silence? Why had his affairs remained hidden from them? Or, why did they keep it hidden? The Qur'an mentions that the Jews had falsely accused Maryam and calumniated her regarding the birth of 'Isa, and that they claimed to have killed 'Isa. Allah says: And for their unbelief and for their having uttered against Maryam a grievous calumny. And their saying: "Surely we killed the Messiah, 'Isa son of Maryam, the messenger of Allah"; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like 'Isa); and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they killed him not for sure (4:156-157). Was this claim of theirs based on some oral tradition which was never put to writing? Every nation does have such folklores - some facts, some myths - which should not be taken seriously unless they are based on correct, reliable sources. Or, was it that they heard the Christians talking about the Messiah and his birth and mission; and taking the story from them they accused Maryam of indecency and claimed to having killed the Messiah? No definite answers can be found to these questions. As far as the Qur'an is concerned, it clearly ascribes to them only the claim of killing, not of crucifying; then it says that they are in confusion and there

is a difference of opinion among them about the whole matter. As for the Christians, the story of the Messiah is based on their- Scriptures, that is, the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; as well as the Acts of the Apostles (by Luke) and several Epistles of Paul, Peter, Jacob, John and Jude. Authenticity of all depends on genuineness of the four Gospels; therefore let us have a look at them. 
-
 
! It is the first and earliest of the Gospels so far as compilation and publication is concerned. Some say that it was written in 38 C.E.; others that it was compiled between 50. and 60 C.E. In any case, it was written after the Messiah. The ancient and modem Christian scholars are of the opinion that it was originally written in Hebrew; and then translated into Greek and other languages. But the original Hebrew version is lost;'and as-for the translation, its condition (correctness, etc.) cannot be verified, nor is it known who had translated it. 
-
  /! Mark was a disciple of St. Peter; he was not one of the twelve disciples of the Christ. It is often said that he "wrote his Gospel on Peter's orders, and that he did not believe in divinity of the Christ. Accordingly some people say that he had written his Gospel for the tribes and villagers, and that was why lie introduced Christ as a messenger of Allah who brought and conveyed the shari'ah of Allah. He wrote this Book in 61 C. E. 
-
8/
! Luke was neither one of the disciples nor liad he seen Christ. He learnt Christianity from Paul. Paul was a Jew who hated the Christians and Christianity; he oppressed those who believed in Christ and used to hinder their activities and disturb their affairs. Then all of a sudden he came to them and claimed that he had been seized by an epileptic tit in course of which Christ appeared to him, and admonished him for his bad treatment of the Christians; according to his claim, he believed in Christ in the same trance and Christ in the same vision appointed him as his apostle to propagate the Christ's Gospel. It was St. Paul who laid the foundation of Christianity, as it is today. He taught that mere believing in the Christ was enough for salvation; there was no need of acting on it. Accordingly, he allowed them to eat pork and dead animals; and forbade circumcision and a lot of the shari 'ah of the Torah. This was in spite of the fact that Injil was revealed just as a verifier of the Torah, and had made lawful only a few things which were forbidden in Torah. 'Isa (a.s.) had come to re-establish the

shari'ah of Torah, and to bring the deviators and transgressors back to it; he had not come to abrogate the shari'ah or to base the eternal felicity on a belief devoid of action. Luke wrote his Gospel after that of Mark, and it was after trie deaths of Sts. Peter and Paul. Some people have firmly opined that the Gospel of Luke is not a revelation like other Gospels, as may be understood from his Prologue. 
-
ÿ ! Many Christians say that the John who wrote it was John son of Zebedee, the fisher, one of the twelve disciples, and the one whom the Christ loved. They say that as Cerinthus and Ebionites and their followers thought that the Christ was nothing more than a created human being whose existence did not precede his mother's existence, the bishops of Asia and others visited John in 96 C.E. and urged him to write what others had not written in their Gospels so that he could particularly describe the divinity of the Christ. John had to comply with their request and wrote this Gospel. There is a difference of opinion when it was written: Some say, in 65 C.E.,some say, in 96 C.E.,and others say, in 98 C.E. Another group says that it was not written by John the disciple: Some say that it is the work of a student of Alexanderia; others say that this Gospel as well as the Epistles of John were authored in the beginning of the 2nd Century by an unknown person who attributed them to John so that the writings might gain credence in people's eyes; yet others think that the Gospel of John originally contained twenty chapters and after his death the Church of Ephesus added the twenty-first. This is then the condition of the four Gospels. What is certain is that all these narrations depend on seven persons: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul and Jude; and they rely on the four Gospels, which in the-'r turn rely on the earliest one, that is, the Gospel of Matthew. And we have already seen that it is a translation whose original is lost; nobody knows who had translated it. What was the theme and teaching of the original? Did it teach messengership of Christ? Or, his divinity? The present Gospels show that there had appeared among the Children of Israel a man named 'Isa son of Yusuf, the carpenter; he began calling towards Allah; he claimed that he was a son of God, born without agency of a human father, and that his Father had sent him to atone for the sin of the people through being killed by

crucifixion; that he gave life to the dead, healed the blind and the lepers, and restored the possessed to health by removing devil from them; that there were twelve disciples with him, one of them being Matthew the Evangelist; he blessed them and sent them to propagate his religion... This is the gist of the Christianity and its mission - in spite of its having been spread to every corner of the world. It all boils down to a report by one person whose name and particulars are unknown, whose identity and character is shrouded in obscurity. This curious weakness just in the initial stage has compelled some independent minds of Europe to claim that Christ, 'Isa son of Maryam, is a mythical being, invented by some religious movements for or against the government of the time. This view has been strengthened by another mythical character which it resembles in every detail, and that is the character of Krishna: The idol-worshippers of India believe that Krishna was the son of God, who descended to earth from his divine abode, and atoned for the people by being crucified in order to deliver them from their sins and mistakes. It is the same belief which the Christians have about Christ 'Isa. Other scholars have found it necessary to say that there were in fact two Christs, one uncrucified, the other crucified, who came more than five centuries after the former. The Christians Era (which at the time of writing is 1956 C.E.) does not correspond with any of the above-mentioned two dates. The former (uncrucified) Christ had preceded it by more than two hundred and fifty years (and lived for sixty years), while the latter (crucified) Christ came more than two hundred and ninety years after the beginning of the said Era (and lived for about thirty-three years). However, difference of the Christians Era with the actual birth-date of Christ is a fact which is not denied even by the Christians - and it is a historical disjunction. Moreover, there are some other matters which give rise to doubts and mistrust. They have written that during the first two centuries many more Gospels, including the four now used, were written - their number exceeded a hundred. Then the Church banned all of them except the four which were canonized because they corresponded with the views of the Church. Among the discarded ones was the Gospel of Barnabas, a copy of which was

found years ago, and which has been translated into Arabic and Persian. The story of Christ, 'Isa son of Maryam, as given in this Gospel, generally corresponds with that given in the Qur'an. Strangely enough, even the non-Jewish historical records are silent about what the Gospels present as the Christ's mission - son-ship, atonement and other related matters. The famous American historian, Hendrick Willem Van Loon has given in his book, Story of Mankind, a letter of a Roman physician, Aesculapius Cultellus, which he wrote in 62 A.D. to his nephew, Gladius Ensa, who was a soldier in Syria. In that letter, he says: A few days ago I was called in to prescribe for a sick man named Paul. He appeared to be a Roman citizen of Jewish parentage, well educated and of agreeable manners ... A friend of mine... tells me that he heard something about him in Ephesus where he was preaching sermons about a strange new god. I asked my patient if this were true... Paul answered me that the kingdom of which he had spoken was not of this world and he added many strange utterances which I did not understand ... His personality made a great impression upon me and I was sorry to hear that he was killed on the Ostian Road a few days ago. Therefore I am writing this letter to you. When next you visit Jerusalem, I want you to find out something about my friend Paul and the strange Jewish prophet, who seems to have been his teacher... I would like to know the truth abouj/all these romours... Six weeks later, Gladius Ensa, the nephew, [a captain of the VII Gallic Infantry], answered as follows: [I received your letter and I have obeyed your order. Two weeks ago our brigade was sent to Jarusalem...] I have talked with most of the older men in this city but few have been able to give me any definite information. A few days ago a peddler came to the camp. I bought some of his olive and I asked him whether he had ever heard of the famous Messiah who was killed when he was

young. He said that he remembered it very clearly... He gave me the address of one Joseph, who had been a personal friend of the Messiah and told me that I had better go and see him if I wanted to know more. This morning I went to call on Joseph. He was quite an old man. He had been a fisherman on one of the freshwater lakes. His memory was clear, and from him at last I got a fairly definate account of what had happened during the troublesome days before I was born. Tiberius, our great and glorious emperor, was on the throne, and an officer of the name of Pontius Pilatus was governor of Judaea and Samaria... In the year 783 or 784 (Joseph had forgotten when) Pilatus was called to Jerusalem on account of a riot. A certain young man (the son of a carpenter of Nazareth) was said to be planning a revolution against the Roman government. Strangely enough our own intelligence officers, who are usually well informed, appear to have heard nothing about it, and when they investigated the matter they reported that the carpenter was an excellent citizen and that there was no reason to proceed against him. But the old-fashioned leaders of the Jewish faith, according to Joseph, were much upset. They greatly disliked his popularity with the masses of the poorer Hebrews. The "Nazarene" (so they told Pilatus) had publicly claimed that a Greek or a Roman or even a Palestinian, who tried to live a decent and honourable life, was quite as good as a Jew who spent his days in studying the ancient laws of Moses. Pilatus does not seem to have been impressed by this argument, but when the crowds around the temple threatened to lynch Jesus, and kill all his followers, he decided to take the carpenter into custody to save his life. He does not appear to have understood the real nature of the quarrel. Whenever he asked the Jewish priests to explain their grievances, they shouted "heresy" and "treason" and got terribly excited. Finally, so Joseph told me, Pilatus sent for Joshua (that was the name of the Nazarene, but the Greeks who live in this part of the world always refer to him as Jesus) to examine him personally. He talked to him for several hours. He asked him about the "dangerous doctrines" which he was said to have preached on the shores of the sea of Galilee. But Jesus answered that he never referred to politics. He was not so much interested in the bodies of men as in Man's soul. He wanted all people to regard their neighbours as their brothers and to love one single God, who was the father of all living beings. Pilatus, who seems to have been well versed in the doctrines of the Stoics and the other Greek philosophers, does not appear to have discovered anything seditious in the talk of Jesus. According to my informant he made another attempt to save the

life of the kindly prophet. He kept putting the execution off. Meanwhile the Jewish people, lashed into fury by their priests, got frantic with rage. There had been many riots in Jerusalem before this and there were only a few Roman soldiers within calling distance. Reports were being sent to the Roman authorities in Caesarea that Pilatus had "fallen a victim to the teachings of the Nazarene". Petitions were being circulated all through the city to have Pilatus recalled, because he was an enemy of the Emperor, You know that our governors have strict instructions to avoid an open break with their foreign subjects. To save the country from civil war, Pilatus finally sacrificed his prisoner, Joshua, who behaved with great dignity and who forgave all those who hated him. He was crucified amidst the howls and the laughter of the Jerusalem mob. That is what Joseph told me, with tears running down his old cheeks. I gave him a gold piece when I left him, but he refused it and asked me to hand it to one poorer than himself. I also asked him about your friend Paul. He had known him slightly. He seems to have been a tent maker, who gave up his profession that he might preach the words of a loving and forgiving God, Who was so very different from that Jehovah of whom the Jewish priests are telling us all the time. Afterwards, Paul appears to have travelled much in Asia Minor and in Greece, telling the slaves that they were children of one loving Father and that happiness awaits all, both rich and poor, who have tried to live honest lives and have done good to those who were suffering and miserable ... This is the main theme of this letter as far as the subject of our present discussion is concerned. On pondering on this letter one may easily understand which direction Christianity had taken - among the Israelites - soon after 'Isa (a.s.). Clearly it was a prophetic mission of a messenger sent by Allah - not a claim of divinity calling people to believe that God had taken a human form and descended to the earth to deliver mankind by offering an atonement for their sins. Then some disciples of 'Isa and/or those claiming connection after the said crucifixion - to various regions of the world, like India, Africa, Rome, etc., and spread the message of Christianity. But soon after that, in the wake of those missionary activities, they differed among themselves about the basic teachings of the new religion. Was Christ a God? Was belief in Christ enough for salvation without any need of following the Mosaic Law? Was the religion of the Gospel an independent one which had abrogated the Mosaic Law? Or, was it a part of the Mosaic religion sent merely to perfect it? In this way they divided into various

sects and groups. We should keep in mind the fact that all the nations where Christianity was propagated in the beginning - like Rome and India, etc. - were at that time idolworshippers, the Sabaeans, the Hindus or the Buddhists, etc. Also there was some mystic influence on one side and the hold of Brahmanic philosophy on the other. All these systems and religions believed to a great extent in incarnation and appearance of gods and deities in human form. Also the beliefs of trinity in unity, coming down of a deity in human body, and its suffering and being crucified to atone sins of mankind was very much prevalent among ancient idol-worshippers of India, China, Egypt, Chaledonia, Assyria and Iran. The same was the situation among ancient western idolaters like Romans, Scandinavians and others - as may be seen in the books written about ancient religions and beliefs. Doane writes in his Bible Myths and their Parallels in other Religions: "If we return to India we shall find that one of the most prominent features in the Indian theology is the doctrine of a divine triad, governing all things. This triad is called Tri-murti - from the Sanscrit (sic.) word tri (three) and murti (form) - and consists of Brahma, Vishnu and Siva. It is an inseparable unity, though three in form." Then he goes on to explain that Brahma is the Father; Vishnu, the Son; and Siva, the Holy Spirit. Then he writes [in the footnote] about Vishnu, the Son that he is "the Lord and Saviour Chrishna. The Supreme Spirit, in order to preserve the world, produced Vishnu. Vishnu came upon earth, for this purpose, in the form of Chrishna. He was believed to be an incarnation of the Supreme Being, one of the persons of their holy and mysterious trinity, to use their language, 'The Lord and Saviour - three persons and one god.'" He writes that like the Christians, the Hindus too use the dove for the emblem of the third person of their trinity. [Doane further, writes:] "Mr. Faber, in his Origin of Heathen Idolatry, says: 'Among the Hindoos, we have

the Triad of Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva; so, among the votaries of Buddha, we find the self-triplicated Buddha declared to be the same as the Hindoo Trimurti. Among the Buddhist sect of the Jainists (sic), we have the triple jiva, in whom the Trimurti is similarly declared to be incarnated.'" [Doane further quotes from the same book of Mr. Faber:] "Among the Chinese, who worship Buddha under the name of Fo, we find this God mysteriously multiplied into three per-sons..." Doane now turns to Egypt: "The priests of Memphis, in Egypt, explained this mystery to the novice, by intimating that the premier (first) monad created the dyad, who engendered the triad, and that it is this triad which shines through nature. "Thulis, a great monarch, who at one time reigned over all Egypt, and who was in the habit of consulting the oracle of Serapis, is said to have addressed the oracle in these words: " 'Tell me if ever there was before one greater than I, or will ever be one greater than me?' "The oracle answered thus: " 'First God, afterward the Word, and with them the Holy Spirit, all these are of the same nature, and make but one whole, of which the power is eternal. Go away quickly, mortal, thou who hast but an uncertain life.'" Doane quotes Bon wick: "Some persons are prepared to admit that the most astonishing development of the old religion of Egypt was in relation to the Logos or Divine Word, by whom all things were made, and who, though from God, was God." It should be noted that these are the very words with which the Gospel of St. John begins. Doane quotes from Higgins Anacalypsis that: "Mithras, the Mediator, and Saviour of the Persians, was called the Logos." Doane has proved that the ancient pagans used to believe in one god with three

persons. He has extensively shown that the pagan belief of trinity in unity was prevalent among the Greeks, Romans, Finns, Scandinavians, Chaldeans, Assyrians and Phoenicians. [On the question of atonement], he writes: "The idea of expiation by the sacrifice of a god was to be found among the Hindoos even in Vedic times." Then giving the references, he, inter alia, writes. "Crishna, the virgin-born, "the Divine Vishnu himself, 'he who is without beginning, middle or end', being moved 'to relieve the earth of her load', came upon earth and redeemed man by his suffering - to save him." "In the earlier copies of Moor's, Hindu Pantheon, is to be seen representations of Chrishna (as Wittoba) with marks of holes in both feet, and in others, of holes in the hands. [In Figures 4 and 5 of Plate II (Moor's work) the figures have nail-holes in both feet. Figure 6 has a round hole in the side;] to his collar or shirt hangs the emblem of a heart (which we often see in pictures of Christ Jesus)... Instead of the crown of thorns usually put on the head of the Christians Saviour, it [Figure 7] has the turreted coronet of the Ephesian Diana, , ." Doane quotes Hue that among the Hindus, "the idea of redemption by a divine incarnation, who came into the world for the express purpose of redeeming mankind, was 'general and popular.'" " 'A sense of original corruption,' says Professor Monier Williams, 'seems to be felt by all classes of Hindoos, as indicated by the following prayer used after the Gayatri by some Vaishnavas. " '"I am sinful, I commit sin, my nature is sinful, I am conceived in sin. Save me, O thou lotus-eyed Heri (Saviour), the remover of sin." '" Rev. Geo. W. Cox remarks on two opposite conceptions of Krishna's character, in one of which he is described "as a self-sacrificing and unselfish hero", who is, "filled with divine wisdom and love, who offers up a sacrifice which he alone can make." "P. Andrada la Crozius, one of the first Europeans who went to Nepal and Thibet

(sic), in speaking of the god whom they worshipped there - Indra - tells us that they said he spilt his blood for the salvation of the human race, and that he was pierced through the body with nails. He further says that, although they do not say he suffered the penalty of the cross, yet they find, nevertheless, figures of it in their books." "The monk Georgius, in his Tibetinum Alphabetum (p. 203), has given plates of a crucified god, who was worshipped in Nepal... He calls it the god Indra." [Figure 9 of these plates] shows a cross having arms of equal length fixed much high on the stem; Thus the head portion is shorter and the body portion longer - no one would think that it represented What the Buddhists narrate about Buddha fits even more perfectly on what the Christians believe about Jesus Christ. The Buddhists call Buddha, the Messiah, the Only Begotten, the Saviour of the World, the God who sacrificed his life to wash away the offences of mankind, and thereby to make them partakers^f the Kingdom of Heaven. This subject has been explained by many orientalists, like Bell, Hue, Muller, and others. This was a sample of the belief of deities taking human form, and of crucifixion and atonement as it was found in ancient religions prevalent in the nations among which Christianity was propagated in the very beginning. The new religion very much attracted the people in all these places where the Christian missionaries went. And the reason was clear: The Christian Fathers took the fundamentals of Christianity and remoulded them in the moulds of idolatry, and in this way got the people attracted to their call and made it easier to them to accept their teachings. This view is strengthened when we see how Paul and others disparage the wisdom and philosophy of the philosophers, and how they look down with disdain at rational argument, declaring that the Lord God prefers the foolishness of the fools to the wisdom of the wise. The fact is that they presented their teaching to the schools of logic and philosophy, and the intellectuals rejected it saying that there was no way of even understanding it - let alone accepting it. To overcome this difficulty, they started talking of revelation, apocalypse and vision; and claimed that they were filled of the Holy Ghost. In this, they followed the life of the ignorant mystics who claim that their way is beyond the reach of reason and intellect. Thereafter, their missionaries went to various cities and

regions (as described in the Acts of Apostles and the history books) and propagated the Christianity. Wherever they went, the masses welcomed them. The main reason of their success - and especially within the Roman Empire - was the simmering discontent and disgruntling despair which had spread everywhere because of the never-ending oppression and injustice; the ruling class treated the masses as their slaves and serfs; there was a yawning gap between the lives of the rulers and the ruled, an unbridgeable chasm between the high and the low classes; the extravagant life-style of the rich was sustained by the sweat and blood of the poor and slaves. In this social structure, the Christian missionaries called the people to brotherhood, love, equality and good neighbourliness; they exhorted them to discard this world and its transient painful life and to concentrate on the pure and happy life that was in heaven. It was this theme which the ruling classes - the kings and emperors - found advantageous to themselves, and they thought that it was in their interest to turn a blind eye to the missionaries' activities; as a general rule, this tacit understanding saved the new group from punishment, torture and banishment. Their number kept increasing, and so did their power. A great multitude embraced Christianity within and outside the Roman Empire; it reached upto Africa and even India, Invariably opening of a church heralded the closure or destruction of a temple. With number and power, their attitude changed. Not only that they disregarded the resistance of the pagan leaders (as they went on undermining idolworship), they even refused obe'Isance to the rulers and emperors. Their refusal to obey imperial decrees in this respect resulted in their punishment, imprisonment and even murder. Many were tortured and killed; others imprisoned or banished. This continued until the Emperor Constantine came on throne. He accepted Christianity and recognized it as the State religion. Churches were built in Rome and throughout the empire. It was in the second half of the fourth century of Christian Era. From then on the Church of Rome became the centre of Christianity. Bishops and missionaries were sent to all regions and countries within the Roman Empire. Countless churches, monastries and seminaries (to teach Christianity) were built. There is an important point which the reader should ponder on: All their talks and discussions begin on some evangelical postulates, like the theme of Father, Son and Holy Ghost, the scheme of crucifixion and atonement, and similar other principles. They base their talks on these ideas as though they were self-evident truths and then go on building their edifice on them. They do not realize that it is their first and basic weakness. No matter how strong and lofty a structure may be, it

cannot make up for the weakness of the foundation. And the foundation on which they have built their edifice - the three-in-one theology and the crucifixion and atonement - is simply incomprehensible. Many Christian scholars agree that it is an idea that cannot be understood. Still they say that it is a religious tenet, therefore, it must be believed without asking for reason - after all, there are many things in religion which the reason says are impossible. But it is one of the invalid ideas which spring from that invalid base. How can there be an impossible principle in the religion of truth? As far as we are concerned, it is through reason and understanding that we accept a religion and discern its truth and validity. How can a true belief contain something which reason invalidates? Is it not a contradiction in term? Of course, religion accepts validity of miracles - the things which are possible in reason but impracticable; but an idea impossible in reason can never happen. However, the above-mentioned way of "argument" led their thinkers and scholars into conflicts, discords and disagreements in the very early days when the students gathered to learn Christianity at Alexanderia, Rome and other places. The church increased its watchdog role to preserve the unity of creed. Whenever a differing view was expressed or new idea raised its head, the church called a council of the bishops and presbyters to convince the party concerned to leave their ideas and beliefs; and if they persisted they were anathematized, banished or even killed. The first such council was held in Nicea, to counter the views of Arius, who said that the Son was not like the Father, that only God was eternal while Christ was a created being. The bishops, and presbyters assembled at Constantinople, in presence of the Emperor Constantine; they were three hundred and thirteen in number. They adopted the following creed: We believe in one God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible;And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten from the Father before all ages, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom all things

came into existence, who because of us men and because of our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnated from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried and rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures and ascended to heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father and will come again with glory to judge living and dead, of whose Kingdom there will be no end; And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son is together worshipped and together glorified, Who spoke through the prophets; in one holy Catholic and apostolic church. We confess one baptism to the remission of sins; we look forward to the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen! That was the first Council; after that numerous Councils were held to anathematize newly appearing schisms, like the Nestorians, Jacobites, Ilyanites, Yalyarsites, Macedonians, Noetus, Sabellians, Paulianists, (or Paulicians), and many others. The church was ever vigilant in guarding what in its eyes was true faith. The missionary work continued in full force, until by the end of fifth century all European governments (except Russia) were parts of Christendom: France; England, Austria, Prussia, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Holland, etc., were all converted to Christianity by 496 C.E. The Church continued to progress becoming stronger day by day. On the other hand, the Barbarians of the North were attacking the Roman Empire every now and then. The wars and internal strifes and unrest weakened the Empire - until a time came when the people of Rome together with the victorious tribes decided to hand over the affairs of the State to the Church. Now the Pope of the time, Gregory the Great1, had in his hand the reins of the temporal as well as the spiritual powers. It was in 590 C.E. Consequently, the Church of Rome acquired absolute power over the Christians world. But by that time the Roman Empire had divided in two parts; the Western Roman Empire with its capital at Rome and the Eastern Roman (i.e. Byzantine) Empire with its capital at Constantinople. The Byzantine Emperors claimed for themselves the headship of Church within their domain, without accepting the authority of the Church of Rome. This led to the division of Christianity between the Catholics - the followers of the Church of Rome and the Orthodox, i.e., others. The things continued in this manner, until the Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople, and Palaeologus, the last Byzantine Emperor and Head of the

Eastern (i.e. Orthoxod) Church, was killed in the Cathedral, Hagia Sophia. The Tzars of Russia now claimed the headship of the Church - as a legacy of the Byzantine Emperors to whom they were related by marriage. (Russia had been Christian since the tenth century.) The Russian Emperors thus became he Heads of the (Orthodox) Church in their land, independent of the (Catholic) Church of Rome. It was in 1454 C. E. The things continued in this way for about five centuries, until the last Tzar, Nicholas, was killed, with all his family, in 1918, by the Communists. Thus the Church of Rome almost returned to the condition that prevailed before the division. Meanwhile, during the Middle Ages when the Vatican had reached the highest point of its glory and the Popes controlled every aspect of the people's lives, a lot of good Christians revolted against the Vatican in order to free themselves from the shackles which the Church had put on them. One group refused to follow the Church of Rome or to obey the Popes, but they continued to accept the religion as interpreted by the Councils and agreed upon by their scholars. They are called the [Greek] Orthodox. Another group discarded the Roman Church altogether; they neither accept the said Church's interpretation of religion nor do they recognized the Pope's authority in any religious matter. They are the Protestants. In this way, the Christians world is mainly divided into three sects: the Catholics who follow the Vatican and its teachings; the Orthodox, who accept the Catholic teachings but do not recognize the authority of the Vatican. As described above, this group resulted from the division of the Church [on the line of the Western and Eastern empires] and especially after the transfer of the Patriarchate from Constantinople to Moscow; and the Protestants, who recognize neither the authority of Vatican nor its teachings - they became independent in the fifteenth century of the Christian Era. This is, in a nut-shell, the history of the Christian Church of the last two millenniums. Those who know the main theme of our book, will understand why we have written here this short account of their history. Our aim was three-fold:  ! To provide to a research scholar an insight into various changes taking place in the religion of the Christians; and to make them aware as to how alien ideas have been implanted in their beliefs and rituals; how pagan superstitions and idolatrous thoughts have crept into Christianity - by hereditary influences, or social

give and take, or wilful adoption, or just because old habits die-hard. %
 $! The power of the Church - and especially the Church of Rome - gradually increased until it reached its zenith in the Middle Ages; the Popes had taken both temporal and spiritual powers in their hands, and the kings and emperors in Europe had to submit to the Papal decrees, and pay homage to the Popes. The Popes put on throne whomsoever they wished and removed whoever they wished. It is narrated that the Pope once ordered the German emperor to stand barefoot on the door of the Papal Palace for three days (in the winter) - for expiation of some mistakes which he beseeched the Pope to forgive. On another occasion, the Pope kicked with his foot the crown of a king who had approached him kneeling down to seek Papal pardon. Those church leaders had described the Muslims to their followers in a way that the Christians were bound to regard Islam as a religion of idol-worshippers. You will see it in the slogans and poems which were written to incite and arouse the Christians against the Muslims during the Crusades which raged between the two powers for long years. The Christians were led to believe that the Muslims worshipped idols; that they believed in three gods: Mahom (who is also called Afomed and Mahounde), he is the first among gods and he is Muhammad; Apoline who is the second; and Tervagan who is the third. Others added two more to this list: Maratwan and Jupiter; but their rank was below the first three. They said that Muhammad's religion was based on his claim of divinity - that he claimed to be god. Sometimes the "information" was added that Muhammad had taken for himself an idol made of gold. Richard composed poems to incite the Franks against the Muslims, in which he, inter alia, says: "Arise and dislodge Mahound and Tervagan and throw them into fire, so that you may get near your God." Roland described Mahom, the "god of Muslims", in a poem, in which he says: "It is made of gold and silver; if you see it, you will know that no artisan can even imagine a more beautiful face, let alone make it; big in size, admirable in workmanship, majesty radiating from its features, Mahom is made of gold and silver, its brilliant splendour dazzles the eyes to blindness; it has been placed on an elephant which is the finest work of art; its stomach is hollow, and an onlooker may find lustrous light glowing from it (because) it is set with precious brilliant

gems, (it is transparent, and) its inside may be seen from outside; its fine workmanship is matchless. "The gods of Muslims used to inspire them at times of trouble and turmoil. The Muslims were once defeated in a battle; so their commander sent someone to call their god who was in Mecca (i.e., Muhammad, s.a.w.). An 'eye-witness' says that the god (i.e., Muhammad, s.a.w.) came to them; a huge mob of his followers surrounded him; they were beating drums, playing lutes and blowing pipes and bagpipes made of silver; singing and dancing around him they brought him to the battleground, they were full of joy and happiness, making merry. His deputy was waiting for him; when he arrived (the deputy) stood up and began worshipping him with humbleness and humility." Richard explains the revelation sent by the god, Mahom, in this manner: "The sorcerers captured a genie and put it in the stomach of that idol. That genie used to thunder and hammer inside and then speak to the Muslims, who listened to him with rapt attention," Such droll flippancies are found in a lot of their books written during, or about, the Crusades, Our readers will, no doubt, be astounded and scandalized to read such accounts of their pure religion - may be some would even doubt the authenticity of these quotations. After all, they have ascribed such things to Islam that no one has ever seen in his life, nor has any Muslim imagined them or even dreamt of them  $! A deep thinker may easily recognize the changes that have occurred in the Christianity during the past twenty centuries. The idolatrous beliefs crept imperceptibly into Christianity: first it was excessive reverence for Christ; then his message was cast into the mould of trinity (Father, Son and Holy Spirit), which was further developed in the theory of crucifixion and atonement, which in its turn gave rise to the belief that law and its obedience was not needed at all, the faith was sufficient for salvation. At first it appeared in religious garb; the Church insisted on some religious rites like prayer, fast and baptism. But opposite trends continued to grow and various ideas raised their heads, until the Protestantism appeared on the scene; the political turmoil and unrest gave way to formal secular laws based on the principle of freedom in the matters which were not covered by those laws. In this way, the teachings of religion became weaker and weaker, and continued to give ground to anti-religion forces, until moral values and virtuous conduct could not stand the onslaught of materialism which "the unrestricted freedom" had let loose on humanity.

Then appeared socialism and communism, based on Dialectic Materialism; belief in God and adherence to moral virtues and religious rites and deeds were discarded. Spiritual humanism was succeeded by materialistic animality composed of only two instincts: greed to gain for oneself whatever one desires and impulse to crush down whoever comes in one's way. Today the world is speeding to that animalistic goal, to its doom. Various new religious revival movements that have lately appeared everywhere are but political games invented and played by political groups, who want to attain their goals through them. We know that politics, as a profession, now knocks at every door and uses every conceiveable device to realize its aims. According to Dr. Joseph Sittler, of Chicago Lutheran Theological Seminary, the underlying weakness of the current U. S. religious revival is that it seeks to give divine sanction to the cultural values modern man lives by. 'We make God say amen to what we believe, instead of saying amen to God.' The greatest danger, he feels, is that this pious self-flattery may immunize Americans against any desire to join in a genuine relgious revival if one should arise. According to Dr. Georges Florovsky, the 'foremost U. S. spokesman for Russian Orthodoxy', Christian teaching, which reaches most Americans through sentimental literature, consoles them instead of awakening them through deeply felt or 'witnessed' experience. Whence the caravan of religion started from, and where has it arrived? The message began in the name of revival of religion (i.e.,belief), morality (i.e., virtuous character) and the shari'ah (good deeds); and ended up by repudiating and abolishing all of it, replacing it with animalistic enjoyment. This has happened because of the first deviation affected by St. Paul the Apostle and his disciples. We are living in a civilization that admittedly threatens mankind with extinction. Some people say that Christ is the leader and standard-bearer of the modern civilization. But it would be nearer to truth to call it the Paulian civilization.  $  al-Qummi narrates about the verse: It is not meet for a man that Allah should give him the Book and the Wisdom and Prophet-hood, then he should say to men, "Be my servants rather than Allah's". "Surely 'Isa did not say to men: 'I have created

you, therefore you should be my servants rather than Allah's?, rather he said to them: 'Be worshippers of the Lord', that is, having true knowledge." (at-Tafsir) 
 ! The context and associations given in the Commentary support this explanation. "Surely Isa did not say to men: 'I have created you.'" It is a sort of a proof to show that he had not said it. Had he told them to worship him, it would have been necessary to tell them that he was their creator; but he had not said it, nor had he created them. The same exegete narrates about the verse: Or that he should enjoin you that you should take the angels and the prophets for lords. "There were people who worshipped the angels; the Christians thought 'Isa was the Lord; and the Jews said that 'Uzayr was the Son of God. Allah therefore said that no prophet would enjoin you that you should take the angels and the prophets for Lords." (ibid.) 
 ! It has been explained in the Commentary. It is narrated in ad-Durru 'l-manthur from Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim and al-Bayhaqi (in his Dala'ilu 'n-Nubuwwah) from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "When the Jewish scholars and Christians of Najran gathered near the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and he invited them to Islam, Abu Rafi' al-Qurazi said: 'Do you wish, O Muhammad, that we should worship you as the Christians worship 'Isa son of Maryam?' Thereupon a Christian of Najran said: 'Well, do you want this from us, O Muhammad?' The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'I seek refuge in Allah that we should worship other than Allah, or that we should enjoin worship of someone else; He has neither sent me with it nor has He enjoined me this.' Therefore, Allah, revealed the verses (because of their question): It is not meet for a man... after you are Muslims (submitting ones)?" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) It is reported in the same book: " 'Abd ibn Hamid has narrated from al-Hasan that he said; 'I have been told that a man said: "O Messenger of Allah! We greet you (exatly) as we greet each other. Should not we prostrate before you?" He said: "No. But you should honour your Prophet, and recognize the right of the ones having that right; because prostration should not be done for anyone other than Allah." Then Allah revealed the verses: It is not meet for a man..., after you are Muslims

(submitting ones)?'" öibid.) 
 ! Also other events have been narrated concerning revelation of these verses. Obviously, all of them are based on academic inferences: and we have discussed in detail about them. Also, it is possible for various reasons to combine in relation to one verse. And Allah knows better. å
 
    

4 4G ά˴ Χ ˴ ΃˴ ˸Ϋ·˶ϭ˴ ϟ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ό˴ ϣ˴ Ύ˴Ϥϟ˶˷ ˲ϕΪ˶˷ μ ˴ ϣ˵˷ ˲ϝϮ˵γέ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ˯˴ Ύ˴Ο Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ Δ˳ Ϥ˴ ˸ϜΣ ˶ ϭ˴ Ώ ˳ Ύ˴Θϛ˶ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϣ˵ϜΘ˵ ˸ϴΗ˴ ΁ Ύ˴Ϥϟ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˷ϴ˶ Β˶ Ϩ˴˷ϟ΍ ϕ ˴ Ύ˴Μϴ˶ϣ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϫ˵ ϧ˴˷ή˵ μ ˵ Ϩ˴Θ˴ϟϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Α˶ Ϧ ˴˷ Ϩ˵ ϣ˶ ˸ΆΘ˵ ˸΍ϭ˵ΪϬ˴ ˸ηΎ˴ϓ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ Ύ˴ϧ˸έή˴ ˸ϗ΃˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ ϱ˶ή˸λ·˶ ˸Ϣ˵Ϝϟ˶Ϋ˴ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ˸ϢΗ˵ ˸άΧ ˴ ΃˴ϭ˴ ˸ϢΗ˵ ˸έή˴ ˸ϗ΃˴΃˴ ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶Ϊϫ˶ Ύ˷θ ˴ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Ϣ˵Ϝό˴ ϣ˴ ˸Ύϧ˴ ΃˴ϭ˴ {81} Ϊ˴ ˸όΑ˴ ϰ˷ϟ˴Ϯ˴ Η˴ Ϧ˴Ϥϓ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϙγ ˶ Ύ˴ϔ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴ϭ˵΄ϓ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ {82} Ϫ˶ ˸ϴϟ˴·˶˴ϭ Ύ˱ϫ˸ήϛ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˱ϋ˸Ϯσ ˴ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍˴ϭ Ε ˶ ΍˴ϭΎ˴Ϥδ ˴˷ ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ Ϧ˴ϣ Ϣ˴ Ϡ˴˸γ΃˴ Ϫ˵ ϟ˴ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϐ˸Βϳ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˶ ϳ˶Ω ή˴ ˸ϴϐ˴ ϓ˴ ΃˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵όΟ ˴ ˸ήϳ˵ {83} ϟΎ˶Α Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϣ˴ ΁ ˸Ϟϗ˵ ρ ˶ Ύ˴Β˸γϷ ˴ ΍˴ϭ Ώ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϙ˸όϳ˴ ϭ˴ ϕ ˴ Ύ˴Τ˸γ·˶ϭ˴ Ϟ ˴ ϴ˶ϋΎ˴Ϥ˸γ·˶ϭ˴ Ϣ˴ ϴ˶ϫ΍˴ή˸Α·˶ ϰ˴Ϡ˴ϋ ϝ ˴ ΰ˶ ϧ˵΃ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ύ˴Ϩ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ϝ ˴ ΰ˶ ϧ˵΃ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˶˸δϣ˵ Ϫ˵ ϟ˴ Ϧ ˵ ˸Τϧ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶˷ Ϊ˳ Σ ˴ ΃˴ Ϧ ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ ϕ ˵ ή˶˷ ϔ˴ ϧ˵ ϻ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ Α˶˷έ˴˷ Ϧ˶ϣ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷ϴ˵ Β˶ Ϩ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ϰ˴δϴ˶ϋ˴ϭ ϰ˴γϮ˵ϣ ϲ ˴ Η˶ ϭ˵΃ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ {84} ˸Βϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ ή˴ ˸ϴϏ ˴ ώ˶ Θ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήγ ˶ Ύ˴Ψ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Γ˶ ή˴ Χ ˶ ϵ΍ ϲ˶ϓ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶ Ϟ ˴ Β˴ ˸Ϙϳ˵ Ϧ˴Ϡϓ˴ Ύ˱Ϩϳ˶Ω ϡ˶ ϼ˸γϹ ˶ ΍{85} {81} And when Allah made a covenant through the prophets: Certainly what I have given you of Book and wisdom - then an messenger comes to you verifying that which is with you, you must believe in him, and you must aid him. He said: Do you affirm and accept My compact in this (matter)? They said: We do affirm. He said: Then bear witness, and I (too) am of the bearers of witness with you. {82} Whoever therefore turns back after this, these it is that are the transgressors. {83} Is it then other than Allah's religion that they seek (to follow), and to Him submits whoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly, and to Him shall they be returned. {84} Say: We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us, and what was revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and Isa and to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit. {85} And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers. The verses are not disjointed from the preceding ones; they have been revealed in the same context. Earlier, Allah had described that the People of the Book transgressed the limits by indulging in alteration of the Books they were given, creating doubts and confusion among the people, making differences between the prophets, and rejecting the signs of the truth of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.); then He showed how impossible it was for a prophet like Musa or 'Isa (peace be on them both) to tell the people to take him or some other prophets or the angels as

their lords - as the Christians openly claimed and the Jews implied. Now He puts more emphasis on the impossibility of such an idea. How can any prophet give such an order to his people, when Allah has made covenant with the prophets that they must believe in and help every prophet no matter whether he preceded them or came after them? They were to fulfil that promise by confirming the truth of the preceding prophets and giving good news of those who were to come after them - as 'Isa (a.s.) verified the prophethood of Musa (a.s.) and his laws, and foretold the advent of Muhammad (s.a.w.). Likewise, Allah made a covenant with them that they should make a similar covenant with their people, and made them witnesses over them; and then declared that it was the Islam - submission which dominates all those who are in the heavens and in the earth. Then Allah enjoins His Prophet (s.a.w.) to adhere to that covenant: he is to believe in Allah and all that was sent to His prophets - without making any distinction between them, and to surrender to Allah. He was to enter into the covenant on his own behalf, and also on behalf of his ummah. That is why it is said that the covenant was made with him directly, and with his ummah through him, as we shall explain later. ([ )! And when Allah made a covenant with the prophets: "Certainly what I have given you of Book and Wisdom - then a Messenger comes to you verifying that which is with you, you must believe in him, and you must aid him": The verse speaks of a covenant that was made. "Mithaqa 'n-nabiyyin" (translated here as "covenant with the prophets"), literally means 'covenant of the prophets'. This covenant was taken for the prophets (as the clause, "then a Messenger comes to you... . you must aid him", points to), as well as "with the prophets" (as the clauses, He said: "Do you affirm. . .", and, Say: "We believe in Allah. . .", show). The covenant was therefore made for the prophets and with the prophets - although it was made with the prophets' people too, through the prophets. The phrase, "covenant of the prophets", may therefore refer to the covenant made "with" them and to that "for" them, while in fact it is the same covenant looked at from different angles. In other words, "the prophets", may refer to those prophets "for" whom the covenant was made, and also to those "with" whom it was made.

However, the import of the preceding two verses (It is not meet for a man... after you are Muslims)which were revealed in the same context, gives rather more weight to the idea that, "the prophets", refers to those "with" whom the covenant was made. Looking in this context the verses have the following connotation: 'It was not possible for the prophets, after Allah gives them the Book, the Wisdom and Prophethood, to call the people to take someone other than Allah as their lord or to worship him. How can it be possible while Allah has made covenant with them to believe in, and help, other prophets of Allah - who enjoin their peoples to believe in one God.' It is for this reason that this verse begins with mention of the covenant - focusing our attention to it. "lama ataytukum min kitabin wa hikmah" (Certainly what I have given you of Book and Wisdom): 'lama' (with the vowel 'a' after 'l', and without putting emphasis on 'm') is in accordance with the well-known recital (of all the reciters except Hamzah). Accordingly 'ma' is relative pronoun meaning, "what" or "whatsoever": "ataytukum" (I have given you) is its "as-silah" (antecedent). Its another recital is "ataynakum" (We have given you). The objective pronoun that should come here is omitted because the phrase "of Book and Wisdom", points to it. The whole phrase is the subject, and, "you must believe in him, and you must aid him", the predicate, 'la', in 'lama', denotes beginning of the sentence, while in "latu'minunna bihi" ( you must believe in him) it is for emphasis and oath. The whole sentence describes the covenant that was made, which would be as follows: 'That which I have given you of Book and Wisdom, then a Messenger comes to you verifying that which is with you, you should believe in that Messenger and aid him without fail.' There is another syntactical possibility: 'ma' in 'lama' may be a conditional pronoun, meaning "when"; and "you must believe in him", its answer. The meaning, in this case, would be like this: 'When I have given you of Book and Wisdom and then a Messenger comes to you... you must believe in him, and you must aid him,' This explanation is rather more appropriate (because it is more common to add 'la' of oath on the "answer" of a conditional sentence), and the meaning in this case is clearer; also it is more usual to put conditional clauses in covenants.

A reciter has recited 'lima' using the vowel 'i' (instead of 'a') for 'l'. In that case 'li' would denote reason, and 'lima ataytukum' would mean 'because of that which I have given you'. But the first recital has more weight. The second person plural pronoun "you" in "have given you" and "comes to you", apparently refers to "the prophets". But the speech, Do you affirm and accept my compact in this?, indicates that it includes the people of the prophets too; that is, the talk is directed to the prophets only but the order (i.e., covenant) covers their people too. The people are as much obliged to believe in and help the coming Messenger as are the prophets themselves. The conjuctive "then" in the clause "then a Messenger comes to you", obviously shows a delay in time; in other words, it was incumbent on a preceding prophet to believe in and help a prophet who would come after him. On the other hand, the verse 3:84 (Say: "We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Ibrahim..."), implies that the covenant was made with each of the preceding and the following prophets for the other - the following prophets too were required to believe in and help the preceding ones. But it is only an inference; the words are silent about this matter - as we shall explain later, Allah willing. There are two third person singular pronouns in the clauses, "you must believe in him, and you must aid him". Both may refer to the "Messenger" who was to come later; there is no difficulty in the idea of one prophet believing in another; as Allah says: The Messenger believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers; everyone of them believes in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers (2:285). Nevertheless, it appears from the verse: Say: "We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us, and what was revealed to Ibrahim ...", that the first pronoun refers to the Book and the Wisdom that was revealed, and the second one to the Messenger. The meaning therefore would be as follows: 'You must believe in what I have given you of the Book and the Wisdom, and you must aid the Messenger who comes to you verifying that which is with you.' ([ )! He said: "Do you affirm and accept my compact in this (matter)?" They

said: "We do affirm": The question was put for confirmation, "al-Iqrar" (affirmation; acknowledgement); "al-isr" (compact, covenant); it is the object of the verb, "accept". Literally, the clause means, 'and take my compact in this'. The prophets were to take or make God's covenant; obviously there should be a second party there to enter into covenant with them, and it could be none except their own ummah. The verse therefore means: 'Do you affirm this covenant and have you made this compact of mine with your people? They said: "We do affirm." An exegete has said: Taking God's compact means that the prophets accepted that covenant for themselves. If so, then, "(Do you) take my compact in this (matter)", would be an explicative apposition of the preceding clause, "Do you affirm?" This explanation is strengthened by their response, as they only said, "We do affirm", without saying anything about taking the compact. Accordingly, the covenant would be restricted to the prophets; their ummah would not be included in it. On the other hand, the next directive, Then bear witness, goes against this explanation; obviously one bears witness for or against other than oneself. Also, the next directive (Say: "We believe in Allah... .") uses plural pronoun, We, and not, I; apparently, it is a declaration of faith by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) for himself and on behalf of his ummah. Therefore, "taking of compact" would mean making the compact with the ummah. Although, it may be said that it is these two sentences, Then bear witness, and, We believe in Allah, which prove the participation of the ummah with the prophets in this compact, while, "take my compact in this", is not related to this matter. ([ )! He said: "Then bear witness, and I (too) am of the bearers of witness with you"; Obviously, the witness, as explained above, is borne for or against someone else; therefore, it is concerned both with the prophets and their people. As mentioned above, also the next directive, (Say: "We believe in Allah"), proves it. And the context too supports this meaning: The verses were revealed to reprove the People of the Book for their rejecting the message of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and for ascribing falsehoods to 'Isa, Musa and some other prophets (peace be on them all); and it is in this background that they have been rebuked: Is it then other than Allah's religion that they seek (to follow)? Some exegetes have said that the order, "Then bear witness", refers to the prophets

bearing witness for one another; others have written that this order was given to the angels who were to bear witness, and that it is not concerned with the prophets. å2

Ô)! These two meanings, although possibly correct in themselves, cannot be inferred from the verse without an association; and you have seen that the association goes against it. One of the fine points in this verse deserves special attention. Read the words, Allah made a covenant with the prophets, in conjunction with the clause, then a Messenger comes to you. You will see that the covenant was made with the prophets for the Messenger. And we have described in the Commentary of the verse 2:213 (Mankind was but one people...) that messenger-ship is more particular than prophethood, that every messenger is a prophet but not every prophet is a messenger. The verse therefore obviously means that the covenant was made with the rank of prophethood for the rank of messengership - but not vice versa. Keeping this connotation in view, we may question the comprehensiveness of the explanation given by an exegete that the covenant was made with the prophets that they would believe in each other and would tell one another to believe in each other - the religion is one which all the prophets invite to. The meaning in fact should be as follows: Allah made a covenant with the prophets and their people that if Allah gave them Book and Wisdom and then a messenger came to them, verifying that which was with them, they would surely believe in what he would bring to them and help him; a later coming prophet would help a preceding (or contemporary) messenger by affirming his truth, and a preceding prophet would foretell the coming of a later messenger and enjoin his ummah to believe in him (the coming messenger), affirm his truth and help him in his cause. This covenant thus implies and affirms the Oneness of Divine Religion. Another exegete has explained the verse as follows: "Allah made a covenant with the prophets that they would affirm the truth of Muhammad (s.a.w.) and give their people the good tidings of his advent." This meaning is correct in itself; but it cannot be discerned from the wording of the verse. Of course, we may infer it from the context, as we have explained earlier: The verse is among the ones that argue

against the People of the Book, admonishing and rebuking them for their tendency of altering the Books, hiding the signs foretold of the Holy Prophet of Islam, transgressing the limit and turning away from the clear truth. ([ )! Whoever therefore turns back after this, these it is that are the transgressors: It puts emphasis on the above-mentioned covenant. The meaning is clear. ([ )! Is it then other than Allah's religion that they seek (to follow), and to Him submits...?: The question arises from the preceding verses. Well, Allah's religion is one; it was about that religion that the covenant was made with the prophets and their people; it was incumbent upon the preceding prophets and their people to foretell the advent of the Messenger who was to follow and they had to believe in his message and help him. Well, is it not strange - in this background the way the People of the Book are behaving? What do they want when they deny your truth? They show the desire to follow the religion. If so, then do they seek a religion other than Islam which is the only Divine Religion? There can be no other explanation why they do not accept your truth, why they do not hold fast to the religion of Islam. Undoubtedly, it was incumbent upon them to accept and follow Islam, because it is the religion which is based on nature - a religion should not go against nature. Do they need a proof? Then see how all those inhabitants of the heavens and the earth (who have been endowed with sense and intelligence) submit to Allah - on the level of creation - then let them also submit to him on the level of legislation. ([ )! and to Him submits whoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly: This is the Islam - submission - that encompasses all who are in the heavens and the earth, including the People of the Book, who it says, are not Muslims. The word used here is "aslama" (he submitted), in past tense, which shows that the action has already taken place; in other words, they have already submitted to Allah. Obviously, it can only refer to their submission in creative affairs - they cannot go against His decree in matters of creation. It does not refer to Islam in the sense of religion, or in the meaning of belief and worship. The words, "willingly or

unwillingly", support, nay, prove this explanation. Keeping the above explanation in view, it appears that the words, "to Him submits", gives a proof, a reason, without mentioning, for the sake of brevity, its result and conclusion. The complete talk would be as follows: 'Do they seek to follow a religion other than Islam? But it is the religion of Allah; whoever is in the heavens and the earth submits to Him and obeys His order. If these People of the Book would accept it, their submission would be done willingly; if they disliked what Allah has decreed for them and tried to seek something else, the Divine Decree would nevertheless be enforced, however they might dislike it.' It appears from it that the conjunctive 'wa' (or)in, "willingly or unwillingly", denotes division. The alternatives point to their willing acceptance of what Allah has decreed for them of the things they like; and their resentment of Divine Decrees in matters they dislike, for example, death, poverty and sickness, etc. ([ )! and to Him shall they be returned: It is another reason why they must seek Islam as religion. They are bound to return to Allah, their true Lord; they would not be able to hide from Allah or to go to what their disbelief and polytheism leads them to rely on. ([ )! Say: "We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us: Allah enjoins the Prophet to adhere to the covenant which was made with him and the others. He should declare as follows, for himself and on behalf of the believers from his ummah: "We believe in Allah and what has been revealed..." It is a proof, as we have said above, that the covenant was made with the prophets and their people together. ([ )! and what was revealed to Ibrahim and Isma'il... and to Him do we submit": All those mentioned here were prophets from the progeny of Ibrahim. The verse implies that the word, "the tribes", refers to the prophets from the progeny of Ya'qub - from the Children of Israel- like Dawud, Sulayman, Yunus, Ayyub and others. Then comes the phrase, "the prophets from their Lord"; it makes the declaration comprehensive, as it covers Adam, Nuh and all the others. Then a

reference is made to the whole group, saying, "we do not make any distinction between any of them and to Him do we submit." ([ )! And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam... . shall be one of the losers: It negates and nullifies all that is outside the purview of the said covenant. It further emphasises the obligation of following the terms of the covenant. [*2) The Leader of the faithful ('Ali, a.s.) said; "Verily, Allah made covenant with the prophets (who came) before our Prophet that they should inform their people of his advent and his characteristics, give them his good news and enjoin them to affirm his truth." (Majma'u 'l-bayan) Ibn Jarir has narrated from Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: "Allah did not send any prophet - Adam and those who came after him without making a covenant with him about Muhammad (s.a.w.); If he (Muhammad, s.a.w.) was sent when that prophet was alive, he must believe in him and help him; and He enjoined him to make a (similar) covenant with his people." Then the Imam recited the verse, And when Allah made a covenant with the prophets: Certainly what I have given you of Book and Wisdom ..." (ad-Durru 'lmanthur) 
 ! These two traditions explain the verse keeping both the words and the context in view, as we have written above. as-Sadiq (a.s.) explained this verse as follows: "When Allah made a covenant with the people of the prophets - (with) every ummah - for affirming the truth of its prophet and following what they (the prophets) would bring to them; but (the people) did not fulfil it (i.e., the covenant) and neglected much of their laws and altered (it) to a great extent." (Majma'u 'l-bayan; al-Jawami) 
 !The above tradition applies the verse to a particular situation; it therefore does not conflict with the explanation given in the Commentary that the verse refers to a covenant made with the prophets together with their people.

The Leader of the faithful (a.s.) said explaining the words: He said: "Do you affirm. . .": "He (Allah) said: 'Do you affirm? And have you made this compact with your people?' They (i.e., the prophets and their people) said: 'We do affirm what Thou hast enjoined us to affirm.' Allah said: 'Then bear witness over your people in this respect, and I too am one of the bearers of witness with you, over you and your people.'" (Majma 'u 'l-bayan) Ibn Jarir narrates from 'Ali ibn Abi Talib that he said about the words, Then bear witness ...: "Allah said: 'Then bear witness over your people in this respect; and I too am one of the bearers of witness with you, over you and them. Then whoever turns away from you, O Muhammad, after this covenant taken from all the people, these it is that are the transgressors, they are the disobedient ones, (steeped) in disbelief.'" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) 
 says: Its explanation has been given earlier. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "(Allah) said to them (when they were) in (the state of) particle: 'Do you affirm and accept my compact in this matter?' They said: 'We do affirm.' Then Allah said to the angels: 'Then bear witness.'" (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) 
 ! The wording of the verse is not in conflict with this explanation, although, as we have said earlier, it is not inferred from its apparent meanings. It is written in ad-Durru 'l-manthur concerning the verse, And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam ...: "Ahmad and at-Tabarani (in his al-Mu'jamu 'l-awsat) have narrated from Abu Hurayrah that he said: 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: "The deeds shall come on the Day of Resurrection. So the prayer will come and say, 'O Lord, I am prayer,' and He will say, 'Surely you are on good.' And the alms will come and say, 'O Lord I am alms,' and He will say, 'Surely you are on good.' Then the fast will come and say, 'I am fast,' and He will say, 'Surely you are on good.' Then the deeds will come (one after another) and Allah will go on saying, 'Surely you are on good.; (until Islam will come and Allah will say:) 'With thee shall I take today and with thee shall I give.' Allah says in His Book: And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and

in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers " '. " as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about this verse: "It (i.e., Islam) means their believing in the Oneness of Allah, the Mighty, the Great." (at-Tawhid; at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! The belief in monotheism requires that the servant should accept, and submit to, whatever Allah wants him to do. It therefore implies the same thing which has been written in the Commentary. If on the other hand it is explained just as "not ascribing anyone or anything to Allah", then the willingness and unwillingness (mentioned in a preceding verse) would imply voluntary and compulsory guidances. There are several other traditions narrated by al-'Ayyashi and al-Qummi (in their books) and others, in explanation of the verse, And when Allah made a covenant with the prophets... In those traditions the words, you must believe in him, and you must aid him, have been explained as follows: You must believe in the Messenger of Allah and you must aid the Leader of the faithful- blessings and peace be on them. Obviously, these tradtions refer the former pronoun, him, to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and the later, him, to the Leader of the faithful ('Ali, a.s.), without there being any proof or association for it in the wording of the verse. Nevertheless, a tradition given by al-'Ayyashi may solve this problem. He narrates from Salam ibn al-Mustanir, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "They have taken for themselves a name, that Allah named no one with it except 'Ali ibn Abi Talib - and there has not come its interpretation yet." I said: "May I be your ransom! When will its interpretation come?" He said: "When it comes, Allah shall gather before Him the prophets and the believers, so that they should help him. And it is the words of Allah, And when Allah made a covenant with the prophets... and I (too) am of the bearers of witness with you." This tradition solves the problem. The problem arises if we take those traditions as an exegesis or explanation of the verse [but this tradition shows that they do not purport to give the exegesis; they aim at pointing at its interpretation]. And we have described earlier that interpretation is not meaning of the word, nor a thing

related to word. Vide for detail the discourse under the following verse: He it is Who sent down to thee the Book... (3:7).

å
 
    

4 ' ΍˴ϭ Ε ˵ Ύ˴Ϩϴ˶˷Β˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ ˯˴ Ύ˴Οϭ˴ ˲ϖ ˷Σ ˴ ϝ ˴ Ϯ˵γή˴˷ ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ˴΃ ˸΍ϭ˵ΪϬ˶ η ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ϧ˶ Ύ˴Ϥϳ˶· Ϊ˴ ˸όΑ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ύ˱ϣ˸Ϯϗ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϱ˶Ϊ˸Ϭϳ˴ ϒ ˴ ˸ϴϛ˴ ϱ˶Ϊ˸Ϭϳ˴ ϻ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˶Ύ˷ψ ˴ ϟ΍ ϡ˴ ˸ϮϘ˴ ˸ϟ΍ {86} Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶όϤ˴ ˸Ο΃˴ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍˴ϭ Δ˶ Ϝ˴ ΋˶ ϼ˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˴ΔϨ˴ ˸όϟ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ϥ ˴˷ ΃˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ΅˵ ΍˴ΰΟ ˴ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴˸ϭ΃˵{87} Ώ ˵ ΍˴άό˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ ˸Ϩϋ ˴ ϒ ˵ ϔ˴˷ Ψ ˴ ϳ˵ ϻ ˴ Ύ˴Ϭϴ˶ϓ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶Ϊϟ˶Ύ˴Χ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήψ ˴ Ϩ˵ϳ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ {88} ΃˴ϭ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ Ϊ˶ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ˸΍Ϯ˵ΑΎ˴Η Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ ˲Ϣϴ˶Σέ˴˷ ˲έϮ˵ϔϏ ˴ Ϫ˷Ϡ˴ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ Έ˶˴ϓ ˸΍Ϯ˵ΤϠ˴˸λ{89} Ϊ˴ ˸όΑ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷ϟ˵Ύ˷π ˴ ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴ϭ˵΃ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ Θ˵ Α˴ ˸ϮΗ˴ Ϟ ˴ Β˴ ˸Ϙ˵Η Ϧ˷ϟ˴ ΍˱ή˸ϔϛ˵ ˸΍ϭ˵Ω΍˴Ω˸ί΍ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ ˸ϢϬ˶ ϧ˶ Ύ˴Ϥϳ˶·{90} Ϟ ˴ Β˴ ˸Ϙϳ˵ Ϧ˴Ϡϓ˴ ˲έΎ˷ϔ˴ ϛ˵ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ΗΎ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ ˴Ϧϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ΃˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήλ ˶ Ύ˷ϧ˴ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϣ˵Ϭϟ˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ˲Ϣϴ˶ϟ΃˴ ˲Ώ΍˴ά˴ϋ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴˸ϭ΃˵ Ϫ˶ Α˶ ϯ˴ΪΘ˴ ˸ϓ΍ Ϯ˶ ϟ˴ϭ˴ Ύ˱Βϫ˴ Ϋ˴ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍ ˯˵ ˸Ϟϣ˶˷ Ϣ˶ϫΪ˶ Σ ˴ {91} {86} How shall Allah guide a people who disbelieved after their believing and (after) they had borne witness that the Messenger was true and clear arguments had come to them; and Allah does not guide the unjust people. {87} (As for) these, their reward is that upon them is the curse of Allah and the angels and of men, all together. {88} Abiding in it; their chastisement shall not be lightened nor shall they be respited. {89} Except those who repent after that and amend, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. {90} Surely, those who disbelieve after their believing, then increase in unbelief, their repentance shall not be accepted, and these are they that go astray. {91} Surely, those who disbelieve and die while they are unbelievers, the earth full of gold shall not be accepted from one of them, though he should offer to ransom himself with it, these it is who shall have a painful chastisement, and they shall have no helpers. å
  The verses may possibly be connected to the preceding ones dealing with the People of the Book; but apparently they are separate and revealed in another context. ([ )! How shall Allah guide a people... Allah does not guide the unjust people: The question shows improbability of the situation; that it is impossible for them to get guidance. The verse ends with the sentence, "and Allah does not guide the unjust people". We have explained somewhere earlier that in such sentences the adjective explains the reason, that is, Allah does not guide them because they are unjust, and as long as they persist in injustice they will not get Divine Guidance. Of course, they could not be debarred from that guidance if they repented and

returned to Allah. The clause, "and they have borne witness that the Messenger was true": If the verse refers to the People of the Book, then the bearing of witness would refer to their realization that the signs foretold of the awaited prophet perfectly fitted on the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.); and the next clause, "and clear argument had come to them", would refer to that reality. If, on the other hand, it refers to those who apostatized after professing Islam, then the "witness" refers to their affirmation of the truth of the Prophet - not only a ritual affirmation resulting from ignorance or tribal influence, but the one based on clear understanding, as the clause, "and clear arguments had come to them", indicates. In any case, as the verse contains the clause, "and they have borne witness that the Messenger was true", it shows that the disbelief refers to their rejection of Faith after the truth was made clear to them, after the proof was completed against them. They had disbelieved only because they hated the truth, because they haughtily wrangled with the believers and transgressed the limit unjustly. It is this injustice which does not let its people find their way to safety and deliverance. There is another syntactic explanation given for the clause, "and they have borne witness". It has been said that it is in conjunction with the word 'imanihim' (their belief) and it means, 'who disbelieved after they had believed and after they had borne witness.' Yet another explanation: The conjunctive, "and", in the clause, "and they have borne witness", has a circumstantial connotation, and the sentence means, 'while they have borne witness'. In this case it would be a circumstantial clause. ([ )! (As for) these, their reward... nor shall they be respited: We have earlier explained how all the curse returns to such people. For detail see the Commentary of the following verse: ...these it is whom Allah does curse, and those who curse do curse them (too) (2:159). ([ )! Except those who repent after that and amend, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful: "Aslahu'"( amended, changed to better); it points to sincerity of repentance; that they repent with true heart, by which the impurity of disbelief is removed and their soul is purified by true belief. This word does not refer to doing good deeds; of course, good deeds follow the sincere repentance and are inseparable from it, yet they are not a part of repentance. The clause, "then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful", puts the reason to point to its unspoken result. Its connotation is as follows: then Allah forgives them and has mercy on them, because Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

([ )! Surely those who disbelieve after their believing... are they that have gone astray. Surely those who disbelieve and die... they shall have no helpers: The two verses together explain the reason of the verse in the beginning, "How shall Allah guide a people who disbelieved after their believing." It applies a general rule to a particular case. A man, who disbelieves after truth has been made manifest to him and proof completed against him, and who then does not sincerely return to Allah, can belong to one of the two categories: Either he is an apostate who disbelieves after believing, then increases in unbelief and goes on transgressing without ever thinking of amending his ways; Allah shall not guide such a person nor will He accept his insincere repentance, because he does not turn to God with sincerity; he is totally lost, and there is no hope at all of his returning to the right path. Or, he is an unbeliever who dies in his disbelief, in his aversion to truth, without ever repenting; Allah shall not guide him in the hereafter to the Garden, because he himself never tried to return to his Lord; and there is no substitute for this returning to Lord, for repentance. He therefore will have nothing to offer as ransom, nor will any intercessor or helper intercede on his behalf or help him. In this context, look at the sentence, "and these are they that have gone astray". In Arabic it is a "nominal sentence", because its predicate is a nomen agentis, 'addallun' (lit: strayers); such a sentence indicates permanence. Then there is the demonstrative pronoun 'ula'ika' (lit: those) which is used for distant objects; and it shows that they are removed far from mercy of Allah. Thus there are three modes of emphasis which have been combined here: addition of a separate personal pronoun, "they", use of a noun (nomen agentis) for predicate; and the definite article 'al' (the) before the said predicate - all these together prove that they are hardened wrongdoers and transgressors for whom there is no hope of guidance. Likewise, the last sentence, "and they shall have no helpers", proves that they will not get benefit of intercession - it is the intercessors who shall be the helpers on the Day of Resurrection. We have earlier explained that the use of plural, e.g., intercessors, in the verse 26:101 (So we have no intercessors) proves that there shall be intercessors on the Day of Judgment but the unbelievers shall not be able to avail themselves of their intercession. (See the details in the discourse of "Intercession" under the verse 2:48.) The same is the import of the plural, "helpers", in this place. The second verse says that no ransom shall be accepted from them, nor will they get any helper. It is because these things are substitutes, which are used when the

original thing is not available. They lost their chance of repentance in this life and there is nothing that can be a substitute of repentance in the hereafter. It also shows that the clause, "and die while they are unbelievers", implies that they died without repentance. As such, there is no conflict between this apparently exclusive statement and the following verse which says: And repentance is not for those who go on doing evil deeds, until when death comes to one of them,-he says: "Surely now I repent"; nor (for) those who die while they are unbelievers. These are they for whom We have prepared a painful chastisement (4:18). In this verse, when death comes, means, when the death approaches and man sees the signs of the next world and his ties with this world are cut off. Obviously at this point of time the door of repentance is closed on him. 'al-Mil' ' ( a quantity that fills a pot); 'mil'u 'l-ardi dhahaban ' (a quantity of gold that would fill the earth); in this phrase, the earth is taken for a pot that is filled by gold. It is an imaginative 'al-isti'arah bi 'l-kinayah' (extended metaphor).  $  It is reported in Majma'u 'l-bayan about the verses, How shall Allah guide a people ...: "It is said that the verses were revealed about a man from the Ansar, al-Harith ibn Suwayd ibn as-Samit by name; he had treacherously killed al-Mujadhar ibn Dhiyad al-Balawi, fled (from Medina), renounced Islam and reached Mecca. Thereafter he felt remorse and sent a message to his people to ask the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) whether he would be allowed to repent. They asked (the Messenger of Allah); so the verses were revealed: How shall Allah guide a people who disbelieved after their believing... Except those who repent after that and amend... A man from his clan took these verses to him. (Hearing them) he said: 'I surely know that you are truthful, and the Messenger of Allah is truer than you, and Allah is the most truthful of the three.' So he returned to Medina, repented and his Islam was good. It is reported from Mujahid and as-Suddi; and the same is narrated from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.)." Ibn Ishaq and Ibn al-Mundhir have narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "Verily al-Harith ibn Suwayd killed al-Mujadhdhar ibn Dhiyad and Qays ibn Zayd (from Banu Dubay'ah) during the Battle of Uhud, and then went over to Quraysh, and remained at Mecca. Thereafter he sent message to his brother, al-Julas, expressing

his desire of repentance, so that he could return to his people. Thereupon, Allah sent these verses about him: How shall Allah guide a people... ." (Then the story continues as above.) (ad-Durru 1-manthur) 
 ! This story has been narrated through other chains, and there are many differences among them: For example, 'Ikrimah says that it was revealed about Abu 'Amir ar-Rahib, al-Harith ibn Suwayd ibn as-Samit and Wahwah ibn alAslat (among twelve persons) who had renounced Islam and went over to Quraysh. Later they wrote to their families whether their repentance would be accepted. Then these verses were revealed. Another example is found in Majma'u 'l-bayan, that the verse, Surely those who disbelieve after their believing, then increase in unbelief ..., was revealed about the eleven companions of al-Harith ibn Suwayd. When al-Harith returned (to Medina), they said: 'We shall remain in Mecca in our disbelief as long as we wished; later on if and when we wanted to return (to Medina) we would return, and there would come for us too what had been revealed about al-Harith.' When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) conquered Mecca, some of them re-entered into Islam and their repentance was accepted. And it was revealed about those of them who had died in disbelief, Surely, those who disbelieve and die while they are unbelievers ... (This report has been attributed to some exegetes.) There is a third view that it was revealed about the People of the Book. Others say that the verse, Surely those who disbelieve after their believing, then increase in unbelief . . ., was revealed particularly for the Jews, because at first they believed (in Musa), then disbelieved in 'Isa, then increased in unbelief by rejecting Muhammad (blessings of Allah be on him and his progeny and the two prophets). There are other explanations given by other people. If you ponder on these views, explanations and traditions, you will realize that all are based on personal opinions of the ancient exegetes - as some later ones have remarked. As for the tradition attributed to as-Sadiq (a.s.), it is al-mursalah and weak. Moreover, it is possible for a verse to have more than one cause for its revelation; and Allah knows better.

å
 
    

' 'G ˲Ϣϴ˶Ϡϋ ˴ Ϫ˶ Α˶ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ Έ˶ϓ˴ ˯˳ ˸ϲη ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϙϔ˶ Ϩ˵Η Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷Β˵ Τ ˶ Η˵ Ύ˷Ϥ˴ ϣ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϙϔ˶ Ϩ˵Η ϰ˷Θ˴ Σ ˴ ή˴˷ Β˶ ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϨΗ˴ Ϧ˴ϟ{92} ϲ˶ϨΒ˴ ϟ˶˷ ϼ ˱˷ Σ ˶ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ ϡ˶ Ύ˴ότ ˴˷ ϟ΍ Ϟ ˵˷ ϛ˵ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ Ϟ ˵ ϴ˶΋΍˴ή˸γ·˶ ϡ˴ ή˴˷ Σ ˴ Ύ˴ϣ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϟ ˴ ϴ˶΋΍˴ή˸γ·˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϗΩ˶ Ύ˴λ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ ϥ˶· Ύ˴ϫϮ˵Ϡ˸ΗΎ˴ϓ Γ˶ ΍˴έ˸ϮΘ˴˷ϟΎ˶Α ˸΍Ϯ˵Η˸΄ϓ˴ ˸Ϟϗ˵ Γ˵ ΍˴έ˸ϮΘ˴˷ϟ΍ ϝ ˴ ΰ˴˷ Ϩ˴ Η˵ ϥ˴΃ Ϟ ˶ ˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ϫ˶ δ ˶ ˸ϔϧ˴ {93} ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϥϟ˶Ύ˷ψ ˴ ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴ϭ˵΄ϓ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ Ϊ˶ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ώ ˴ ά˶ Ϝ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϯ ˴ ή˴ Θ˴ ˸ϓ΍ Ϧ ˶ Ϥ˴ ϓ˴ {94} ·˶ Δ˴ ˷Ϡ˴ϣ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵όΒ˶ Η˴˷Ύ˴ϓ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϕ ˴ Ϊ˴ λ ˴ ˸Ϟϗ˵ Ϣ˴ ϴ˶ϫ΍˴ή˸Α Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϛή˶ ˸θϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ύ˱ϔϴ˶ϨΣ ˴ {95} {92} By no means shall you attain to righteousness until you spend (benevolently) out of what you love; and whatever thing you spend, Allah surely knows it. {93} All food was lawful to the children of Israel except that which Israel had forbidden to himself, before the Taurat was revealed. Say: Bring then the Taurat and read it, if you are truthful. {94} Then whoever fabricates a lie against Allah after this, these it is that are the unjust. {95} Say: Allah has spoken the truth, therefore follow the religion of Ibrahim, the upright one; and he was not one of the polytheists. å
  The connection of the first verse with the preceding ones is not clear; possibly it was not revealed with the remaining verses (which are clearly connected to each other). We had encountered a similar difficulty in deciding the revelation date of the verse: Say: "O People of the Book! come to a word common between us and you . . ." (3:64). Someone has tried to show its relation with the other verses. He says: The verse like the rest of the talk is addressed to the Children of Israel. Previously they were admonished and rebuked because they loved this world, and preferred wealth and riches to the Divine Religion. Now it says to them: You tell a lie when you claim a special relationship with Allah and His prophets, and when you say that you are pious and righteous ones. See what the truth is; you love your good property and sit on it refusing to spend from it in Allah's way. You only spend from undesirable things which you do not care about. But man can never attain to righteousness unless he spends out of what he loves, that is, from good properties; and if you spend out of it Allah shall preserve it for you and give you its reward in the hereafter. That is the gist of what he has written; but, as you see, it is stretching the point too far. As for the rest of the verses, their connection with the preceding one is quite clear.

([ )!Never shall you attain to righteousness until you spend (benevolently) out of what you love: "an-Nayl" (to reach, to attain); 'al-birr' means comprehensive good-doing. ar-Raghib says: "'al-barr' (land) is opposite of 'albahr' (sea); it led to the idea of spaciousness, and from that is derived 'al-barr' spaciousness (or comprehensiveness) in good-doing." "Good-doing" is used in an unrestricted sense. It covers the action of heart (like true belief and pure intention) as well as the action of body (like worship of Allah and spending in His way). (We have used the word "righteousness" in translation to convey this comprehensive goodness.) And it is this very sense in which this word has been used in the following verse: It is not righteousness that you turn your faces towards the East and the West, but righteousness is the one who believes in Allah and the Last Day, the angels and the Book and the prophets, and gives away wealth out of love for Him to the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and the beggars and for (the emancipation of) the captives, and keeps up prayer and pays the zakat; and the performers of their promise when they make a promise, and the patient in distress and affliction and in time of conflicts (2:177). Reading this verse in conjunction with the one under discussion, one may clearly understand that spending wealth out of love for Allah is an essential part of righteousness; and making righteousness dependent on this spending shows the utmost importance attached to it particularly. It is because man by nature has too much attachment with the wealth he has gathered; he thinks that it is a part of his being, if it goes then a portion of his life is gone. There is no such difficulty in other acts of worship and good deeds where nothing seems to be lost. It is not difficult, in view of the above discourse, to see the weakness of an exegete's explanation that 'righteousness is spending from what you love.' Perhaps he thought that the verse is framed in the style of the sentence, 'You cannot get rid of hunger until you eat!' The verse 2:177 is enough to show inaptness of this explanation. The same verse (2:177) also makes it clear that 'al-birr' has been used in its literal sense, that is, comprehensiveness in good-doing, because it explains it by enumerating all-encompassing good of faith and deed. And it shows the in appropriateness of an explanation that 'al-birr' means bounty and favour of Allah; or of someone else's interpretation that it means the Garden.

([ )! and whatever thing you spend, Allah surely knows it: It strengthens and gladdens the spenders' hearts. They should know that what they have spent from their cherished wealth and property is not wasted, has not gone unnoticed, because Allah Who has enjoined them to do so, knows their spending and what they spend. ([ )! All food was lawful to the Children of Israel- except that which Israel had forbidden to himself - before the Torah was revealed: "at-Ta'am" (whatever is eaten); the people of Hijaz [in whose language the Qur'an was revealed] use this word particularly for wheat, and it is this meaning they understand when the word is used without any association. 'al-Hill' (lawfulness) is opposite of 'al-hurmah (unlawfulness, prohibition); probably it is derived from 'al-hall' (to open) which is opposite of 'al-'aqd' or 'al-'aql' (to tie, to bind) - thus lawfulness has a connotation of openness, unrestrictedness. Israel was (the acquired name of) the Prophet Ya'qub; he got this name because he endeavoured hard in the way of Allah; the People of the Book say that it means 'one who vanquished God and prevailed against Him'. The Torah says that he wrestled with God in a place called Peniel and vanquished Him. But the Qur'an rejects it and the reason says that such thing is impossible. The clause, "except that which Israel had forbidden to himself," is exception from the above-mentioned "food". The next clause, "before the Torah was revealed", is related to the verb "was lawful"; it means: Allah had not forbidden any food to the Children of Israel before the Torah was revealed, except that which Israel had forbidden for himself. The following sentence, "Say: 'Bring them the Torah and read it, if you are truthful,'" indicates that the Jews were not admitting that every food was lawful to them before the Torah was revealed. They had to say so because they did not accept that Divine Laws could be abrogated. (We have described it under the verse 2:106[08, Whatever signs We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it.) No wonder, they disputed the words of Allah where He says: Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful to them (4:160). Likewise, the last verse, Say: "Allah has spoken the truth; therefore follow the religion of Ibrahim...", indicates that they were trying to create doubts in the minds of the Muslims through these denials. They did not admit that every food was lawful to them before the revelation of the Torah; nor that many lawful things were forbidden to them because of their iniquity; and through these denials they disputed the claim of the Messenger of Allah (which was based on Divine

Revelation) that his religion was that of Ibrahim, and that it was the natural religion free from excess and shortcoming. The Jews said: "How can it be true, when Ibrahim was a Jew in religion, on the shari'ah of Torah? How could religion of Ibrahim allow what was forbidden in the Torah, when abrogation is not allowed?" It is clear now that the verse intends to answer the questions which the Jews had put about, and by which they had tried to confuse the Muslims. Obviously, they had not put these questions directly to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), but to the believers during their social contacts. This inference is supported by the fact that the Qur'an has not mentioned here their objection or question at all, unlike many occasions where it has quoted their sayings before replying. For example, And the Jews say: "The hand of Allah is tied up" (5:64); And they say: "Fire shall not touch us but for a few days" (2:80); And they say: "Our hearts are covered" (2:88); there are several such verses. Moreover, the verses 3:99 ± 100, coming soon after this talk clearly show that the Jews were trying to mislead the believers through such insidious propaganda: Say: "O People of the Book! why do you hinder him who believes from the way of Allah?..." 0 you who believe! if you obey a party from among those who have been given the Book, they will turn you back as unbelievers after you have believed. In short, the Jews objected as follows: How can your Prophet be true as he accepts validity of abrogation? He says that God had disallowed many lawful things to the Jews because of their iniquity. But it entails abrogation of a previously ordained law, which is not acceptable in case of Allah. What is unlawful will remain unlawful forever; it is not possible for a Divine Law to change, Allah directed His Prophet to answer them as follows: The Torah says that every food was lawful to the Children of Israel before the revelation of the Torah. Therefore bring the Torah and read it if you are truthful in your claim. (All food was lawful... if you are truthful.)But if you refuse to do so, then you must admit that you have fabricated a lie against Allah and that you are unjust. (Then whoever fabricates a lie against Allah after this, these it is that are the unjust.)It will prove to you that I am truthful in my mission. You should therefore follow my religion which is the religion of Ibrahim, the upright one; (Say: "Allah has spoken the truth; therefore follow the religion of Ibrahim, the upright one; and he was not one of the polytheists.") The exegetes have variously explained these verses - each in his own way. But all have said that the verses aim to refute the objection of the Jews concerning

abrogation - as we have said above. The strangest explanation (given by one of them) is as follows: "The verse replies to a Jewish objection regarding abrogation. It appears that the Jews had said: 'O Muhammad! If you are, as you claim, on the religion of Ibrahim and the succeeding prophets, then how is it that you have allowed, for example, camel meat that was forbidden to him and them? And now that you have made lawful what was unlawful to them, you should not claim that you affirm their truth and are on their religion; nor should you especially mention Ibrahim.' "The reply runs as follows: 'Every food was lawful to all people including the Children of Israel. But the Children of Israel had forbidden some things to themselves by indulging into sins and evils, as Allah says: Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them . . .' (4:160). Therefore, the word, 'Israel', refers to the whole nation, to all the Children of Israel, not to Israel (Ya'qub) alone. And such usage in tribes' names is common. The clause, 'Israel had forbidden to himself, actually means that the Children of Israel indulged in injustice and committed sins, as a result of which Allah forbade it to them. The clause, 'before the Torah was revealed', qualifies the preceding verb, 'Israel had forbidden to himself; that is, what the Israelites had forbidden to themselves before the revelation of the Torah. If we take, 'Israel', to mean Ya'qub alone, then this clause (before the Torah was revealed) would be superfluous, because everybody knows that Ya'qub had preceded the revelation of the Torah." This is the gist of what he has written. Someone else has given the same explanation with one difference. He writes: "The clause, 'that which Israel had forbidden to himself ', means that the Children of Israel had themselves forbidden those things to themselves, making laws of their own, without any revelation from God; in the same way as the Arabs of pre-Islamic days were doing and which Allah has mentioned in the Qur'an," Both exegetes have strained the words to an intolerable limit, which no knowledgeable person would agree with. They have diverted the whole talk from its proper line. Actually, they were misled in this way because they thought that the clause, "before the Torah was revealed", was related to the clause, "Israel had forbidden" - while in fact it qualifies the words in the beginning, "All food was lawful"; and the exception clause, "except that which Israel had forbidden to himself", is just a parenthetical clause.

Consequently, there is no reason why "Israel" should be interpreted as "the Children of Israel", as they have done, thinking that without it the verse could not be explained! Now we come to the usage of tribes' names. It is true that the Arabs say, Bakr, Taghlib, Nizar and 'Adnan, when they actually mean, the children of Bakr, the children of Taghlib, the children of Nizar and the children of 'Adnan, respectively. But we have never seen them ± at the time when the Qur'an was revealed ± using "Israel" for "the Children of Israel". Nor has the Qur'an used this word in that sense anywhere else; although it has mentioned "the Children of Israel" in about forty places, including this very verse: "All food was lawful to the Children of Israel ± except that which Israel had forbidden to himself." Let us ask them one thing: What is the difference (according to their explanation) between the two clauses? The Qur'an refers to them first as "the Children of Israel" and then immediately after that as "Israel". Why this change if both words mean the same? If their explanation is correct, then was it not necessary to use the same word in both places, lest there be any confusion? And confusion was bound to occur; because, from the point of view of these two writers, the whole lot of the exegetes was misled into thinking that Israel refers to Ya'qub, not to his children! The best proof to show that the name "Israel" refers to Ya'qub alone, is the singular masculine pronoun, "to himself", used for "Israel". Had "Israel" stood for "the tribe of Israel" or "the Children of Israel", it was essential to say "to itself" or "to themselves". ([ )! Say: "Bring then the Torah and read it, if you are truthful": So that it may be seen who is right, I or you. Allah guides His Prophet to reply them in this way. ([ )! Then whoever fabricates a lie against Allah after this, these it is that are the unjust: Apparently it is Allah's talk addressed to His Prophet; accordingly, the aim is to strengthen and gladden the Prophet's heart, by declaring that it is his enemies, the Jews, who are the unjust, because they fabricate lies against Allah. It is an indirect adverse allusion to the Jews. There is another syntactical possibility: It may be a continuation of the reply given to the Jews by the Prophet, although the second person singular pronoun used in the demonstrative pronoun 'dhalika' (this) does not fit this explanation. However, according to this explanation too, the sentence would be just veiled aside, giving

the vanquished adversary a chance to save his face - because it does not clearly say that the Jews are the unjust ones. Putting the matter in general terms gives the enemy an opportunity to surrender gracefully. It is the same style that has been used in the following verse which says: And most surely we or you are on a right way or in manifest error (34:24). The demonstrative pronoun, "this", in "after this" points to the explanation and proof offered to the Jews. Why has this proviso, "after this", been added here? Is not he, who fabricates a lie against Allah, unjust in all circumstances? The fact is that he cannot be called unjust until proof has been clearly explained to him - as some scholars have said. However, the sentence, "these it is that are the unjust", is an exclusive one, and it implies that such fabricators cannot be but unjust. ([ )! Say: "Allah has spoken the truth; therefore follow the religion of Ibrahim...": As the truth is on my side (in what I have told you and called you to), you should follow my religion; also you should admit that camel meat, for example, is a good thing made lawful by Allah, and that Allah had forbidden it to you as a punishment for your injustice and transgression - as He has said. The clause, "therefore follow the religion of Ibrahim", is a sort of indirect invitation to follow the Prophet's religion. It was not mentioned directly because: first, the Jews affirmed the truth of Ibrahim's religion; secondly, the present wording shows that the religion to which they are invited is the upright and natural one - after all, nature does not prevent man from eating good sustenance given by Allah, including meat.  $  as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "Whenever Israel ate camel meat, he felt throbbings of pain in his sides. Therefore, he forbade camel meat to himself. And it was (long) before the revelation of the Torah. When the Torah was revealed, (Musa) neither forbade it, nor ate it." (al-Kafi; at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! An almost similar tradition is narrated through the Sunni chains. The verbs in the clause, neither forbade it nor ate it, refer to Musa (a.s.) whose name, although not mentioned, is clearly understood. The verb, 'lam ya'kulhu' (did

not eat it) may alternatively be read from the paradigm 'at-taf'il as 'lam yu'akkilhu' (did not feed it, i.e., did not tell them to eat it). The dictionary, Taju 'l-'arus, says that the verb 'al-akl (to eat) when conjugated on the paradigms of 'at-taf'il' and 'almufa'alah',has the same meaning. It means that 'at-ta'kil' ( to feed) and 'almu'akalah' (to eat together) have the same connotation.

å
 
    

' '& ·˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˴Ύ˴ό˸Ϡϟ˶˷ ϯ˱Ϊϫ˵ ϭ˴ Ύ˱ϛέ˴ Ύ˴Βϣ˵ Δ˴ Ϝ˴˷ Β˴ Α˶ ϱ˶άϠ˴˷ϟ˴ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ Ϡ˶ϟ ϊ˴ ο ˶ ϭ˵ Ζ ˳ ˸ϴΑ˴ ϝ ˴ ϭ˴˷ ΃˴ ϥ ˴˷ {96} ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴Χ ˴ Ω˴ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϣ˴ ϴ˶ϫ΍˴ή˸Α·˶ ϡ˵ Ύ˴Ϙϣ˴˷ ˲ΕΎ˴Ϩϴ˶˷Α˴ ˲ΕΎ˴ϳ΁ Ϫ˶ ϴ˶ϓ ή˴ ϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ ϼ ˱ ϴ˶Βγ ˴ Ϫ˶ ˸ϴϟ˴·˶ ω ˴ Ύ˴τΘ˴ ˸γ΍ Ϧ ˶ ϣ˴ Ζ ˶ ˸ϴ˴Β˸ϟ΍ Ξ ˵˷ Σ ˶ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ˶ϭ˴ Ύ˱Ϩϣ˶ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˴Ύ˴ό˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˶ϋ ˴ ˲ϲ ˷ Ϩ˶ Ϗ ˴ Ϫ˷Ϡ˴ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ Έ˶ϓ˴ {97} {96} Most surely the first house appointed for men is the one at Bekka, blessed and a guidance for the nations. {97} In it are clear signs, the standing place of Ibrahim, and whoever enters it shall be secure, and pilgrimage to the House is incumbent upon men for the sake of Allah, (upon) every one who is able to undertake the journey to it; and whoever disbelieves, then surely Allah is Selfsufficient, above any need of the worlds. å
  The two verses are in reply to another objection which the Jews were putting to the believers, because of the "abrogation". Their target, this time, was the change of qiblah from Baytu '1-Maqdis to the Ka'bah. We have explained under the verse 2:144 (... turn then thy face towards the Sacred Mosque...) that the change of qiblah was a very important matter which had profound effect, materially as well as spiritually, on the People of the Book, especially the Jews; apart from the fact that it offended their views about abrogation. That is why they vehemently objected to it and contentions and conflicts between them and the Muslims continued for a long time after the change of qiblah. It may be inferred from the verses that they had combined two elements in their objection: their aversion to abrogation, and a denial that the new direction of qiblah had anything to do with Ibrahim. How could the Ka'bah be considered the qiblah of Ibrahim, when Allah had appointed Baytu 'l-Maqdis as qiblah? This new rule entails abrogation of Ibrahim's law - admittedly the true religion - when we know that abrogation is impossible and void.

The verse deals with it as follows: The Ka'bah was appointed as the House of worship long before other houses like Baytu '1-Maqdis were built. Undoubtedly it was Ibrahim who built it and dedicated it for Divine Worship; there are many clear signs, like the standing place of Ibrahim, which prove this fact. Baytu '1-Maqdis, on the other hand, was built by Sulayman who came centuries after Ibrahim. ([ )! Most surely the first house... for the worlds: Meaning of house is wellknown; that the Ka'bah was appointed for men, means that it was dedicated in order that people should worship Allah in that place. It was a means of Divine Worship, helping men and making it easier for them to pray to Allah, by journey to, or facing towards it; and in various ways turning their attention to Him. All this may be inferred from the phrase "blessed and a guidance for the worlds". Also the expression "one at Bakkah" hints at it. The word "bakkah" means gathering of people, and its use here points to the fact that there is always a large gathering of people therein who are engaged in circumambulation, prayer and other rites of worship. The wording however does not show that the Ka'bah was the first House built on the earth or appointed for the benefit of men. Bakkah - refers to the land on which the Ka'bah stands; it has been given this name because there is always a huge gathering of people there. There are also other explanations: (1) Bakkah is Mecca, the letter 'm' has been changed to 'b', as it has been done in 'lazim' and 'lazib' or 'ratim' and 'ratib' etc.; (2) It is a name of the Meccan Sanctuary; or (3) of the Sacred Mosque; or (4) of the area of circumambulation. "al-Mubarakah"' is on the paradigm of al-mufa'alah from the root word al-barakah (abundant good); it has been translated here as 'blessed'; it means bestowal of abundant good on the House, making it blessed. Abundant good covers good of both worlds; but in this verse it has been put face to face with the phrase "a guidance for the worlds" and it indicates that the blessing refers to worldly good. The best of such blessings are abundance of sustenance in Mecca, and deep yearning of people to go there for pilgrimage, to present themselves there and to keep it in highest regard. In other words, it would show the fulfilment of Ibrahim's prayer: O our Lord! surely I have settled a part of my offspring in a valley, uncultivable, near Thy Sacred House, our Lord! that they may establish prayers; therefore make the hearts of some people yearn towards them and provide them with fruits; haply

they may be grateful (14:37). The Ka'bah is a guidance, as it shows the people the way to their happiness in the hereafter, leads them to nobility and Divine Nearness; because, Allah has designated it for worship, and has prescribed various prayers, acts of worship and rituals to be performed there; also, it has remained the longed for destination of believers and a place of worship for worshippers. The Qur'an shows that it was in Ibrahim's time - after he had completed the construction of the Ka'bah - that pilgrimage was prescribed for the first time: Allah says: And We enjoined Ibrahim and Isma'il (saying): Purify (you two) My House for those who make circuit and those who abide (in it for devotion) and those who bow down (and) those who prostrate themselves (2:125). And He had enjoined Ibrahim as follows: And proclaim among men the Hajj; they will come to you on foot and on every lean camel, coming from every remote path (22:27). This verse clearly says that this call, this cry, would surely be answered with general acceptance by the people from near and afar, from various clans and tribes. Also the Qur'an proves that this divinely-initiated "symbol" was firmly established and quite well-known in the days of Shu'ayb (a.s.). Allah quotes him as saying to Musa (a.s.): I desire to marry one of these two daughters of mine to you on condition that you should serve me for eight years (lit.: pilgrimages); but if you complete ten, it will be of your own free will (28:27). He used the word "pilgrimages" for "years". There can be only one explanation for it: the years were counted in terms of pilgrimage, as it happened every year. Also there are many points in Ibrahim's invocation which show that the House all the time served as a worship centre, was a symbol of guidance. (For detail see ch. 14 - Ibrahim). The Arabs even in the days of ignorance, held the House in reverence and performed its pilgrimage, rightly believing it to be a part of Ibrahim's shari'ah. History says that other nations too accorded respect to it. This in itself is a sort of guidance because it fixes man's mind on remembrance of Allah. So far as the period after the advent of Islam is concerned, Ka'bah's guidance needs no elaboration. Its fame encompasses the East and the West. The Ka'bah is always present in people's minds and hearts. The Muslims turn to it every where and at all times: during worship and prayer, while standing or sitting, for slaughtering animals and in a number of other religious affairs.

In this way, the House is a guidance (with all stages of guiding), be it just attention of mind or complete surrender to Allah ± the stage which may be attained only by the purified servants of Allah ± from among those who are free of sin and error. Moreover, it guides the Muslim's world to their worldly blessings, because it unifies their goal, unites the ummah and opens for them avenues of benefit and profit. Also it is a guidance for the others, because it makes them appreciate the fruits of this unity and they realize how beneficial it is to unite all separate forces together. It appears from the above that:  ! The Ka'bah is a guidance to the happiness of this world and the next; and it encompasses all the stages of guidance. In short, the guidance is general and unconditional. %
 $!It is a guidance for the whole world, not for a particular world or special group like the progeny of Ibrahim, or the Arabs, or the Muslims. It is because of unrestrictedness of the guidance. ([ )! In it are clear signs, the standing place of Ibrahim: The "signs" are qualified by the adjective "clear", it particularizes the signs to a certain extent. Yet the ambiguity, the vagueness remains. But the context demands that the distinctions and special qualities of the House be clearly shown, in order that the audience may know why it has got precedence over all other houses of worship. It requires definitive description of its distinctions, free from ambiguous expression or vague depiction. Looking from this angle, it becomes clear that the next phrases and clauses have been put there as classifications of the "clear signs". What are the clear signs? They are the standing place of Ibrahim, its being a sanctuary and place of safety, and obligatoriness of its pilgrimage for those who can afford. But it does not mean that the three clauses are in " 'atfu 'l-bayan" (explicative apposition) to the phrase "clear signs" or serve as its "al-badal" (substitute). Otherwise it would require reconstruction of all the sentences. For example, it will have to be rewritten as follows: "These signs are the standing place of Ibrahim, and safety for those who enter it, and its pilgrimage for him who may afford the journey." Thus we will have to reduce a whole sentence (whoever enters it shall be secure) to a single word "security" (it makes no difference whether we take that sentence as an imperative or a declarative one), and to change the imperative sentence (and for the sake of Allah, pilgrimage to the House is incumbent . . .) into

a declarative one and then setting it in conjunction with the preceding sentence; and this too will have to be reduced to a single word. Alternatively we will have to add 'an' )of masdar before both sentences. But the context does not agree with all these alterations. The fact is that the three sentences are independent; each has a certain connotation - either declarative or imperative - and all three together describe the clear signs. It is as we say: Zayd is a noble man; he is the son of a great father; his house is always open to guests; and we should follow in his footsteps. [Thus the three independent sentences explain the nobility of Zayd.] ([ )! the standing place of Ibrahim: It is a subject with its predicate omitted; the complete sentence would be, "There is in it the standing place of Ibrahim." It is the stone that has the imprint of the feet of Ibrahim. It is reported that the stone is fixed in the place now called "Maqamu Ibrahim " ( standing place of Ibrahim) on the periphery of the circum-ambulation area, facing "al-Multazam" (the Ka'bah's wall between its door and the Black Stone). It is this stone that Abu Talib, the uncle of the Prophet, refers to in his well-known poem: And the footprints of Ibrahim in the stone identify, With his (i.e., Muhammad's) feet - when they are bare. Sometimes this phrase gives the idea that there is in the House - or the House itself - the place where Ibrahim stood or stayed for Divine Worship. Another syntactical possibility: We may say that the implied sentence is as follows, 'In it are clear signs, and they are the standing place of Ibrahim, and security and pilgrimage'; but the last words (i.e. 'and security and pilgrimage') have been omitted for brevity because the next sentences allude to them. The next sentences, (and whoever enters It ..., and for the sake of Allah pilgrimage...) give imperative connotation, but are constructed as declarative ones. This verse, therefore, shows one of the wonderful Qur'anic styles: It uses a talk (which has its own theme) - to serve another purpose - it is placed in such a way as to point to the other meaning too. Thus one sentence serves two purposes without sacrificing either connotation. For example, sometimes it puts direct quotation in an indirect narration: ...everyone of them believes in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers: We make no difference between any of His messengers (2:285). Two examples are found in the verse 2:258 (Did you not see him who disputed with Ibrahim about his Lord... .) and also 2:259 (Or like him who passed

by a town, and it had fallen down upon "its roofs . . .); and we have pointed to this in the Commentary of the second verse. Other examples are seen in 26:88 - 89 (The day on which neither property will avail, nor sons, except him who comes to Allah with a heart submissive); and also 2:177 (It is not righteousness that you turn your faces ..., but righteousness is the one who . ..) wherein righteousness has been used for "righteous"; the same modality is seen in 2:171 (And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears not more than a call and a cry). This modality is used in most of the Qur'anic parables. The modality used in this verse, In it are clear signs... independent of the worlds, which frequently switches from declarative to imperative mood and back, is the same as that employed in the verses: And remember Our servants Ayyub, when he called upon his Lord: The Satan has afflicted me with weariness and torment. Stamp your foot, here is a cool washing place and a drink. And We gave him his family and the like of them with them, as a mercy from Us, and as a reminder to those possessed of understanding. And take in your hand a bundle of rushes and beat her with it and do not break your oath; surely We found him patient; most excellent the servant! Surely he was frequent in returning (to Allah) (38:41-44). However, the explanation given above is totally different from that given by some people who speak in term of explicative apposition, and which we have rejected earlier. If one thinks it necessary to treat it as an explicative apposition, then it is far better to treat only one phrase "the Standing Place of Ibrahim", in this way; and treat the next two sentences as independent ones, which by their meanings point to other two explicative appositions which are deleted for brevity - as we have done. The completed sentence then would be as follows: In it are clear signs, the Standing Place of Ibrahim, and the security of the visitor, and the pilgrimage of one who can afford it. There is no doubt whatsoever that each of the above-mentioned things is a clear sign that leads to Allah and reminds one of His majesty. What is a sign? It is a thing that points to something else. And there is no sign that may lead to Allah, may remind His servants of His majesty, greater and clearer in people's eyes than the Standing Place of Ibrahim, the sanctuary that provides security to the one who enters it, and the worship and rites which are performed by millions of people year after year and which the alternations of days and nights cannot set aside. It should be made clear that it is not necessary for a "sign" to be a super-natural thing that should contradict the normal system of nature; neither miraculousness is a part of this word's meaning, nor its use in the Qur'an is confined to this sense.

Allah says: Whatever signs We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it (2:106). No doubt, abrogated laws of the shari'ah are included in the meaning of the word, "signs", here. Also He says: Do you build on every height a monument (lit. sign)? Vain is it that you do (26:128). There are many such verses in the Qur'an. Now you may see how untenable is the position of those who say that only the Standing Place of Ibrahim is a "clear sign", and that the security and the pilgrimage are not related in any way to the "clear signs". The same is the position of those who insist that the phrase "clear signs" refers to various special characteristics of the Ka'bah. (We do not think it necessary to quote them here; whoever so desires, should refer to some detailed books of exegesis.) Such an explanation takes it for granted that "signs" means miraculous and supernatural things; but as we have explained just now, there is no evidence to prove it. The fact is that the sentence "Whoever enters it shall be secure", points to a legislative law, not to any creative characteristic. Apparently it is a declarative sentence which refers to a law that was in force since long and had made the House a place of security. This may be inferred from the invocation of Ibrahim quoted in the ch. 14 (Ibrahim) and ch. 2 (The Cow). This right of sanctuary was recognized even by the Arabs of pre-Islamic time, and its origin may be traced to Ibrahim's days. Some exegetes have said: The sentence declares that violence and upheaval, turmoil and turbulence cannot happen in, or reach, the sanctuary. But experience refutes this explanation; we know how many battles and wars were fought in that area; how much distance and violence had occurred there - and especially before this verse was revealed. Also the verse 29:67 (Do they not see that We have made a sacred territory secure, while men are carried off by force from around them?)does not show any creative security inherent in the nature of Ka'bah. It only points to the fact that safety and security surrounded the sacred area, because people respected the sanctity of the House and accorded it full honour as it was established by the shari'ah of Ibrahim; thus ultimately it depends on Divine Legislation, on the law ordained by Allah. This view is further supported by the invocations of Ibrahim as he implored Allah: My Lord! make this city secure (14:35); My Lord! make it a secure town (2:126). He prayed to Allah to make Mecca a secure town, and Allah answered his prayer

by promulgating a law to that effect and implanting acceptance of this law in people's hearts so that they could continue respecting this sanctuary generation after generation. ([ )! and for the sake of Allah, pilgrimage to the House is incumbent upon men, (upon) every one who can afford the journey to it: "al-Hijj" which has also been recited 'al-hajj' literally means, to intend, to aim; then it was reserved for intention of, or repairing to, the House in a particular manner laid down by the shari'ah; 'sabilan' (lit.:way; translated here as, the journey) is 'at-tamyiz' (accusative of specification) related to the verb "can afford". The verse approvingly describes the institution of 'hajj' as a law that was ordained for the shari'ah of Ibrahim; as Allah describes in the verse 22:27, where He mentions His order to Ibrahim: And proclaim among men the hajj; they will come to you... It appears from the above, that the modality of the sentence "and for the sake of Allah ..." is the same as that of the preceding one "and whoever enters it shall be secure". Each is a declarative sentence which approvingly describes a previously ordained law. Alternatively it is possible to treat both as imperative sentences meant to reconfirm the two Ibrahimic laws. But the context obviously supports the first explanation. ([ )!and whoever disbelieves, then surely Allah is Self-sufficient (independent) of the worlds: Disbelief, in this verse, means disbelieving in a law, in a branch of religion; like the disbelief resulting from neglect of prayer or zakat. The word in this context means neglecting the important law of hajj. In this clause, the effect has been used to describe the reason; in other words it says, 'Whoever neglects hajj becomes a disbeliever.' On the other hand, the clause "Allah is Selfsufficient" puts the reason in place of effect; that is, he will not cause any harm to Allah because Allah is Self-sufficient. The full sentence, therefore, means as follows: Whoever neglects hajj becomes a disbeliever, but he, by his disbelief, cannot harm Allah in any way because Allah is Self-sufficient and independent of the worlds.  $  Ibn Shahrashub narrates from the Leader of the Faithful ('Ali, a.s.) about the words of Allah, Most surely the first house appointed for men ..., as follows: "A man asked him whether it was the first house (built). He said: 'No. Surely there were houses (built) before it, but it is the first House appointed for men, blessed, in

which there is guidance, mercy and blessing. And it was Ibrahim who first built it; then an Arabian group from the (tribe of) Jurhum built it, then it was demolished, so the al-'Amaliqah rebuilt it; again it fell down and then the Quraysh rebuilt it.'" Ibnu '1-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Hatim have narrated through the chain of ash-Sha'bi, from 'Ali ibn Abi Talib, that he said, explaining this verse: "There were houses before that; but it was the first House made for the worship of Allah." (ad-Durru lmanthur) 
 !as-Suyuti has also narrated a similar tradition through Ibn Jarir from Matar (ibn Tuhman). And there are numerous traditions of the same theme. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "The land on which the House stands is Bakkah; and the town is Mecca." ('Ilalu 'sh-sharayi') The same book quotes the same Imam as saying: "Bakkah was named Bakkah because people are crowded therein." 
 ! "Yabakkun" (they are crowded). al-Baqir (a.s.) said: "Mecca is called Bakkah because men and women are crowded therein; a woman prays in front of you, and on your right, and on your left, and with you, and there is no harm in it (at that place); but surely it is disliked in all other towns." (ibid.) The same Imam said: "When Allah intended to create the earth, He ordered the winds and they agitated the face of water until it produced waves (and) then brought up foam (and froth); so (all of) it became one foam. Then Allah gathered it in the place of the House (i.e., where the House now stands) and made it a mountain of foam; thereafter He spread out the earth from beneath it. And this is the (meaning of the) words of Allah: Most surely the first house appointed for men is the one at Bakkah, blessed. Thus the first plot created of the earth is the Ka'bah; then the earth was expanded from it." (ibid.) 
 says: There are numerous traditions saying that the earth was expanded and extended from beneath the Ka'bah. There is nothing against the Qur'an in these traditions. Nor is there any rational reason to refute it - except the

ancient philosophers' theory that the earth was an eternal indivisible element; but that theory has so manifestly been proved wrong that it needs no further exposition. This narrative explains how and why the Ka' bah was the first House (i.e., piece of land) of the earth ± from traditions' point of view. But so far as the obvious meaning of the verse is concerned, it supports the first two traditions. as-Sadiq (a.s.) was asked what were the clear signs mentioned in the verse: In it are clear signs. He said: "The Standing Place of Ibrahim - where he stood upon the stone and his feet left their prints in it, and the Black Stone, and the House of Isma'il." (al-Kafi; at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! There are other traditions of the same meaning. Perhaps the Imam (a.s.) mentioned them as examples, although some of them are not mentioned in the verse. 'Abdu 's-Samad said: "Abu Ja'far [al-Mansur] wanted to buy from (some) Meccans their houses in order to extend the (Sacred) Mosque; but they refused. Then he induced them; they still resisted. So he was frustrated. Then he came to Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) and said to him: 'I requested these people (to sell to us) some of their houses and compounds, so that we could extend the Mosque; but they have refused; and it has put me into utmost grief.' Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said: 'Why does it grieve you and your proof against them is (very) clear?' He said: 'And what should I argue against them with?' (The Imam) said: 'With the Book of Allah.' He said: 'In which place (is it explained)?' (The Imam) said: 'The words of Allah: Most surely the first house appointed for men is the one at Bakkah. And Allah has informed you (in this verse) that the first House appointed for the men is the one that is at Bakkah. Now if they had taken the possession (of the land) before the House (was built) then their plots would belong to them; but if the House was there before them, then it (the Ka'bah) owns its plot.' Abu Ja'far then called them and argued with them accordingly. Thereupon they said: 'Do whatever you want.'" (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) al-Hasan ibn 'Ali ibn an-Nu'man says: "When al-Mahdi built (i.e., extended) the

Sacred Mosque, there remained there one house (because of which) the Mosque could not be made square. He asked for it from its owners; but they refused. He asked jurists about it, and all of them told him that he should not include in the Sacred Mosque anything taken by force. Then 'Ali ibn Yaqtin said: 'O leader of the faithful! I am writing (a letter) to Musa ibn Ja'far (peace be on them both), so that I may tell you what the proper ruling is in this matter.' So he wrote to the Governor of Medina to ask Musa ibn Ja'far (peace be on them both) about the house which we wanted to include in the Sacred Mosque but its owners refused (to sell it) - how this problem could be solved? (The Governor) told Abu '1-Hasan (Musa ibn Ja'farpeace be on them both) about it. Abu'1-Hasan (a.s.) said: 'Is it necessary to give its reply?' He said: '(Yes), it is a matter that is necessary.' Then (the Imam) said to him: 'Write down: "In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful; if the Ka'bah had settled down with the people, then the people have more rights on its courtyard; but if the people have settled down around the Ka'bah, then the Ka'bah has more right over its courtyard."' When the letter reached al-Mahdi, he took it and kissed it, then he ordered to demolish the (said) house. The house owners then came to Abu '1-Hasan (a.s.) and requested him to write a letter to al-Mahdi regarding the price of the house. He wrote to him to give them something, so he made them happy." (ibid.) 
 ! The two traditions contain a very fine point of argument. It was Abu Ja'far al-Mansur who began the extension of the Sacred Mosque which was completed during al-Mahdi's reign. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about the words of Allah, and for the sake of Allah, pilgrimage to the House is incumbent ...: "(Allah) means by it the hajj and the 'umrah both, because both are obligatory." (al-Kafi) 
 ! al-'Ayyashi too has narrated it in his at-Tafsir. This tradition takes the word 'hijj' in its literal sense, i. e., to proceed to. as-Sadiq (a.s.) has explained the word, and whoever disbelieves, as "whoever neglects". (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! ash-Shaykh has narrated this tradition in at-Tahdhib. We have explained it earlier that disbelief, like belief, has many grades; and that the word,

as used in this verse, means disbelieving in - i.e., not complying with - a commandment of the shari'ah. 'Ali ibn Ja'far narrates from his brother Musa (a.s.), a tradition in which he, inter alia, says: "I said: 'Then whoever among us does not go for hajj, is an unbeliever?' (The Imam) said: 'No. But whoever says that it is not so (i.e., it is not obligatory) becomes an unbeliever.'" (al-Kafi) 
 !There are many traditions of the same theme. Disbelief, as explained in this tradition, means rejection and refutation, and the verse could mean it. Thus disbelief has been used here in its literal meaning, i.e., hiding the truth; and it may refer to various grades of disbelief according to various situations. %72[7%2[
27Ô6 .7 It is mutawatir and definitely known that it was Ibrahim al-Khalil (a.s.) who built the Ka'bah. The residents around it at that time were his son, Isma'il, and the tribe of Jurhum (originally from Yemen). It is an almost square building whose sides face the cardinal points of the compass; the winds, no matter how strong, lose their force when they strike it - without doing it any harm. The construction of Ibrahim stood intact, until it was rebuilt by al-'Amaliqah, and later by the tribe of Jurhum (or vice versa), as has been described in the earlier narrated tradition of the Leader of the Faithful ('Ali, a.s.). When the management of the Ka'bah came into the hands of Qusayy ibn Kilab - an ancestor of the Prophet - in the second century before hijrah, he demolished and rebuilt it on firm foundation, putting a roof of doom palm timber and date-palm trunk on it. He also built 'Daru 'n-Nadwah' ( Council House) on one side. It was the place from where he ruled and where he held counsel with his colleagues. Then he divided various sides of the Ka'bah among different clans of the Quraysh and each clan built their houses at the side allotted to them; and they opened their doors towards the Ka'bah. Five years before the start of the Prophet's mission, there came a flood which

destroyed the Ka'bah's building. The Quraysh divided among themselves the various responsibilities connected with its reconstruction. They hired a Roman mason to build it and an Egyptian carpenter to help him with the woodwork. When the time came to fix the Black Stone, a dispute erupted as to which clan should be accorded the honour of putting the Black Stone in its place. Then they agreed to leave the decision to Muhammad (s.a.w.), who at that time was thirty-five years old - because they had full faith in his deep wisdom and sound judgment. He got his robe, and putting the Stone on it, told all the clans to hold the sides of the robe and raise it together. When the Stone reached the required height (on the eastern corner), he took it in his hands and fixed it in its proper place. But the Quraysh found their funds exhausted. So they reduced the size on one side - as it is today; thus a part of the original foundation was left out, and that is the portion known as 'Hijr. Isma'il ( the Enclosure of Isma'il). The building remained in that condition until 'Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr established his rule over Hijaz during the reign of Yazid ibn Mu'awiyah. Husayn ibn Numayr, the commander of Yazid's army, besieged him at Mecca and struck the Ka'bah with catapult. The Ka'bah was demolished, the 'al-Kiswah' (covering of the Ka'bah) and some roof timbers were burnt down. The siege was lifted when news came of Yazid's death. Ibn az-Zubayr decided to demolish the Ka'bah completely and rebuild it on its original foundation. He got good mortar from Yemen and constructed the new building. Hijr Isma'il was re-included in the Ka'bah; the door was fixed at the level of the ground; another door was fixed on the opposite side, so that people might enter from one door and go out from the other. He fixed the height of the House at twenty-seven arms. When the building was ready, he covered the whole building with musk and perfume inside out, and put silken Kiswah on it. The construction was completed on l7th Rajab, 64 A.H. When 'Abdu '1-Malik ibn Marwan came to power in Damascus, he sent his commander, Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, who defeated Ibn az-Zubayr and killed him. Entering the Sacred Mosque, he saw what Ibn az-Zubayr had done regarding the Ka'bah. He wrote to 'Abdu '1-Malik about it who ordered him to return it to its previous shape. Hajjaj, therefore, demolished six and a half arms from the northern side and rebuilt it according to the plan of the Quraysh; he raised the eastern door

and closed the western one; he also filled the inside with the stones that could not be re-used (thus raising the inside floor to the new level of the door). When the Ottoman Sultan Sulayman ascended the throne in 960 A.H., he changed the roof of the Ka'bah. Sultan Ahmad (who came to power in 1021 A.H.) made some other repairs and alterations. Then came the great flood of 1039 A.H. which demolished parts of its northern, eastern and western walls. Therefore, the Ottoman Sultan Murad IV got it repaired. And the same building continues till this day and it is the year 1375 by lunar hijri calendar, and 1338 according to the solar one. 
%

6 !The Ka'bah is nearly square in shape, built with hard dark bluish-grey stones. It now rises to sixteen metres; but was much lower at the time of the Prophet (s.a.w.) as may be inferred from the fact that, on the day of conquest of Mecca, the Prophet raised 'Ali (a.s.) on his shoulders so that 'Ali could remove and break the idols that were placed on the roof of the Ka'bah. The wall [the northern one that faces the Enclosure of Isma'il and] over which is placed the water trough and the one on its opposite side [the southern one] are ten metres and ten centimetres long; while the [eastern] wall which has the door and the one opposite to it are twelve metres long. The door is placed at a height of two metres from the ground level. The Black Stone is fixed in the [east-south] corner, so that if one wants to enter the door, the Stone would be on his left. This Stone is one and a half metres above the ground level, that is, above the level of the circumambulation area. The Black Stone is a hard rock of irregular oval shape, black with some reddish tint; it has red dots and yellow wavy lines which appeared when some broken pieces were soldered and joined. It has a diameter of about thirty centimetres. The Ka'bah's corners, since ancient days, are called "al-arkan " (pl. of "ar-rukn " pillar); the northern one is called, the Iraqi rukn; the western, the Syrian; the southern, the Yemenite; and the eastern (wherein the Black Stone is fixed), is named the Black. The area between the door and the Black Stone is called "alMultazam" (lit.: the place where one clings to) because when one circumambulates one adheres to it for invocation and prayer.

The trough fixed over the northern wall, which is called the Trough of Mercy, was an innovation of al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf; in 954 A.H. Sultan Sulayman changed that with a silver one; that too was replaced by Sultan Ahmad in 1021 A.H. with another one of enameled silver with golden designs. In 1273 A.H. Sultan Abdu '1Majid replaced it with another one made of gold, and it is the present one. Facing the northern wall is a wall- half circle in shape. It is called, al-Hatim. It is like a bow whose two ends face the northern [Iraqi] and the western [Syrian] rukns; there is a gap of two metres and three centimetres between the ends of the bow and the said rukns. The wall, al-Hatim, is one metre high and one and a half metres wide. It is panelled with carved marble. The distance between the centre of al-Hatim and the centre of the northern wall of the Ka'bah is eight metres and forty-four centimetres. The area covered by al-Hatim and the northern wall is known as Hijr Isma'il [Enclosure of Isma'il]. About three metres of this space was included in the Ka'bah built by Ibrahim (a.s.); and the remaining area was the pen for sheep of Hajirah and her son. It is said that Hajirah and Isma'il are buried in the same Enclosure. The changes and alterations that were done inside the Ka'bah, and the rituals and sunnah rites connected with the House are not so necessary to be described here. 
å+
 ,
6 !We have described, in the chapter of 'The Cow', in the traditions relating the story of Hajirah and Isma'il and their settlement at Mecca, that Hajirah hung her mantle as a curtain on the door of the Ka'bah when its construction was completed. As for the covering of the House itself, it is said that the first to cover it was the Tubba' Abu Bakr As'ad, who hung on it the sheets embroidered with silver threads. His successors followed this custom. Then people started covering it with sheets of various kinds - putting one upon the other. Whenever a covering looked old, a new one was put over it. This continued until Qusayy came on the scene. He imposed a tax on the Arabs for putting a new covering every year. This system continued in his descendants. Abu Rabi'ah ibn al-Mughirah used to put a covering one year and all the clans of Quraysh did so the next year.

The Prophet covered the House with Yemenite sheets. This custom continued. When the 'Abbaside caliph al-Mahdi went for pilgrimage, the attendants of the House complained to him about the coverings that had accumulated on the roof of the Ka'bah. They said there was a danger of the roof collapsing down because of that load. The King ordered that all the old coverings should be removed and that every year a new covering should replace the old one - and that custom is followed uptil now. The Ka'bah is draped from inside too. The first to do so was the mother of 'Abbas, son of 'Abdu '1-Muttalib - she had done so because of a vow she had taken regarding her son -'Abbas. î
,

6 !The Ka'bah was held in high esteem by various nations. The Hindus respected it, believing that the spirit of Siva, the third person of their Trimurty, entered into the Black Stone, when he was accompanied by his wife visited Hijaz. The Sabaeans of Persia and Chaledonia counted it as one of their seven holy sanctuaries. Many of them said that it was the House of the Saturn - because it was the most ancient, and the longest in existence. The Persians too respected the Ka'bah, believing that the spirit of Hormoz was present therein; they sometimes went for its pilgrimage. The Jews honoured it and worshipped God there according to the religion of Ibrahim. There were many pictures and images in the Ka'bah, including those of Ibrahim and Isma'il which had divining arrows in their hands. Also there were pictures of the virgin Mary and Christ - which indicates that the Christians too respected the Ka'bah like the Jews. The Arabs held it in the highest esteem; they believed that it was the House of Allah, and came to its pilgrimage from every place. They believed the Ka'bah to be built by Ibrahim and the hajj to be a part of his religion which had come to them as his legacy.

 


6 !The trusteeship was in the hands of Isma'il; and after him it remained in his descendants. Then the Jurhumites became more powerful and took over the trusteeship. They in their turn were vanquished - after several wars - by the 'Amaliqah, who were a part of Banu Karkar. The 'Amaliqah resided at the lower section of Mecca while the Jurhumites had settled in its upper section. They had their own Kings. Later on, the Jurhumites defeated the 'Amaliqah and regained the trusteeship, which remained with them for about three hundred years. They extended the area of the House and increased its height. Gradually the Isma'ilites grew in number and gained power; and they found the place too congested and over-populated. Then they fought the Jurhumites, defeated and expelled them from Mecca. The leader of the Isma'ilites at that time was 'Amr ibn Lahiyy, the chief of the clan of Khuza'ah. He became over-lord of Mecca and took over the trusteeship of the Ka'bah. It was he who put idols in the Ka'bah and called people to worship them. The first idol he put there was Hubal which he had brought from Syria; then he brought others. Gradually there were a lot of idols, and idol-worship spread among the Arabs; the upright religion of Ibrahim was discarded. Shahnah ibn Khalaf al-Jurhumi refers to this episode, when he addresses 'Amr ibn Lahiyy in the following ode: 0 'Amr! you have invented various gods; At Mecca - idols around the House. And there was for the House One Lord from ever; But you have made for it several lords (which are now worshipped) by the people. Surely you should know that Allah is in no hurry; Soon He will choose for (His) House stewards other than you. The trusteeship remained in the clan of Khuza'ah up to the time of Halil al-Khuza'i. He nominated his daughter (who was married to Qusayy ibn Kilab) to succeed him, and gave the right of opening and closing the door to a man from his clan, Abu Ghabshan al-Khuza'i by name. Abu Ghabshan sold his right to Qusayy ibn Kilab for a camel and a skinful of liquor. The proverb, "More loss incurring than the deal of Abu Ghabshan", alludes to this sale.

The trusteeship was thus transferred to the Quraysh. Qusayy rebuilt the House, as we have mentioned above. The things continued as they were, until the Prophet conquered Mecca, and entering the Ka'bah ordered the pictures to be effaced, and the idols to be thrown down and broken. The Standing Place of Ibrahim - the stone with the imprints of Ibrahim's feet - was at first put in a kneading trough near the Ka'bah; then it was buried in the place where it is at present. It has a dome on four pillars where the people offer their prayers after the circumambulation. There are a lot of details of various aspects of the Ka'bah and other religious buildings attached to it. We have described here only the things which are necessary for understanding the verses of hajj and the Ka'bah. One of the especialities of this House - which Allah has blessed and made a guidance - is that no Muslim group has ever disagreed about it or its prestige, honour and respect. å
 
    

'4 3 Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳ΂˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϔ˵ ˸ϜΗ˴ Ϣ˴ ϟ˶ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˴ ˸ϫ΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ˸Ϟ˵ϗ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠϤ˴ ˸όΗ˴ Ύ˴ϣ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ˲Ϊϴ˶Ϭη ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍{98} Ϧ˴ϋ ϥ ˴ ϭ˷Ϊ˵ μ ˵ Η˴ Ϣ˴ ϟ˶ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˴ ˸ϫ΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ˸Ϟϗ˵ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠϤ˴ ˸όΗ˴ Ύ˷Ϥ˴ ϋ ˴ Ϟ ˳ ϓ˶ Ύ˴ϐΑ˶ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ˯΍˴ΪϬ˴ ˵η ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ Ύ˱ΟϮ˴ ϋ ˶ Ύ˴Ϭϧ˴ Ϯ˵ϐ˸ΒΗ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˴ ΁ ˸Ϧϣ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ϴ˶Βγ ˴ {99} τ ˶ Η˵ ϥ˶· ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˴Ϭϳ˵˷΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ˸΍Ϯ˵όϴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϓ˶ Ύ˴ϛ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϧ˶ Ύ˴Ϥϳ˶· Ϊ˴ ˸όΑ˴ Ϣ˵ϛϭ˷Ω˵ ή˵ ϳ˴ Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ηϭ˵΃ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Ύ˱Ϙϳ˶ήϓ˴ {100} Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ε ˵ Ύ˴ϳ΁ ˸ϢϜ˵ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ϰ˴Ϡ˸ΘΗ˵ ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϔ˵ ˸ϜΗ˴ ϒ ˴ ˸ϴ˴ϛϭ˴ Ϣ˳ ϴ˶ϘΘ˴ ˸δϣ˵˷ ρ ˳ ΍˴ήλ ˶ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ϱ ˴ Ϊ˶ ϫ˵ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϓ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟΎ˶Α Ϣ˶μΘ˴ ˸όϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˵ ϟ˵Ϯ˵γέ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϴ˶ϓϭ˴ {101} {98} Say: O followers of the Book! why do you disbelieve in the communications of Allah? And Allah is a witness of what you do. {99} Say: O followers of the Book! why do you hinder him who believes from the way of Allah? You seek (to make) it crooked, while you are witness, and Allah is not heedless of what you do. {100} O you who believe! if you obey a party from among those who have been given the Book, they will turn you back as unbelievers after you have believed. {101} But how can you disbelieve while it is you to whom the communications of Allah are recited, and among you is His Messenger? And whoever holds fast to Allah, he indeed is guided to the right path. å
 

The verses as is evident from thematic continuity, indicate that the People of the Book (a group of them - i.e., the Jews - or a group of the Jews) disbelieved in the Divine Revelation, and hindered the believers from the way of Allah by trying to show that it was a crooked and unright way, and presenting to them the actually crooked misleading way as the way of Allah. They did so by creating doubts in the believers' minds, in order that the believers would see the truth as falsehood and the falsehood (to which they invited them) as truth. The preceding verses had pointed to the Jews' deviations, for example, their denial of the fact that all food was lawful to them before the revelation of the Torah, and their rejection of the abrogation of the previous qiblah, that is, Baytu '1-Maqdis. These verses therefore put the finishing touches to the preceding ones which had described the lawfulness of all food before the Torah and declared that the Ka'bah was the first House appointed for the men. Now these verses admonish the Jews because they were constantly trying to create doubts and mislead the believers; also the verses warn the believers against following the advice of those unbelievers, because if they listened to their call, they would themselves become unbelievers; then they exhort and encourage them to hold fast to Allah so that they would be guided to the path of true faith and their guidance would continue for ever. It has been narrated by Zayd ibn Aslam (as as-Suyuti has reportedly written in Lubabu 'n-nuqul) as follows: "Shash ibn Qays, a Jew, saw some people of the tribes of Aws and Khazraj engaged in (friendly) talk, and he was incensed by what he saw of their friendship and unity after their (hereditary) enmity. Therefore, he ordered a young Jew (who was with him) to sit with them and remind them of the Battle of Bu'ath. He did and they started boasting and quarelling with each other. The argument continued until two men - Aws ibn Qurazi from the Aws and Jabbar ibn Sakhr from the Khazraj -jumped up and abused each other; the two groups were enraged and stood against each other for fighting. The news reached the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.); he came and admonished them and established peace between them. They heeded his call and obeyed. Then Allah revealed about Aws

and Jabbar: 'O you who believe! if you obey a party from among those who were given the Book . . .'; and about Shash ibn Qays: 'Say: "0 People of the Book! why do you hinder him who believes from the way of Allah?" '" This tradition is abridged from the one narrated (by as-Suyuti) in ad-Durru 'lmanthur in detailed form from Zayd ibn Aslam; he has narrated nearly similar traditions from Ibn 'Abbas and others. However, these verses obviously fit more properly on the explanation given by us than on this tradition. Moreover, they speak about disbelief and belief, and also about testimony of the Jews, recitation of the revealed verses to the believers, and things like that; and all these matters are more relevant to the explanation given by us. It is also supported by the words of Allah: Many of the People of the Book wish that they could turn you back into unbelievers after your faith, out of envy on their part, (even) after the truth has become manifest to them... (2:109). Therefore, the fact is, as we have said, that these verses are a sort of prologue to the preceding ones. ([ )! Say: "O People of the Book! why do you disbelieve in the communications of Allah and...": The continuation of the context indicates that "the communications" refers to the lawfulness of food before the revelation of the Torah and to the Ka'bah being the qiblah in Islam. ([ )! Say: "O People of the Book! why do you hinder him who believes from the way of Allah? You seek (to make) it crooked,: "as-Sadd" (to hinder; to divert); "you seek it," that is, you want this way to be crooked; " 'iwajan" (crooked, perverted); it refers to the fact that they wanted the way of Allah to be deviated, not straight. ([ )! "while you are witnesses, and. , .": You know very well that all food was lawful before the revelation of the Torah, and that one of the signs of the promised prophet was that he would change the qiblah to the Ka'bah. The Jews have been counted as witnesses in this verse, while the preceding verse declared Allah to be a witness of their activities and disbelief. The implication of this fine juxtaposition cannot be lost on a man of literary taste. They are witnesses of the

truth of what they deny; and Allah is a witness of their denial and disbelief. As "witnessing" was ascribe to them in this verse, the ending clause of the preceding verse (And Allah is a witness of what you do)was changed here to: "and Allah is not heedless of what you do". The implication is that they are witnesses for the truth of the Prophet's claim while Allah is a witness for everyone and everything. ([ )! O you who believe! if you obey a party from among those who were given the Book,... and among you is His Messenger? ...: As mentioned earlier, "a party", refers to the Jews or a Jewish group, "while it is you to whom the communications of Allah are recited, and among you is His Messenger": It is possible and easy for you to hold fast to the truth (which has been sent and explained to you) if you just listen to the verses recited to you and then meditate on them; then if you encounter any difficulty because of faulty meditation, you may to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) for clarification; you may refer to the Messenger even before meditating on the verses to explain it to you: he is present among you, it is not difficult for you to approach him because he is neither hidden nor far away from you; you may easily find the reality by referring to him, then you may clear the doubts which the Jews try to create in your minds. To hold fast to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and the Divine Communications is to hold fast to Allah; "And whoever holds fast to Allah, he indeed is guided to the straight path." The disbelief, mentioned in the clause, "But how can you disbelieve", refers to disbelieving after believing; the clause, "while it is you to whom the communications of Allah are recited," points to the possibility of holding fast to the communications of Allah and the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) in order to protect oneself from disbelief; the clause, "And whoever holds fast to Allah," is a sort of the major premise of a syllogism, [the full form of which has been given above]. The guidance to the straight path means being guided to the firmly-rooted true belief; it is the path that does not deviate nor does it fail to reach the destination; it keeps all those who proceed on it in proper line without letting them deviate hither or thither lest they go astray. The Arabic word translated here as, "is guided", is a past tense in passive voice; it implies that they have been guided without realizing who has guided them.

The verse shows that the Book of Allah and the verbal and practical guidance given by the Messsenger of Allah (s.a.w.) are sufficient to guide a man to every truth and reality in which he could possibly go astray. å
 
    

3 3 ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˶˸δϣ˵˷ Ϣ˵Θϧ˴΃ϭ˴ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϧ ˴˷ Η˵ Ϯ˵ϤΗ˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Η˶ Ύ˴ϘΗ˵ ϖ ˴˷ Σ ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΗ˴˷΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˴Ϭ˷ϳ˵ ΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ{102} Ύ˱όϴ˶ϤΟ ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ˸ΒΤ ˴ Α˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϥμ ˶ Θ˴ ˸ϋ΍˴ϭ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ˸όϨ˶ Α˶ Ϣ˵Θ˸ΤΒ˴ ˸λ΄˴ϓ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˶ Ϯ˵Ϡϗ˵ Ϧ ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ ϒ ˴ ϟ˴˷΄˴ϓ˴ ˯΍˴Ϊ˸ϋ΃˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ ˸Ϋ·˶ ˸ϢϜ˵ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Δ˴ Ϥ˴ ˸όϧ˶ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϛ˵ ˸Ϋ΍˴ϭ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϗή˴˷ ϔ˴ Η˴ Γ˳ ή˴ ˸ϔΣ ˵ Ύ˴ϔη ˴ ϰ ˴ Ϡ˴ϋ ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛϭ˴ Ύ˱ϧ΍˴Ϯ˸Χ·˶ Ϫ˶ Θ˶ Ϥ˴ ϳ˴ ΁ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϟ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˵ ϴ˶˷Β˴ ϳ˵ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶ά˴ ϛ˴ Ύ˴Ϭ˸Ϩϣ˶˷ Ϣ˵ϛ˴άϘ˴ ϧ˴΄ϓ˴ έ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ΪΘ˴ ˸ϬΗ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϡ˴˷ό˴ ϟ˴ Ϫ˶ ˶ΗΎ{103} ή˶ ˸ϴΨ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϋ˸Ϊϳ˴ ˲Δϣ˴˷ ΃˵ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϩ˷ϣ˶ Ϧ˵ϜΘ˴ ˸ϟϭ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ΤϠ˶˸ϔϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴ϭ˵΃ϭ˴ ή˶ Ϝ˴ Ϩ˵Ϥ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˶ϋ ˴ ϥ ˴ ˸ϮϬ˴ ˸Ϩϳ˴ ϭ˴ ϑ ˶ ϭ˵ή˸όϤ˴ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϣ˵ ˸΄ϳ˴ ϭ˴ {104} Ϧ˶ϣ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϔϠ˴Θ˴ ˸Χ΍˴ϭ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϗή˴˷ ϔ˴ Η˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷Ύ˴ϛ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧϮ˵ϜΗ˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϣ Ϊ˶ ˸όΑ˴ ˲Ϣϴ˶ψϋ ˴ ˲Ώ΍˴άϋ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴ϭ˵΃ϭ˴ Ε ˵ Ύ˴Ϩϴ˶˷Β˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ ˯˴ Ύ˴Ο{105} ˸ΕΩ˴˷ Ϯ˴ ˸γ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˷ϣ˴ ΄˴˴ϓ ˲ϩϮ˵Οϭ˵ Ω˵˷ Ϯ˴ ˸δΗ˴ ϭ˴ ˲ϩϮ˵Οϭ˵ ξ ˵˷ ϴ˴ ˸ΒΗ˴ ϡ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϔ˵ ˸ϜΗ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ώ ˴ ΍˴άό˴ ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϗϭ˵άϓ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϧ˶ Ύ˴Ϥϳ˶· Ϊ˴ ˸όΑ˴ Ϣ˵Η˸ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ ΃˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϫ˵ Ϯ˵Οϭ˵ {106} Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ά˴˷ϟ΍ Ύ˷ϣ˴ ΃˴ϭ˴ Δ˶ Ϥ˴ ˸Σέ˴ ϲ˶ϔϓ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϫ˵ Ϯ˵Οϭ˵ ˸Ζπ ˴˷ ϴ˴ ˸Α΍ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵Ϊϟ˶Ύ˴Χ Ύ˴Ϭϴ˶ϓ ˸Ϣϫ˵ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍{107} Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˴Ύ˴ό˸Ϡϟ˶˷ Ύ˱Ϥ˸Ϡχ ˵ Ϊ˵ ϳ˶ήϳ˵ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ϖ ˶˷ Τ ˴ ˸ϟΎ˶Α Ϛ ˴ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ Ύ˴ϫϮ˵Ϡ˸Θϧ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ε ˵ Ύ˴ϳ΁ Ϛ ˴ ˸ϠΗ˶ {108} ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴ϣ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ˶˴ϭ ϊ˵ Ο ˴ ˸ήΗ˵ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ϭ˴ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ε ˶ ΍˴ϭΎ˴Ϥδ ˴˷ ϟ΍ έ˵ Ϯ˵ϣϷ ˵ ΍{109} ϑ ˶ ϭ˵ή˸όϤ˴ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϣ˵ ˸΄Η˴ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ Ϡ˶ϟ ˸ΖΟ ˴ ή˶ ˸Χ΃˵ Δ˳ ϣ˴˷ ΃˵ ή˴ ˸ϴΧ ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ ϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶˷ Ϣ˵Ϭϟ˴˷ ΍˱ή˸ϴΧ ˴ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴Ϝϟ˴ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˵ ˸ϫ΃˴ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˴ ΁ ˸Ϯϟ˴ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟΎ˶Α ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆΗ˵ ϭ˴ ή˶ Ϝ˴ Ϩ˵Ϥ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˶ϋ ˴ ϥ ˴ ˸ϮϬ˴ ˸ϨΗ˴ ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϙγ ˶ Ύ˴ϔ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ ή˵ Μ˴ ˸ϛ΃˴ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϩ {110} {102} O you who believe! fear Allah with the fear which is due to Him, and do not die unless you are Muslims. {103} And hold fast by the cord of Allah all together and be not divided, and remember the bounty of Allah on you when you were enemies, then He united your hearts so by His favor you became brethren; and you were on the brink of a pit of fire, then He saved you from it, thus does Allah make clear to you His communications that you may follow the right way. {104} And from among you there should be a party who invite to good and enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong, and these it is that shall be successful. {105} And be not like those who became divided and disagreed after clear arguments had come to them, and these it is that shall have a grievous chastisement. {106} On the day when (some) faces shall turn white and (some) faces shall turn black; then as to those whose faces turn black: Did you disbelieve after your believing? Taste therefore the chastisement because you disbelieved. {107} And as to those whose faces turn white, they shall be in Allah's mercy; in it they shall-abide. {108} These are the communications of Allah which We recite to you with truth, and Allah does not desire any injustice to the creatures. {109} And whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is Allah's; and to Allah all things return {110} You are the best of the nations raised up for (the benefit of) men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and believe in Allah; and if the followers of the Book had believed it would have been better for them; of them (some) are believers and most of them are transgressors.

å
  The verses conclude the speech addressed to the believers, warning them of the People of the Book and their machinations. It reminds them that they have got a life-line which if they hold fast to they shall not perish, shall not go astray and shall not fall into pits of perdition. It is a speech branching from the preceding talk. However the previous context, that is, exposition of the behaviour of the People of the Book, has not been concluded yet, as may be seen from the verses coming after these: They shall by no means harm you but with a slight distress. ([ )! O you who believe! fear Allah with the fear, which is due to Him,: We have explained that "at-taqwa" (to be on guard; fear; piety) when related to Allah, means to be on guard against His punishment, to fear His chastisement. Allah says: then be on guard against the fire of which men and stones are the fuel (2:24). One may guard oneself from the Divine Wrath by behaving according to Allah's pleasure. In other words, it is doing what He has enjoined one to do, and abstaining from what He has forbidden; being grateful for His favours and patient when He puts one in adverse conditions. The last two attributes are actually two facets of gratefulness - because gratefulness is to put a thing in its proper place. In short, fear of Allah means that man should obey (and not disobey) Him, and should submit to Him in all that He bestows or withholds. But the verse talks of at-taqwa as it rightfully should be done, that is, a piety that is not tainted by the least wrong. Such piety is the pure servitude which is never marred by an iota of obliviousness or heedlessness; it is obedience without disobedience, gratitude without ingratitude, remembrance without forgetfulness; it is the true Islam, that is, the highest grade of Islam. Accordingly, the words, and do not die unless you are Muslims, would mean: Continue on this condition of ideal at-taqwa until you die. This verse gives a different ideal than the words: Therefore fear Allah as much as you can (64:16). This command enjoins man not to leave fear of Allah in anything as much as he can. But ability differs from man to man according to people's strength, understanding and will. There is no doubt that the ideal piety is not within easy reach of a majority of men. There are, in this spiritual journey, many stations, locations and danger points which cannot be spotted except by those who know. Also there are many delicate points and subtle differences which cannot be recognized except by those who have been purified. There is many a stage of piety which a common man would say, was beyond human ability; he really believes it to be far above the human strength - while the truly pious people have long past

that stage and are now progressing towards even more difficult goal, through much more harder terrains. The verse, Therefore fear Allah as much as you can, has been so worded that different minds would interpret it in different ways, according to one's perceived strength and ability. This will provide a means to proceed to the real goal which is given in the verse under discussion: "fear Allah with the fear which is due to Him, and do not die unless you are Muslims." They will then understand that the main purpose is for them to take to the path of the ideal piety and to progress towards that lofty station. In this respect, it is not different from being guided to the Straight Path: Although all men are invited to it, only the true believers, the pure monotheists, get to that path. The two verses (fear Allah with the fear which is due to Him; fear Allah as much as you can)then give the following connotation: All people are called and invited to the ideal piety; then they are told to proceed to that goal as much as they can, everyone according to his own ability and strength. In this way, all will come on the path of piety; but they will be in different stages and various stations according to their own understanding and ambition, coupled with the Divine help and support, that is, bestowed on deserving servants. (This is what one understands after pondering on the two verses.) It is clear from the above explanation that the two verses are neither different from each other in meaning nor identical; rather, the first verse (fear Allah with the fear which is due to Him)points to the ultimate goal, while the second (fear Allah as much as you can) shows the way. ([ )! and do not die unless you are Muslims: Death is a creative affair that is beyond the circle of our will and power. An order or a prohibition concerning this or similar things shall be a creative order or prohibition, as Allah says: Then Allah said to them, Die (2:243); ...is only that He says to it, 'Be', and it is (36:82). But sometimes an affair beyond our control is joined to one within our control, and then the combined phrase comes within our power, control and authority. At this stage, it may become a subject of legislative order or prohibition, as Allah says: therefore you should not be of the doubters (2:147); and be not with the unbelievers (11:42); and be with the true ones (9:119), and many similar verses. Obviously, "to be" is an intransitive creative affair upon which man has no control or power; but when it is joined with an action within his power, like doubting, disbelieving and holding fast to the true ones, it comes within our power; and then

it may become subject of legislative order and prohibition. In short, the prohibition that they should not die unless they are Muslims is a legislative one because the said proviso has made it a voluntary action; and it implies that man should hold fast to Islam in all conditions and at all times, until death comes to him in one of those conditions. Thus he would die on Islam. ([ )! And hold fast by the cord of Allah all together and be not divided: Allah has said before to the believers: But how can you disbelieve while it is you to whom the communications of Allah are recited and among you is His Messenger; and whoever holds fast to Allah, he indeed is guided to the straight path (3:101). It had shown that holding fast to the communications of Allah and to His Messenger (the Book of Allah and the sunnah of the Prophet) is to hold fast to Allah; and whoever holds fast to Allah is safe and secure and his guidance is guaranteed; also holding fast to the Prophet is holding fast to the Book, because it is the Book itself that enjoins us to do, so: and whatever the Messenger gives you, take it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep it back (59:7). Now the verse under discussion has changed the phraseology; instead of telling us to hold fast to Allah, it enjoins to hold fast to the cord of Allah. It shows that the cord of Allah is the Book revealed by Allah; it is the cord that joins the creature to his Lord, that connects the heavens to the earth. You may also say that the Divine Cord is the Qur'an and the Prophet because the end result of all is the same. The Qur'an invites only to the ideal piety and firm Islam. Yet the aim of this verse is different from the preceding verse that had enjoined ideal piety and the death on Islam, inasmuch as that verse was concerned with guidance of the individual, while this looks at the good of the society. The words "all together" and "be not divided" point to this fact. The verse therefore orders the Muslim society to hold fast to the Book and the sunnah, as they had earlier enjoined the individual to do so. ([ )! and remember the bounty of Allah on you when you were enemies, then He united your hearts so by His favour you became brethren;: The clause "when you were" explains the bounty of Allah, and the next clause, and you were on the brink of a pit of fire, then He delivered you from it, is in conjuction with it. The order to remember this Divine bounty and favour is based on the established Qur'anic system: it builds its education on explanation of its reasons and causes; and invites to the good and the guidance through proper door; it does not demand blind following from its adherents. Far be it from the Divine Teaching to guide the

people to eternal happiness - that is useful knowledge and good deed - and then to tell them to wander in the darkness of ignorance and blind following. But the reader is warned here not to confuse the subject matter. Allah teaches men the reality of their happiness and then shows them its proper way and reason, in order that they would understand the mutual relationship between the realities and know that all emanate from the fountainhead of monotheism. It continues side by side with men's obligation to totally submit to Allah because He is Allah, the Lord of the universe, and to hold fast to His cord because it is the cord of Allah Who is the Lord of the universe. The last two verses (These are communications of Allah which we recite to you...) point to this fact. In short, Allah has ordered them not to accept any word, nor to obey any order, except after knowing its reason. At the same time He has told them to surrender totally to Him, giving for its reason the fact that He is Allah Who owns them totally and unconditionally, they have got nothing except that which Allah has willed for them and done for them; also He has ordered them to unconditionally obey what His Messenger has brought to them, giving for its reason the fact that he is His Messenger who conveys to them only that which he has been entrusted by Allah to do; then Allah explains to them the realities of knowledge and describes the ways of happiness, giving them a comprehensive reason in order that they could understand the inter-relation of the spiritual knowledge and the ways of happiness, and thus arrive at the root of monotheistic belief; it provides them with a Divine Training which enables them to think what is correct and speak what is true. Thus they would be alive with knowledge, free from blind following. Result: If they would understand the reason of any established religious reality (or any related thing) they would accept it; and if they did not understand they would not reject it outright; instead they would try to understand it by research and meditation without rejecting, or objecting to, it - because it is an established reality. But it does not mean that one should not accept anything - even from Allah and His Messenger - without asking for its reason. Such a proposition would be the height of folly, as it would imply that Allah wants His creatures to demand for proof after the proof is given to them: His lordship and His ownership is the basic reason and argument that makes it incumbent on everyone to submit to Him and obey His command. Likewise, the messengership of His Messenger is the solid reason and proof to prove that whatever he says has come from Allah. Otherwise, we would have to say that Allah has no authority in that which He manages by His authority. Is it but a contradiction in terms? In short, the Islamic way and the prophetic method calls only to knowledge, and not to blind following as these so-

called critics - who are nothing if not blind followers themselves - claim. Perhaps that is why Allah has called it a favour (the bounty of Allah on you). It indicates the reason as to why We enjoin you to unite together: you have already experienced the bitterness of enmity and sweet taste of love and brotherhood; you have seen that you were on the brink of the pit of fire and Allah has saved you; We point this reason to you not because We have to support our sayings with some proof (obviously, Our saying is true whether We point to its reason or not), but only to let you know that it is a favour of Us on you, in order that you may appreciate that in this unity - like everything else We enjoin on you - lies your felicity, comfort and success. Allah has given here two proofs, one of which (... you were enemies...) is obviously based on their experience, while the other (. . . you were on the brink of a pit of fire... .) is based on rational explanation. The clause "so by His favour you became brethren" reminds the Muslims a second time of the Divine Favour mentioned in the preceding clause "and remember the bounty of Allah on you". The bounty and favour refers to their unity; hence the brotherhood too (which results from this bounty) refers to the same love and unitedness. The brotherhood, as used here, is therefore a claimed reality. Also possibly it may be a reference to the brotherhood that has been legislated as between the believers, vide the verse: The believers are but brethren (49:10); this legislated brotherhood creates very important mutual rights and duties between one believer and the other. ([ )! and you were on the brink of a pit of fire, then He delivered you from it: "Shafa hufratin" ( brink or edge of a pit where one is in danger of falling down); "fire" may be of the hereafter or of this world. If former, then it would refer to the fact that previously they were unbelievers and about to fall down in the hell the moment they died - and death is nearer to man than is the iris of eye from its white - then Allah saved them from it through the true faith. And if the aim is to point to their evil society which they were living in before they accepted Islam and became brethren, and the fire refers to their wars and conflicts - and it is a commonly used metaphor - then the meaning would be as follows: A society built on disunited hearts and divergent minds cannot proceed under one leader or in one direction; it is bound to turn into a disorientated and deranged collection of people - each one pulling it to his side, as it suits his own wishes and

desires. Such a society would be a cauldron of dissension and strife, always pushing its members to ever-new conflicts, embroiling them in wars and fights, and threatening them with decline and extinction. It is the fire that neither allows one to endure nor does it leave one alone, raging in the pit of ignorance from which no inmate could hope to escape. The immediate audience of this verse, were the Muslims who before the verse was revealed, had accepted Islam after their disbelief. They had spent all their preIslamic lives in constant threat of battle and war. There was no security, no peace, no law and order. They did not understand what constituted public safety - the concept that covers the society in all its aspects like property, honour and life, etc. When they joined hands to hold fast to the cord of Allah, perceived the signs of happiness and felicity, and tasted the sweetness of Divine Bounties, they understood by this experience the truth and reality of what Allah reminds them of His pleasant favours and the resulting wholesome felicity. In this background, this speech was bound to win their hearts - as well as of the others - most effectively and in all totality. That is why the call to unite has been based on their own experience and observation instead of just philosophical presumptions. One picture is worth a thousand words. And it is because of the same reason that the next warning (And be not like those who became divided and disagreed after clear evidences had come to them...) points to the condition of those who had preceded them. The believers have seen and heard what happened to those nations - how they declined and fell- because of their disunity and internal strife; the believers should learn lessons from them; they should not walk on the same path, should not proceed in the same direction. Then Allah draws their attention to the special nature of this speech and says: thus does Allah make clear to you His signs that you may follow the right way. ([ )! And from among you there should be a party who invite to good and enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong, and these it is that shall be successful.:Experience shows that the knowledge a man acquires in his life (and he acquires and preserves for himself only that which may be of some use to him) is soon forgotten if not repeatedly remembered, if not frequently put in practice and acted upon - it makes no difference how that knowledge was acquired and preserved. Also there is no doubt that action, in all its aspects, turns on the pivot of knowledge; its strength or weakness, its efficiency or deficiency - all depends on

the strength or weakness, efficiency or deficiency of knowledge. Allah has given a likeness of knowledge and action in the following verse: And as for the good land, its vegetation springs forth (abundantly) by the permission of its Lord, and (as for) that which is bad (its herbage) comes forth but scantily; thus do We repeat the communications for a people who give thanks (7: 58). Undoubtedly, there is an interaction between knowledge and action. Knowledge is the strongest motive of action, and action is the greatest teacher that imparts knowledge. This reality binds a good society (that which has got useful knowledge and virtuous action) to preserve and keep intact their knowledge and culture; and obliges them to bring a deviator back to the right path, to make sure that nobody goes astray leaving the known way of righteousness for the unforgiving desert of evil- they must protect him from falling into the pit of sin and error by forbidding him to go near it. This is the call to educate the society members; the obligation of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. It is this important obligation to which Allah refers when He says: "... who invite to good and enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong". The Arabic words translated here as "right" and "wrong" (en-join what is right and forbid the wrong) are 'al-ma'ruf and 'al-munkar' which literally mean "known" and "unknown" respectively. Ponder on the explanation given above and you will understand why Allah has used these expressions. The verse under discussion is based on the preceding one, And hold fast by the cord of Allah all together and be not divided . . . A society which follows this guidance must be the ideal society. It would only be the right and the good which they would recognize, which would be "known" to them; and only the wrong and the evil which they would not recognize, which would be "unknown" to them. If this fine point is not kept in mind, then the only possible explanation would be that the right and the wrong were respectively known and unknown in the eyes of religion - but not in actual practice of the society. The clause "And from among you there should be a party": It has been said that "from among" indicates portion, obliging only a party among the Muslim ummah to enjoin the good and forbid the evil and call to the truth. Others have said that the particle 'min' (from among) has here an explanatory connotation; that the sentence means as follows: If you unite together you will become a party who invite to

good, enjoin the right and forbid the evil. In other words it is as we say: 'I should find in you a friend', which actually means: 'Be my friend'. Apparently, the said explanatoriness of "from among" means that the whole Muslim ummah is obligated to call to the good. Actually, the controversy whether "from among" is for division or explanation is quite irrelevant. Calling to good, enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong are things which, even when obligatory, cannot be obligatory except on a few; because once the goal is achieved it would not be necessary for others to do so. Even if we were to say that the whole ummah invited to good, enjoined the right and forbade the wrong, it would only mean that there were some people in the ummah who did so. Thus the responsibility lies on only a selected group in any case. If the verse is addressed to a group of the ummah, the matter is clear; but if it is addressed to the whole nation, that is because of that particular group. In other words, initially the responsibility lies on every body's shoulders, but when some perform the duty, they get its reward and the others are then exempted from the obligation. That is why the verse ends with the clause "and these [i.e., those who perform this duty] it is that shall be successful" It appears from the above that "from among" indicates here a portion; it is this meaning that is generally understood from such combinations in common conversation, and it is not right to go for another meaning without a good reason. The three - inviting to good, enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong - are profoundly extensive subjects which require deep exegetic discourse, and we shall write about it, Allah willing, in proper places; also we shall deal there with its academic psychological and social aspects. ([ )! And be not like those who became divided and disagreed after clear evidences had come to them, and ... Probably the clause, "after clear evidences had come to them", is an adverbial phrase related to the verb, "disagreed", only. If so, then the "disagreement" would refer to difference of belief while the "division" to their physical separation and dissociation. Division has been mentioned first, because it is the prelude to divergence of belief. As long as the members of a community remain in contact with each other, there continues a harmony in their ideas and ideals, and their constant meetings - and the inevitable interaction welds their beliefs into a single entity, protecting them from ideological differences. If on the other hand, they lose contact and become separated the process of mutual action and reaction comes to a standstill; their views and ideas start developing independently, each going his own way, and it does not take each

group very long to develop its own views, ideals, theories and beliefs. It is in this way that ideological disagreements are born and unity of nations is shattered. It is as though Allah was warning the Muslims not to be like those who began their journey to disaster by separating from each other, losing mutual contacts and remaining aloof from the community, and ended by having different beliefs and divergent ideas. Allah has mentioned in various places that this disagreement and difference springs from revolt and envy; for example: And none differed about it but the very people who were given it, after clear signs had come to them, revolting among themselves (2:213). Of course, it is inevitable for ideas and opinions to differ, because knowledge and understandings differ from individual to individual; but at the same time it is essential for a society to remove that difference and bring back the deviators to the fold of unity. It is possible to remove the differences through various means; and if the ummah neglected this duty, it would in itself be a revolt which would throw them into perdition. The Qur'an has given utmost importance to unity and forcefully warned the Muslims against disunity. Why? Because it knew which path this ummah would take; they would differ, disagree and disunite not only as the previous people did, but even more. A peculiarity of the Qur'anic style has already been mentioned in several places: When it emphatically warns against some pitfall, it serves as a prophecy that the Muslim ummah was going to fall into it, nevertheless; the more forceful the admonition, the more likely the people were to violate it. This difference and disunity was foretold by the Prophet as well as by the Qur'an; he said that difference would creep into his ummah, then it would raise its head in the form of divergent sects; also he prophesied that the ummah would become divided as the Jews and the Christians were before. Some of those prophecies will be given under "Traditions". History testifies to the truth of this prophesy. No sooner was the Prophet gone than the people scattered in all directions; they were divided into several sects, each accusing others of apostasy. This has been going on since the days of the Companions to this time of ours. Every attempt at uniting two sects, results in the creation of a third. Experience and analytical study of Islamic literature and history prove that the fount-head of this difference were the hypocrites. Read the Qur'an and you will see

how forcefully it speaks against them and condemns them; how seriously it denounces their schemes; and how dangerous it takes their plans to be. Ponder on what Allah has said about them in the Chapters of: The Cow, The Repentance, The Confederates, and The Hypocrites, etc., and you will be stunned. This was their condition and behaviour during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), when the revelations were regularly coming from Allah. But as soon as the Prophet departed, the hypocrites were immediately forgotten; we find no mention of them in the Muslim literature; it was as though they vanished the moment the Prophet died! (It was) as though there never was any intimate friend between al-Hujun and asSafa, Or there never conversed at night any talker at Mecca. Soon the people found themselves scattered to the four winds and sectarian differences cut them asunder. Despotic and tyrannical governments succeeded in subjugating them, and their felicity of life was transformed into infelicity of error and straying. And we seek help from Allah. We hope, by the grace of Allah, to write on this subject in detail in the Chapter of The Repentance, ([ )! On the day when (some) faces shall become bright and (some) faces shall turn black; ...they shall abide.; As the talk centres around ungratefulness which, like treachery and breach of trust, causes shame and bashfulness, Allah has selected here a chastisement of the hereafter that is analogous to it, that is, blackness of face which metaphorically denotes shamefacedness, abashment and disgrace. It is implied, or rather clearly shown, by the words of Allah: "then as for those whose faces will have turned black: Did you disbelieve after your believing?" For the same reason, those who are grateful for this Divine Favour, shall be given a reward that will be appropriate for thankfulness, and that is brightness of face, which is metaphorically used for contentment and delight. ([ )! These are communications of Allah which We recite to you with truth,: The clause, "with truth" is related to the verb, "We recite", that is, the recitation is the recital of truth, it is not false, nor is it from Satanic whisperings. Alternatively, it may be related to "communications" giving it an adjectival meaning, that is, true communications. Or it may be related to a deleted word. In any case, the verse means as follows: These verses which describe what Allah will do with two groups - the ungrateful and the grateful- are accompanied by and based on truth, there is no falsehood or injustice in them. This meaning is more appropriate because the

verse ends on the words: and Allah does not desire any injustice... . ([ )! and Allah does not desire any injustice to the creatures: The word "injustice", is a common noun used in a negative context, implies comprehensiveness, that is, every type of injustice is negated. Likewise "the creatures" being a plural with definite article "the" denotes comprehensiveness. Therefore, the meaning will be as follows: Allah does not desire any injustice - of whatever type it may be - to any of His creatures or a group of creatures. It is a fact that difference and conflict among the people is such a bad thing that its evil consequences adversely affect all the creatures, the whole mankind. ([ )! And whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is Allah's; and to Allah all things are returned.: After the declaration that Allah desires no injustice whatsoever, this verse gives its reason to remove any possible misunderstanding to the contrary. Allah owns everything in all its aspects; He has right and authority to manage it in any way He likes. There is nothing outside His ownership. Had there been anything outside His ownership, only then He would do any injustice or exceed the limit by managing or usurping that "unowned" thing. Moreover, man inclines to injustice when he has a need which cannot be fulfilled except by manipulation of something he does not own. But Allah is Self-sufficient to Whom belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. (This argument has been given by an exegete, but it is not in conformity with apparent meaning of the verse. This reply is based on the Self-sufficiency of Allah, and not on His ownership, while the verse mentions the latter, not the former.) However, the Divine Ownership offers irrefutable proof that Allah is not unjust. Then comes another proof: Everything and every affair, whatsoever it may be, returns to Allah. If anyone other than Allah would have had any authority on any thing or affair, only then Allah would have been committing injustice if He would have removed it from that other's authority and manipulated it according to His own will. This proof is pointed at in the concluding statement: "and to Allah all things are returned". The two proofs, as you see, are complementary. One is based on the premise that everything belongs to Allah, and the other on the principle that no affair belongs to anyone other than Allah. ([ )! You are the best nation raised up for the (benefit of) men; ...: The word translated as "raised up"is "ukhrijat" (lit. taken out); it has a connotation of

introduction. Taking out also implies incidence, bringing forth and creation. Allah says: And Who brought forth herbage (87:4). The verse is addressed to the believers; therefore, the word "men" should mean general public, the humanity at large. Someone has said that the verb, 'kuntum' (lit.: you were), is here devoid of time factor and means 'you are'. The word 'ummah' (nation, group), is used for a party as well as for individual ± when they have the same goal which they aim to reach; it is derived from 'al-amm' ( to intend, to aim). The clause, "and you believe in Allah", has been placed after mentioning the enjoining the right and forbidding the evil; it is like mentioning the whole thing or the root after describing some components or branches. According to the above explanation, the verse means as follows: O Muslims! you are the best group which Allah has brought out for the mankind by guiding it; because you are united, you believe in Allah, and perform the twin duties of enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong. Obviously, this honoured title has been given to the whole ummah only because some of them have attained to the true belief and do fulfil the obligations of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. This is in short what some exegetes have written about it. But obviously the word 'kuntum' (you were), is not devoid of time factor; it is a past tense and refers to the believer's condition in the early days of Islam. It speaks about those who were foremost among the Emigrants and the Helpers; the belief here refers to their positive response to the call of holding fast to the cord of Allah without being divided; this belief is opposite of the disbelief in that call- the disbelief that is mentioned in the words: Did you disbelieve after your believing? The same is the import of the belief as related to the People of the Book in this verse, "and if the People of the Book had believed." In short the meaning will be as follows: O Muslims! you were - when you were brought forth first of all and appeared for the people - the best group that was ever formed, because at that time you enjoined good and forbade evil, and holding fast by the cord of Allah you became united and unified like one body and one soul; and if the People of the Book too were like that it would have been better for them, but they are divided and disunited - some of them are believers while most of them are transgressors. Many times in these verses the talk switches from third to the second person, and from plural to the singular number, and vice versa. Also there are clauses where noun has been used instead of pronoun, for example, the Divine Name "Allah" has been repeated several times. The reasons for these changes are not difficult to find after meditation.

 $  Abu Basir says: "I asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about the words of Allah, fear Allah with the fear which is due to Him, and he said: 'He should be obeyed, and not disobeyed; remembered, and not forgotten; and thanked, and not shown ingratitude.'" (Ma'ani 'l-akhbar; at- Tafsir, al-'Ayy ashi) al-Hakim and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated through another chain from Ibn Mas'ud that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Fear Allah as He should be feared; (it means) that He should be obeyed and not disobeyed, and remembered, and not forgotten,'" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur)

al-Khatib narrates from Anas that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'No servant fears Allah with the fear which is due to Him until he knows that what has befallen him could not miss him, and what has missed him could not reach him.'" (ibid.) 
 ! We have explained in the Commentary how the meaning given in the first two traditions could be inferred from the verse. As for the third one, it gives a concomitant of the Qur'anic meaning, and it is clear. Ibn Shahrashub quotes from at-Tafsir of Waki' that 'Abd Khayr said: "I asked 'Ali ibn Abl Talib (a.s.) about the words of Allah: O you who believe! fear Allah with the fear which is due to Him, (and) he said: 'By Allah, no one acted upon it except the House of the Messenger of Allah; we remembered Him, so we do not forget Him; and we thanked Him, so we are never ungrateful to Him; and we obeyed Him, so we never disobeyed Him. When this verse was revealed, the Companions said: "We are unable to do it." Then Allah revealed, Therefore fear Allah as much as you can" '" Waki' said: "that is, as much as you are able to do." (al-Burhan [fi tafsiri 'l-Qur'an], al-Bahrani) Abu Basir said: "I asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about the words of Allah, fear Allah with the fear which is due to Him. He said: '(It is) abrogated.' I said: 'And which

(verse) abrogated it? He said: 'The words of Allah, Therefore fear Allah as much as you can.'" (at- Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! It may be inferred from the tradition of Waki' that "abrogation" (as mentioned in the tradition of al-Ayyashi) refers to various stages of piety and fear of Allah. But it does not mean abrogation in the sense of cancellation (as some exegetes have said) because it is against the apparent meaning of the Qur'an, as-Sadiq (a.s.) explained the clause, unless you are Muslims, in these words: "unless you are submissive." (Majma'u 'l-bayan) as-Suyuti writes under the words of Allah: And hold fast by the cord of Allah . . .: "Ibn Abi Shaybah and Ibn Jarir have narrated from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri that he said: 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: "The Book of Allah, it is the cord of Allah (which is) outstretched from the heaven to the earth." '" (ad-Durru 'lmanthur) Ibn Abi Shaybah narrates from Abu Shurayh al-Khuza'i that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Surely this Qur'an is a rope, one end of which is in the hand of Allah, and the other end is in your hands; therefore hold fast to it; because you shall never slip nor will you ever go astray after (holding fast to) it.'" (ibid.) as-Sajjad (a.s.) said, inter alia, in a hadith: "And the cord of Allah ± it is the Qur'an." (Ma'ani 'l-akhbar) 
 ! There are other traditions on this theme, narrated by both sects. al-Baqir (a.s.) said: "The progeny of Muhammad, they are the cord of Allah which He has ordered (the believers) to hold fast to; so He has said: And hold fast by the cord of Allah all together and be not divided." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! There are other traditions of the same meaning; they are supported by what has been written in the Commentary; also other traditions given below, support it.

at-Tabarani has narrated from Zayd ibn Arqam that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said: 'Surely, I am to depart from you; and surely you are to come to me near the 'hawd' (reservoir, i.e., of 'al-Kawthar'). Therefore be careful how you follow me about the two weighty things.' He was asked: 'And what are the two weighty things? O Messenger of Allah!' He said: 'The greater one is the Book of Allah, the Mighty, the Great, (it is) a rope one end of which is in the hand of Allah and (another) end is in your hands; therefore hold fast to it, you shall never slip up nor will you ever go astray. And the smaller one is my progeny. And surely they will never separate from each other until they reach me near the water-reservoir; and I have asked for them this (especiality) from my Lord; therefore do not precede them lest you be destroyed; and do not (try to) teach them because they are more knowledgeable than you .'" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) 
 ! The tradition of the "Two Weighty Things" is among the mutawatir ones, which has been narrated unanimously by both the Sunnis and the Shi'ahs. We have mentioned in the beginning of the chapter that some scholars of traditions have narrated it from thirty-five different narrators - males and females and a multitude of narrators and scholars have narrated it from those original narrators. Ibn Majah, Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim have narrated from Anas that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'The Children of Israel became divided into seventy-one sects, and surely my ummah will soon be divided into seventy-three sects - all of them shall be in the fire except one.' They said: 'O Messenger of Allah! and who is this one?' He said: 'The party.' Then he recited; And hold fast to the cord of Allah all together.' " (ibid.) 
 ! This too is one of the famous traditions. The Shi'ahs have narrated it in a different way, as may be seen in al-Khisal, Ma'ani 'l-akhbar, alIhtijaj, al-Amali, the Kitab of Sulaym ibn Qays and at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi. We quote it here from the first-named book. as-Saduq narrates through his chains from Sulayman ibn Mihran who narrates from Ja'far ibn Muhammad (peace be on them both) who narrates, through his forefathers, from the Leader of the Faithful (peace be on them all) that he said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) saying:

'Verily, the ummah of Musa became divided after him, into seventy-one sects, one of them (was) saved, and seventy (were thrown) into the fire. And the ummah of 'Isa became divided after him, into seventy-two sects, one of them (was) saved, while seventy-one (were thrown) into the fire. And surely my ummah will soon be divided after me, into seventy-three sects, one of them (will be) saved, and seventy-two (will be thrown) into the fire." 
 ! It conforms with the next tradition. Abu Dawud, at-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah and al-Hakim (who has confirmed correctness of this hadith) have all narrated from Abu Hurayrah that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'The Jews were divided into seventy-one sects; and the Christians were divided into seventy-two sects; and my ummah will be divided into seventy-three sects.'" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) 
 !This theme is found in other traditions narrated through other chains from Mu'awiyah and others. al-Hakim has narrated from Ibn 'Umar that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said; "There will happen in any ummah all that happened in the Children of Israel in a completely identical manner, so much so that if there were among them someone who had openly had incestuous relation with his mother, there would be someone like that in my ummah too. Verily the Children of Israel were divided into seventy-one sects, and my ummah will become divided into seventy-three sects all of them (will go) into the fire except one.' He was asked: 'Which one?' He said: 'That on which are I and my Companions today.'" (ibid.) 
 ! A similar tradition has been narrated in Jami'u 'l-usul (by Ibnu'1Athir) from at-Tirmidhi, on the authority of the son of 'Amr ibn al-'As from the Prophet. as-Saduq has narrated through his chains from Ghiyath ibn Ibrahim, from as-Sadiq (a.s.) (through his forefathers, peace be on them all) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'All that happened in the previous nations will surely happen in this ummah in a completely identical manner and exactly alike way." (Kamalu

'd-din) The Prophet said: "Most surely you will follow the customs of those who were before you, in a completely identical manner and exactly alike way; you will not deviate from their path; you will imitate them faithfully (in every conceivable manner), span to span, hand to hand and arm to arm; so much so that if someone in previous nations had entered an iguana's den, you will surely enter it." They said: "Do you mean the Jews and the Christians? O Messenger of Allah!" He said: "Who (else) do I mean? Surely you will unravel the rope of Islam strand by strand; the first thing you will destroy of your religion shall be trustworthiness, and the last of it (to go, shall be) the prayer." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) The author of Jami'u 'l-usul has narrated on the authority of the correct books also at-Tirmidhi has narrated it - from the Prophet that he said: "By Him in Whose hand my soul is, most surely you will follow the custom of those who were before you." And Razin has added the words: "in a completely identical manner and exactly similar way; so much so that if there were among them one who had cohabited with his mother, someone among you too would do so. But I do not know whether you would worship calf or not." 
 ! This too is a famous tradition. The Sunnis have narrated it in their correct and other books, while the Shi'ahs have recorded it in their collections of traditions. Anas said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Surely there will arrive at the Reservoir a group of my Companions, until when they shall be removed (from there) they shall tremble before me. So I shall say: O Lord! my Companions.' Then it will be said: 'You do not know what they did do after you.'" (as-Sahih, alBukhari; as-Sahih, Muslim) Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said; "There will arrive near me on the Day of Resurrection a group of my Companions (or according to another report: of my ummah), and they will be evicted from the Reservoir. Then I will say: 'O Lord! my Companions.' And (Allah) will say: 'You have no knowledge of what they did do after you; they became apostates, going backwards, (to their

previous disbelief).' Then they will be evicted." (ibid.) 
 ! This tradition also is very well-known; both the Sunnis and the Shi'ahs have recorded it in their correct books and collections, on the authority of many Companions, like Ibn Mas'ud, Anas, Sahl ibn Sa'id, Abu Hurayrah, Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, 'A'ishah, Umm Salmah, Asma' bint Abi Bakr, and others, and also from some Imams of the Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.). These traditions, numerous and varied as they are, confirm what we have inferred from the verses; and the historical events and strifes confirm these traditions. al-Hakim has narrated (and confirmed its correctness) that Ibn 'Umar said: "Verily the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Whoever went out of community about a hand-span, he surely removed the collar of Islam from his neck - until he returns. And whoever died without having a leader of community over him, then surely his death shall be a death of ignorance (i.e., disbelief).'" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) 
 ! The theme of this hadith too is well-known. Both the Sunnis and the Shi'ahs have narrated from the Prophet that he said: "Whoever died without knowing the Imam of his time, he died the death of ignorance (i.e., disbelief)." It is recorded in the Sunans of at-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud that the Prophet said: "There shall always be a group of my ummah on truth." (Jami'u 'l-usul) The Leader of the Faithful (Ali, a.s.) said about the words of Allah: Did you disbelieve after your believing?: "They are the people of innovations and heretic tendencies and wrong views from this ummah" (Majma'u 'l-bayan) Abu 'Amr az-Zubayri narrates from as-Sadiq (a.s.) about the words of Allah: You are the best nation raised up for the (benefit of) men... , that he said: "(Allah) means the ummah (group, nation) for which the prayer of Ibrahim (a.s.) was granted; and they are the people Allah raised (His Messenger) among them, and from them and to them; and they are the medium nation, and they are the best nation that has been raised up for the people." (Majma'u 'l-bayan; at-Tafsir, al'Ayyashi)


 ! We have explained this tradition under the Commentary of the following verse: ...and (raise) from our offspring a group submitting to Thee (2:128). Ibn Abi Hatim has narrated from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said about the verse: You are the best nation raised up for the (benefit of) men ...: "The People of the House of the Prophet." (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) Ahmad has narrated through good chains from 'Ali (a.s.) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'I have been given that which no prophet was given: I have been helped with awe, and I have been given keys of the earth, and I have been named Ahmad, and the earth has been made a means of cleansing for me, and my ummah has been made the best nation." (ibid.) å
 
    

 3 ˸Ϣϛ˵ Ϯ˵ϠΗ˶ Ύ˴Ϙϳ˵ ϥ˶·ϭ˴ ϯ˱Ϋ΃˴ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ϭ˷ή˵ π ˵ ϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϟ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήμ ˴ Ϩ˵ϳ ϻ ˴ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ έ˴ Ύ˴Α˸ΩϷ ˴ ΍ Ϣ˵ ϛ˵ Ϯ˷ϟ˵Ϯ˴ ϳ˵ {111} ϻ ˴˷ ˶· ˸΍Ϯ˵ϔϘ˶ Λ˵ Ύ˴ϣ Ϧ ˴ ˸ϳ΃˴ Δ˵ ϟ˴˷ά˶˷ ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ˸ΖΑ˴ ή˶ ο ˵ Α˶ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ Δ˵ Ϩ˴ Ϝ˴ ˸δϤ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ˸ΖΑ˴ ή˶ ο ˵ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ ΐ ˳ π ˴ ϐ˴ Α˶ ΍ϭ˵΅Ύ˴Αϭ˴ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Ϟ ˳ ˸ΒΣ ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˸Ϧϣ˶˷ Ϟ ˳ ˸ΒΤ ˴ Α˶ ϳ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧΎ˴ϛ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϧ˴˷΄˴ Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳ΂˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϔ˵ ˸Ϝ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ΪΘ˴ ˸όϳ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧΎ˴ϛϭ˴˷ ΍Ϯ˴μϋ ˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ ϖ ˳˷ Σ ˴ ή˶ ˸ϴϐ˴ Α˶ ˯Ύ˴ϴΒ˶ ϧ˴Ϸ΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠΘ˵ ˸Ϙϳ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍{112} ˲ΔϤ˴ ΋˶ Ύ˴ϗ ˲Δϣ˴˷ ΃˵ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ˸ϫ΃˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶˷ ˯΍˴Ϯγ ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵δ˸ϴ˴ϟ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ΪΠ ˵ ˸δϳ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϭ˴ Ϟ ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴˷ϟ΍ ˯Ύ˴ϧ΁ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳ΁ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϡ˸Θϳ˴ {113} ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ˸Άϳ˵ Ϧ ˶ϋ ˴ ϥ ˴ ˸ϮϬ˴ ˸Ϩϳ˴ ϭ˴ ϑ ˶ ϭ˵ή˸ό˴Ϥ˸ϟΎ˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϣ˵ ˸΄ϳ˴ ϭ˴ ή˶ Χ ˶ ϵ΍ ϡ˶ ˸Ϯϴ˴ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟΎ˶Α Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Τϟ˶Ύ˷μ ˴ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴ϭ˵΃ϭ˴ Ε ˶ ΍˴ή˸ϴΨ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϋέ˶ Ύ˴δϳ˵ ϭ˴ ή˶ Ϝ˴ Ϩ˵Ϥ˸ϟ΍{114} ˲Ϣϴ˶Ϡϋ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ϩ˵ ϭ˵ή˴ϔ˸Ϝϳ˵ Ϧ˴Ϡϓ˴ ή˳ ˸ϴΧ ˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϡό˴ ˸ϔϳ˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϘΘ˴˷Ϥ˵ ˸ϟΎ˶Α{115} ά˶ ϟ˴˷΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶˸Ϣϫ˵ έ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ώ ˵ Ύ˴Τ˸λ΃˴ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴ϭ˵΃ϭ˴ Ύ˱Ό˸ϴη ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Ϣ˵ϫΩ˵ ϻ˸ϭ΃˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˵΍˴Ϯ˸ϣ΃˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϋ ˴ ϲ ˴ Ϩ˶ ˸ϐΗ˵ Ϧ˴ϟ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ϳ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵Ϊϟ˶Ύ˴Χ Ύ˴Ϭϴ˶ϓ{116} ϡ˳ ˸Ϯϗ˴ Ι ˴ ˸ήΣ ˴ ˸ΖΑ˴ Ύ˴λ΃˴ ˲ή˷ λ ˶ Ύ˴Ϭϴ˶ϓ ΢ ˳ ϳ˶έ Ϟ ˶ Μ˴ Ϥ˴ ϛ˴ Ύ˴ϴ˸ϧΪ˵˷ ϟ΍ Γ˶ Ύ˴ϴΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϩ˶ ά˶ ϫ˴ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϙϔ˶ Ϩ˵ϳ Ύ˴ϣ Ϟ ˵ Μ˴ ϣ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ δ ˴ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴χ ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˶˸ψϳ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ δ ˴ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ ˸ϦϜ˶ ϟ˴ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ Ϥ˴ Ϡ˴˴χ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˵ ˸ΘϜ˴ Ϡ˴˸ϫ΄˴ϓ˴ {117} ˸ϢϜ˵ ϧ˴ Ϯ˵ϟ˸΄ϳ˴ ϻ ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϧ˶ ϭ˵Ω Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Δ˱ ϧ˴ Ύ˴τΑ˶ ˸΍ϭ˵άΨ ˶ Θ˴˷Η˴ ϻ ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˴Ϭϳ˵˷΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ˸Ϧϣ˶ ˯˵ Ύ˴π˸ϐΒ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ε ˶ Ϊ˴ Α˴ ˸Ϊϗ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵˷Ϩ˶ ϋ ˴ Ύ˴ϣ ˸΍ϭ˷Ω˵ ˴ϭ ϻ ˱ Ύ˴ΒΧ ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠϘ˶ ˸όΗ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ ϥ˶· Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳϵ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϝ˵ ϟ˴ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϴ˴˷Α˴ ˸Ϊϗ˴ ή˵ Β˴ ˸ϛ΃˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ έ˵ ϭ˵Ϊλ ˵ ϲ˶ϔ˸ΨΗ˵ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ϫ˶ ΍˴Ϯ˸ϓ΃˴ {118} ϭ˴ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϣ˴ ΁ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ ˸Ϣϛ˵ Ϯ˵Ϙϟ˴ ΍˴Ϋ·˶ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˶˷ϛ˵ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆΗ˵ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϧ˴ Ϯ˷Β˵ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϧ˴ Ϯ˷Β˵ Τ ˶ Η˵ ˯ϻϭ˵΃ ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃Ύ˴ϫπ ˵˷ ϋ ˴ ΍˸ϮϠ˴Χ ˴ ΍˴Ϋ·˶ Ϣ˵ Ϝ˵ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ˸΍Ϯ έ˶ ϭ˵Ϊμ ˵˷ ϟ΍ Ε ˶ ΍˴άΑ˶ ˲Ϣϴ˶Ϡϋ ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸ϢϜ˵ ψ ˶ ˸ϴ˴ϐΑ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ΗϮ˵ϣ ˸Ϟϗ˵ φ ˶ ˸ϴϐ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ϟ ˴ ϣ˶ Ύ˴ϧϷ ˴ ΍{119} ˸ϢϜ˵ ˸Βμ ˶ Η˵ ϥ˶·ϭ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ˸Άδ ˵ Η˴ ˲ΔϨ˴ δ ˴Σ ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ˸δδ ˴ ˸ϤΗ˴ ϥ˶· ˸Ϣϫ˵ Ϊ˵ ˸ϴϛ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ή˵˷ π ˵ ϳ˴ ϻ ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΘ˴˷ Η˴ ϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήΒ˶ ˸μΗ˴ ϥ˶·ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϬΑ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵Σή˴ ˸ϔϳ˴ ˲ΔΌ˴ ϴ˶˷γ ˴ ˲ςϴ˶Τϣ˵ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠϤ˴ ˸όϳ˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ Ύ˱Ό˸ϴη ˴ {120} {111} They shall by no means harm you but with a slight evil; and if they fight with you they shall turn (their) backs to you, then shall they not be helped. {112} Abasement is made to cleave to them wherever they are found, except under a covenant with Allah and a covenant with men, and they have become deserving of wrath from Allah, and humiliation is made to cleave to them; this is because they disbelieved in the communications of Allah and slew the prophets unjustly; this is because they disobeyed and exceeded the limits. {113} They are not all alike; of the followers of the Book there is an upright party; they recite Allah's

communications in the nighttime and they adore (Him). {114} They believe in Allah and the last day, and they enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and they strive with one another in hastening to good deeds, and those are among the good. {115} And whatever good they do, they shall not be denied it, and Allah knows those who guard (against evil). {116} (As for) those who disbelieve, surely neither their wealth nor their children shall avail them in the least against Allah; and these are the inmates of the fire; therein they shall abide. {117} The likeness of what they spend in the life of this world is as the likeness of wind in which is intense cold (that) smites the seed produce of a people who haw done injustice to their souls and destroys it; and Allah is not unjust to them, but they are unjust to themselves. {118} O you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than your own people; they do not fall short of inflicting loss upon you; they love what distresses you; vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater still; indeed, We have made the communications clear to you, if you will understand. {119} Lo! you are they who will love them while they do not love you, and you believe in the Book (in) the whole of it; and when they meet you they say: We believe, and when they are alone, they bite the ends of their fingers in rage against you. Say: Die in your rage; surely Allah knows what is in the breasts. {120} If good befalls you, it grieves them, and if an evil afflicts you, they rejoice at it; and if you are patient and guard yourselves, their scheme will not injure you in any way; surely Allah comprehends what they do. å
  The verses, as you see, now revert to the original theme, describing the behaviour of the People of the Book - and particularly the Jews - exposing their disbelief in the Divine Revelation, their going astray and their hindering the believers from the way of Allah; the preceding ten verses were a talk within talk, a parenthetical speech. The verses are thus connected with the foregoing discourse. ([ )! They shall by no means harm you... they shall not be helped: "al-Adha" ( slight distress) denotes a harm suffered by a creature, either to his soul or body or to those related to him, be it of this world or of the hereafter - as ar-Raghib has said in Mufradatu 'l-Qur'an, ([ )! Abasement is brought down upon them wherever they are found, except

under a protection from Allah and a protection from men;: "adh-Dhillah" (abasement) denotes here species of abasement; 'adh-dhull' is the humiliation imposed by someone else; 'adh-dhill is that which results from one's own obstinacy - as ar-Raghib has written. However, its general import is the condition of humiliation and degradation. Its opposite 'al-'izz' means honour, strength and pride. The word 'thuqifu' means "are found"; 'al-habl' literally means rope or cord which provides protection to one who holds fast to it; it is metaphorically used to everything that provides a kind of safety, security and protection, e.g., a covenant, guarantee or amnesty. The meaning is as follows - and Allah knows better: Abasement is stamped on them as a design is stamped on a coin, or it encompasses them as a tent encompasses a man. Anyhow, they are either branded with, or overwhelmed by abasement and humiliation - except when they get a protection or guarantee from Allah and a protection or guarantee from men. The word "protection" is repeated when referring to Allah and then to men, because the connotation differs from one place to the other. Protection given by Allah is His decree and command, either creative or legislative; and that provided by men is their decision and action. Abasement is stamped on them; it means that Allah has ordained a law affirming their abasement. This meaning is supported by the proviso "wherever they are found". Obviously, it means that wherever the believers find them and subjugate them; this proviso is obviously more appropriate to legislative abasement, one of whose effects is the imposition of jizyah. The meaning of the verse therefore is as follows: They are abased and humiliated, according to the law of Islamic shari'ah, except when they come under the protection of an Islamic State, or somehow get protection from people. One of the exegetes has said that the clause "Abasement is brought down upon

them " is not a legislative order; it is rather a statement of fact describing what they had suffered by the Divine decree and measure - because when Islam came, the Jews were paying jizyah to the fire-worshippers of Persia, and some of them were subjects of the Christians. å2

Ô)! This meaning could be correct; and the end portion of the verse might even support this view, because it apparently explains the reason of their being branded with abasement and humiliation in terms of their misdeeds, e.g., their disbelief in the signs of Allah, their slaying the prophets and their continuous transgression. But then we would have to apply this verse exclusively to the Jews ± and there is apparently nothing in the verse to suggest such exclusiveness. We shall write some more on this subject under the following verse: and We have put enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Ressurection (5:64). ([ )! and they have become settled in wrath from Allah, and humiliation is stamped upon them;: "Ba'u " they settled in; they returned with); 'al-maskanah' translated here as humiliation, literally means extreme poverty. Apparently it is used when a man finds no way of escape from a threatening poverty or need. Accordingly the end of the verse conforms with its beginning. ([ )! this is because they disobeyed and used to exceed the limits: They disobeyed, and, even before that, they were habitually and continuously transgressing the limits. ([ )! They are not all alike; ...and Allah knows the pious ones: "as-Sawa" (literally, to be equal) is a masdar which is used in the meaning of adjective, that is, equal, alike. The People of the Book are not all alike in their behaviour, nor in the rules applying to them; there is among them an upright group whose attributes the verse describes. Obviously, the phrase "of the People of the Book there is ..." shows the reason as to why the People of the Book are not all alike. Various meanings have been given for the word 'qa'imah' (literally, standing; translated here as upright): It is said that it means 'firm in obeying the command of Allah', or 'just', or 'proceeding on straight path'. The fact is that the word is of a general nature which could be interpreted in any of the above meanings. But the

mention of the Book and of their good deeds makes it certain that it has been used here in the meaning of being standing or firm in belief and obedience. 'Ana'' is plural of 'inan' or 'anan' or reportedly 'anu', all of which mean "time". 'al-Musara'ah' (to vie with one another in hastening); it is on paradigm of 'almufa'alah' from the root verb 'as-sur'ah' (to be fast, to make haste). It is explained in Majma'u 'l-bayan as follows: "The difference between as-sur'ah and 'al-'ajalah'' is as follows: as-Sur'ah is to go ahead in a matter in which going ahead is allowed; it is a praise-worthy trait, and its opposite is 'al-ibta' (to be late) which is a disliked action. And al-'ajalah is to go ahead in a matter in which one should not go ahead; it is a disliked trend, and its opposite is 'al-anah' (deliberateness) which is a good trait. Apparently, as-sur'ah is an attribute of movement, while al-'ajalah shows an attribute of the one who moves. 'al-Khayrat' means good deeds in general ± be it worship, or spending in the way of Allah, or justice or looking after the needs of needy persons. It is a plural with prefix 'al' which denotes comprehensiveness. It is mostly used for monetary good deeds, as its singular 'al-khayr' (good) is mostly used for wealth and property. In these verses, Allah has enumerated most of the basic good attributes, i.e., belief, enjoining the good and forbidding the evil, and hastening towards good deeds; then He has praised them that they are among the good people. It means that they are the people of the straight path, and among the companions of the prophets, the truthful ones and the martyrs. Read, for proof, the following verses: Guide us to the straight path, the path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favours, not of those inflicted with Thy wrath, nor of those gone astray (1:6±7); in conjuction with: And whoever obeys Allah and the Messenger, these are with those upon whom Allah has bestowed favours from among the prophets and the truthfuls and the martyrs and the good ones; and excellent are these as companions (4:69). It has been said that the verses under discussion refer to 'Abdullah ibn Salam and his companions.

([ )! And whatever good they do, they shall not be denied it: "Lan yukfaruh" (they shall never be denied it); the root word is 'al-kufran'  ungratefulness) which is opposite of 'ash-shukr' (gratefulness). Allah will reward them for whatever good they do, they will receive its recompense from Allah, He will not let it be lost; He says: and whoever on his own accord does good, then surely Allah is Grateful, Knowing (2:158). Also He says: and whatever good thing you spend, it is to your own good; ...and whatever good thing you spend shall be paid back to you in full, and you shall not be wronged (2:272). ([ )! (As for) those who disbelieve, surely neither their wealth nor their children shall avail them ...: The continuation of context apparently shows that the phrase "those who disbelieve" refers to the other groups of the People of the Book which did not respond to the call of the Prophet; those were the people who used to hatch conspiracies against Islam and had left no stone unturned in extinguishing the light of the truth. Some people have said that this verse refers to the idol-worshippers; according to them, it paves the way for the story of the Battle of Uhud which comes after a few verses. But this explanation does not take into account the next statements, that is, and you believe in the Book (in) the whole of it; and when they meet you they say: "We believe". . . Obviously it describes the Jews' behaviour with the Muslims, not that of the idol-worshippers. It proves that the context is the same; it has not changed yet. An exegete has tried to combine both explanations by applying the verse under discussion to the idolaters and the next one to the Jews. But it is a mistake. ([ )! The likeness of what they spend ...; "as-Sirr" ( intense cold), What they spend has been qualified with the proviso "in this life of the world" to indicate that they are completely cut off from the life of the hereafter; whatever they spend is related only to this life. The smitten tilth is qualified by the phrase "of a people who have done injustice to their souls" this proviso perfectly meshes with the coming statement, "and Allah does no injustice to them". The verse means that whatever they spend in this life (in order to better their conditions and achieve their evil goals) brings nothing to them except infelicity

and unhappiness; it destroys what they ardently desire and which they think would bring happiness to them. It is like an intensely cold wind that smites the farm produce of an unjust people; it is because they had done injustice to their own selves - after all, an evil deed can bring only evil results. ([ )! O you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than your own people;...: Intimate friend has been called 'al-bitanah' (inner lining of a garment) i.e., opposite of 'az-ziharah' (outer side of a garment) - because such a friend knows the inner thoughts and secrets of man; "they do not fall short," i.e., they leave no stone unturned; 'khabalan' (harm, mischief); insanity is called 'al-khabl' because it harms or destroys understanding; "they love what distresses you": "what" in this sentence is for masdar, and it means: they love your distress, your grievous harm; "vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths": it means that their enmity and hatred is very obvious from their way of talking, from slips of their tongues; it is a fine metaphor; the verse does not describe what they have kept hidden in their hearts, it just says: "and what their breasts conceal is greater still"; this apparent vagueness indicates that the hatred hidden in their hearts is so varied and so great that it is beyond description - this vague -ness puts even greater stress on the word "greater". ([ )! Lo!you are they who will love them while they do not love you,... Allah knows what is in the breasts: Apparently 'ula'i' (they, these) is demonstrative pronoun, and 'ha' (lo!) is exclamatory particle, and between the two has been inserted the pronoun "you"; the meaning thus will be, 'you these', as we say 'Zayd this did so', or 'Hindah this did so'. The article 'al' (the) in "the Book" denotes genes, i.e., you believe in all the Books which have been revealed by Allah - your Book as well as their Books - while they do not believe in your Book. The clause "and when they meet you they say: 'We believe,'"shows that they are hypocrites; "and when they are alone, they bite the ends of their fingers in rage against you": 'al-'add'  to bite forcefully); 'al-anamil' is plural of 'al-unmulah' ( fingertip); 'al-ghayz' (rage, wrath, anger); to bite fingertips against something

proverbially expresses one's anger or sorrow on that thing. The clause "Say: 'Die in your rage,'" is a curse against them in the form of command. It connects the foregoing sentences to the next one "surely Allah knows what is in the breasts". The meaning together will be as follows: "O Allah! cause them to die in their rage; surely Thou knowest what is in the breasts, that is, what is in their hearts or souls." ([ )! If a good befalls you, it grieves them ...: "al-Masa'ah"  to grieve) is opposite of 'as-surur' ( to make happy; happiness). The verse shows that the believers may protect themselves only if they have patience and piety. å
 
    

 ' ˲Ϣϴ˶Ϡϋ ˴ ˲ϊϴ˶Ϥγ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ϝ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϘ˶ ˸Ϡϟ˶ Ϊ˴ ϋ ˶ Ύ˴Ϙϣ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ή ˵ Ϯ˶˷ Β˴ Η˵ Ϛ ˴ Ϡ˶˸ϫ΃˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ε ˴ ˸ϭΪ˴ Ϗ ˴ ˸Ϋ·˶˴ϭ{121} ϼ ˴ θ ˴ ˸ϔΗ˴ ϥ˴΃ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϩ˶ϣ ϥ ˶ Ύ˴Θϔ˴ ΋˶ Ύ˷σ ˴ Ζ˷Ϥ˴ ϫ˴ ˸Ϋ˶· ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ϛ˴˷ Ϯ˴ Θ˴ ϴ˴ ˸Ϡϓ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϤϬ˵ ϴ˵˷ϟ˶ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ{122} ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϜ˵ ˸θΗ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϡ˴˷ό˴ ϟ˴ Ϫ˴ ˴˷Ϡϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΗ˴˷Ύ˴ϓ ˲Δϟ˴˷Ϋ˶ ΃˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ έ˳ ˸ΪΒ˴ Α˶ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϛ˵ ή˴ μ ˴ ϧ˴ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϟ˴ϭ˴ {123} ϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸Ϡϟ˶ ϝ ˵ Ϯ˵ϘΗ˴ ˸Ϋ·˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϟΰ˴ Ϩ˵ϣ Δ˶ Ϝ˴ ΋˶ ϼ˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ ϑ ˳ ϻ΁ Δ˶ Λ˴ ϼ˴ΜΑ˶ Ϣ˵ϜΑ˵˷έ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ Ϊ˴˷ Ϥ˶ ϳ˵ ϥ˴΃ ˸ϢϜ˵ ˴ϴϔ˶ ˸Ϝϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϟ΃˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩ{124} ϥ˶· ϰ˴ϠΑ˴ Ϯ˶˷ δ ˴ ϣ˵ Δ˶ Ϝ˴ ΋˶ ϼ˴Ϥ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ ϑ ˳ ϻ΁ Δ˶ δ ˴ ˸ϤΨ ˴ Α˶ Ϣ˵ϜΑ˵˷έ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ˸ΩΪ˶ ˸Ϥϳ˵ ΍˴άϫ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˶ έ˶ ˸Ϯϓ˴ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϣ˵ϛϮ˵Η˸΄ϳ˴ ϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΘ˴˷Η˴ ϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήΒ˶ ˸μΗ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϣ{125} ϣ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴ό˴ Ο ˴ Ύ Ϣ˶ ϴ˶ϜΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ΰ˶ ϳ˶ΰό˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϊ˶ Ϩ˶ϋ ˸Ϧϣ˶ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ ή˵ ˸μϨ˴˷ϟ΍ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Α˶ Ϣ˵ϜΑ˵ Ϯ˵Ϡϗ˵ Ϧ ˴˷ Ό˶ Ϥ˴ ˸τΘ˴ ϟ˶ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϟ˴ ϯ˴ή˸θΑ˵ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ {126} Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Ύ˱ϓή˴ σ ˴ ϊ˴ τ ˴ ˸Ϙϴ˴ ˸ϟ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Β΋˶ Ύ˴Χ ˸΍Ϯ˵ΒϠ˶Ϙ˴ Ϩ˴ϴϓ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ Θ˴ Β˶ ˸Ϝϳ˴ ˸ϭ΃˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ή˴ϔϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍{127} Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˴ β ˴ ˸ϴϟ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϧ˴˷Έ˶ϓ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˴Αά˶˷ ό˴ ϳ˵ ˸ϭ΃˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ Ώ ˴ Ϯ˵Θϳ˴ ˸ϭ΃˴ ˲˯˸ϲη ˴ ή˶ ˸ϣϷ ˴΍ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϥϟ˶Ύ˴χ{128} ˲Ϣϴ˶Σέ˴˷ ˲έϮ˵ϔϏ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣ Ώ ˵ ά˶˷ ό˴ ϳ˵ ϭ˴ ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ Ϧ˴Ϥϟ˶ ή˵ ϔ˶ ˸ϐϳ˴ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ε ˶ ΍˴ϭΎ˴Ϥδ ˴˷ ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴ϣ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ˶ϭ˴ {129} {121} and when you did go forth early in the morning from your family to lodge the believers in encampments for war and Allah is Hearing, Knowing. {122} When two parties from among you had determined that they should show cowardice, and Allah was the guardian of them both, and in Allah should the believers trust. {123} And Allah did certainly assist you at Badr when you were weak; be careful of (your duty to) Allah then, that you may give thanks. {124} When you said to the believers: Does it not suffice you that your Lord should assist you with three thousand of the angels sent down? {125} Yea! If you remain patient and are on your guard, and they come upon you in a headlong manner, your Lord will assist you with five thousand of the havoc-making angels. {126} And Allah did not make it but as good news for you, and that your hearts might be at ease thereby, and victory is only from Allah, the Mighty, the Wise. {127} That He may cut off a portion from among those who disbelieve, or abase them so that they should return disappointed of attaining what they desired. {128} You have no concern in the affair whether He turns to them (mercifully) or chastises them, for surely they are

unjust. {129} And whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is Allah's; He forgives whom He pleases and chastises whom He pleases; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. å
  Now the discourse turns back to what the chapter had begun with: Warning the believers of the serious situation they were in; reminding them of Allah's favors bestowed on them, that is, true belief, divine help and the fact that Allah is sufficient for them; teaching them what would lead them to their noble goal; and guiding them to what would make them happy in this life and the hereafter. It describes the battle of Uhud. There are some verses referring to the battle of Badr, but they are like supplement inserted here for cross-reference, and as we shall explain later, they are not meant as main topic here. ([ )! And when you did go forth early in the morning from your family to lodge the believers in encampments for war: "When" in Arabic is adverb of time related to a deleted verb e.g. "Remember" or similar verbs; "ghadawta" translated here as "you did go forth early in the morning" is derived from al-ghadw (to come out early in the morning); attabwi'ah means to prepare a place for someone, or to put him in a place; ma-qa'id is plural (of seat; translated here as encampment). Ahl of a man, according to ar-Raghib, are those who are joined to him in genealogy or house or other such things like religion, town or handicraft. Thus ahl of a man refers to his wife and all those who are in his house, like wife, child, servant, etc.; also it denotes all who are related to him like his family or clan; residents of a town or followers of a religion are called ahl of that town or religion; artisans and masters of a handicraft are called ahl of that art or handicraft. The word "ahl" is used for masculine and feminine both; also for singular and plural alike. Its use is exclusively reserved for human beings; ahl of a thing are the people related to it exclusively. "Ahl" of the Messenger of Allah are therefore the people exclusively related to him. Here it refers to a group²not to a single person. It may be understood from the expression, "you did go forth early in the morning from your family", because it may be said, "You went forth from your relatives and your group "; but it cannot be said, "You went forth from your wife " or "from your mother". An exegete mistakenly has thought that ahl refers to singular only, and therefore has had to say

that there was some word deleted (but understood) from the verse; according to him the verse means, "did go forth... from the house of your family" . But as you have seen nothing in this verse demands such interpretation. The preceding and following verses are addressed to the believers as a group. But the verses under discussion turn from plural to singular; they are addressed not to the believers but to the Messenger of Allah alone. Apparently this diversion has some connection with the shade of displeasure found in the verses dealing with this battle: there is an undercurrent of reproach, censure and stricture running throughout for what the Muslims had done (in the battle of Uhud) where they had shown cowardice and lack of will-power and courage. Therefore, whenever a topic comes which exclusively concerns the Prophet, Allah ignores and disregards the believers and speaks to the Prophet alone. Thus Allah says: And when you did go forth early in the morning from your family; When you said to the believers: "Does it not suffice you that your Lord should assist you... "; You have no concern in the affair; Say: "Surely the affair is wholly (in the hands) of Allah" (3:154); Thus it is due to the mercy from Allah that you deal with them gently, and had you been rough, hardhearted, they would certainly have dispersed from around you (3:159); And reckon not those who are killed in Allah's way as dead (3:169). In all the above verses plural verbs and pronouns have been changed to singular. It seems as though the speaker is not in a mood to continue the preceding style (of speaking to the whole community) because he is very much annoyed and displeased with them. It is unlike some other verses coming in between where effectiveness and sharpness of admonition depended on direct talk with the believers and therefore the plural was used. For example: And Muhammad is no more than a messenger, the messengers have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heals? (3:144); When you ran off precipitately and did not turn towards any one, and the Messenger was calling you from your rear (3:153). Also it is unlike another intervening verse, that is: Certainly Allah conferred a benefit upon the believers when He raised among them a Messenger from among themselves, reciting to them His communications (3:164). Here Allah describes His favor on the believers of sending the Prophet to them; and it could be effective and more impressive only if it was supposed as if the Prophet himself were not present there. Ponder on all these verses and you will appreciate the relevance of what we have written.

The verse under discussion means as follows: O Prophet, remember when you did go forth early in the morning from your family in order that you should place the believers in their sectors for war; and Allah is Hearing (He had heard what was said there) and Knowing (He had known what was hidden in their hearts). The expression, "you did go forth early in the morning from your family", indicates that the battleground was nearer to the Prophet's house. It clearly shows that the two verses refer to the battle of Uhud, and in this way they are related to other verses, which would follow later, and which describe the battle of Uhud. All these verses fit the events, which had taken place in Uhud. This shows the weakness of the claim that these two verses were revealed about the battle of Badr, or, as someone else said, about the battle of the Confederates. And it is obvious (from the context). ([ )! and Allah is Hearing, Knowing: He is Hearing, He had heard what was spoken there; and Knowing, He knew what was hidden in their hearts. It indicates that some Muslims had spoken there some (undesirable) things, and there were other things, which they had not disclosed to others. Apparently the next clause, "When two parties from among you had determined that they should show cowardice", is related to these two attributes, (i.e., Allah heard and knew the conspiracy and intention of the two parties when they had determined to show cowardice). ([ )! When two parties from among you had determined that they should show cowardice, and Allah was the guardian of them both: "al-Hamm" what you determine in your heart; intention); al-fashl (weakness with cowardice). "and Allah was the guardian of them both": This is a circumstantial clause, related to the verb, "had determined ". It is meant as an admonition and reproof, as is the concluding sentence, "and in Allah should the believers trust". The connotation is as follows: The two parties had determined to show cowardice although Allah was their guardian²and a believer should not show weakness and cowardice when he believes that Allah is his guardian and when he is supposed to entrust all his affairs to Allah, and whoever trusts in Allah then He is sufficient for him.

This explanation shows the weakness of an interpretation offered by an exegete who says: This intention of the two parties was merely a thought, a notion, not a determination, because Allah has praised them and said that He was their guardian. Had it been a firm determination and intention, they should have been blamed rather than praised. But I do not understand what he means when he says that it was merely a thought, a notion. Does he mean merely a passing thought, a knowledge what cowardice means? If so, then everyone present there knew the meaning of cowardice, and it makes no sense to mention it in this context; nor is it called "determination" in Arabic language. Or, does he mean knowledge of cowardice coupled with some intention; a notion with determination to act upon it? (If so, then it was not merely a thought or a notion.) Also, the verse shows that the condition of the two parties was obvious to the others; had it been merely a passing thought without showing any effect on their behavior, others would not have known that they had determined to show weakness and cowardice. Moreover, the reminder that Allah was their guardian and that the believers must put their trust in Allah, dovetails with firm determination, not with a passing thought. And in any case, we have explained that in the present context, the clause, "and Allah was the guardian of them both", is not intended as a praise, it is a reproof, an admonition. Perhaps this misunderstanding has sprung up from a tradition attributed to Jabir ibn 'Abdillah al-Ansar; in which he says: "(This verse) was revealed about us; and I would not prefer if it were not revealed, because Allah has said, and Allah was the guardian of them both." The said exegete probably thought that Jabir had taken the clause as a praise. Even if the said tradition were accepted as correct, Jabir's theme is different from what that exegete has thought. Jabir means that Allah then accepted their belief and confirmed that they were believers, because He counted Himself as their guardian, and Allah is the guardian of those who believe, a d as for that this clause implies any praise, when it has been put in this contact of clear reprimand and censure. ([ )! And Allah did certainly assist you at Badr when you were weak; fear Allah then, that you may give thanks: The context obviously shows that this verse has been revealed here as a supporting evidence to emphasize the stricture, to complete the reproof. If so, then this too would be a circumstantial clause, like the preceding one, "and Allah was the

guardian of them both." Its connotation then would be as follows: You should not have determined to show cowardice while Allah had certainly assisted you at Badr when you were weak. On the other-hand, it might be an independent sentence revealed here to remind them of the wonderful assistance provided to them at Badr, when Allah had sent down the angels to help them when they were weak. Allah mentions here the help sent by Him to them at Badr, and compares their present condition with that; and it is known that whoever becomes strong, does so only with Allah's help and His assistance, because man, per se, has nothing except neediness and weakness. That is why Allah says: "when you were weak". It many be understood from the above that the statement, "when you were weak", does not disagree with such other divine words as, and to Allah belongs the might and to His Messenger and to the believers 163:8), because the believers' might springs from the might of Allah, as He says: Then surely all might is for Allah (4:139); and it proceeds from the divine help given to the believers, as Allah says: And certainly We sent before you messengers to their people, so they came to them with clear arguments, then We gave the punishment to those who were guilty; and helping the believers is ever incumbent upon Us (30:47). In this situation if we look at the condition of the believers, per se, they have got nothing except weakness. Apart from that, if we look at the believers' condition in Badr, we shall have to admit that they were certainly weaker in comparison to the strength, might and élan the polytheists had had. And there is no difficulty in ascribing a relative weakness to otherwise mighty ones. Allah has ascribed it to a people whom He has praised very extensively, when He says: ...then soon Allah will bring a people that He shall love them and they shall love Him, humble (adhillah, lit: weak) before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers... (5:54). ([ ): When you said to the believers: "Does it not suffice you that your Lord should assist you... "al-Imdad" is derived from al-madd and signifies giving al-madad (help) continuously. ([ ): "Yea! if you remain patient and are on your guard (against evil), and they come upon you in a headlong manner...":

"Bala" (Yea) is used for affirmation; al-fawr and al-fawran means to boil; they say, fara 'l-qidr (the cooking-pot boiled up); then the word was used to denote hurry and haste. Thus the phrase, min fawrihim hadha (- translated here as, in a headlong manner) means, ' at once ', 'immediately '. Obviously, the promise refers to the battle of Badr. It is a conditional promise, and the conditions are given in these clauses, "if you remain patient and are on your guard and they come upon you in a headlong manner". An exegete has written that it is a promise to send down the angels if they came upon the believers (not "immediately", i.e. not on the day of Badr, but) after the immediate time, i.e. after the battle of Badr. Another one has written that it is a promise to send down the angels in all the battles after the Badr, like Uhud, Hunayn and the Confederates. But the wording of the verse does not agree with it. As for Uhud, there is obviously nothing in the verses that might allude to coming of the angels on that day. So far as the battles of the Confederates and Hunayn are concerned, the Qur'an, of course, says (in other places) that the angels were sent on those days: It says about the battle of the Confederates: ...when there came down upon you hosts, so We sent against them a strong wind and hosts that you saw not . . (33:9). And it says about the day of Hunayn: « and on the day of Hunayn «and sent down hosts which you did not see. .. (9:25-26). Nevertheless, the wording of the verse under discussions, "Yea! if you remain patient and are on your guard (against evil) and they come upon you in a headlong manner", does not show any general promise. There is no conflict between this verse which speaks of three thousand angels being sent down at Badr, and the statement of the chapter of al-Anfal, which says: ...so He answered you: "I will assist you with a thousand of angels following (after others)" (8:9) . The word, "following", indicates that they would follow others² the "others" referring to the remaining two thousand who would complete the number promised in this verse. ([ )! And Allah did not make it but as good news for you, ...and help is only form Allah, the Mighty, the Wise: The pronoun "it" refers to the help. 'Ind (near) is an adverb of place, indicating presence. Initially it was used for nearness and presence in place; obviously it was reserved for physical things. Then its circle widened and it was used for nearness in time. Finally it was used for general, and even spiritual, nearness. The Qur'an

has used it in various connotations. The theme of the statement, "and help is only from Allah, the Mighty, the Wise", when seen in conjunction with the preceding words, "And Allah did not make it but as good news for you, and that your hearts might be at ease thereby", implies that the phrase, min 'indi 'llah (lit: from near Allah) refers to that "station" of Lordship which every affair and every order emanates from; and without which nothing can suffice, nor can any cause be independent of it. The meaning therefore is as follows: The helper angels have in fact no concern with the promised help; they are merely apparent causes ² they bring to you good news and satisfaction of heart. The reality of help is from Allah, nothing can suffice from Him; He is Allah, the final destination of every thing; the Mighty Who cannot be subdued, the Wise Who is not unaware of any thing. ([ )! That He may cut off a portion from among those who disbelieve, or abase them... and chastises whom He pleases; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful: "That" is related to the verb, "And Allah did certainly assist you at Badr". (He assisted you so that He may cut off...). 'Cutting off a portion' metaphorically means decreasing their number and debilitating them with slaying and imprisoning, as had happened at Badr where seventy idol worshippers were killed and seventy arrested. al-Kabt (to abase, to exasperate). The clause, "You have no concern in the affair", is a parenthetic one. It emphasizes the proposition that the authority of cutting off a portion from, or abasing them, is entirely in the hand of Allah; the Prophet has no concern in this matter ² that they should praise and acclaim him if they vanquished and defeated their enemy, and should blame him and remonstrate with him if things went against them; they should not be infirm and grieving, as they had done on the day of Uhud ² as Allah has narrated. The next clause, "whether He turns to them (mercifully) or chastises them", is in conjunction with the preceding, "That He may cut off ...", and the sentence is continuing. The next verse, "And whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is Allah's", is explicative clause describing why the matter of repentance and forgiveness rests exclusively in the hand of Allah. The meaning is as follows: The sound arrangement (at Badr) were made by Allah in order that He might cut off a portion of the polytheists through slaughter and imprisonment, or abase them and disappoint them of attaining what they had desired, or that He might turn to them mercifully or chastise them. As for the cutting off a portion of them and abasing

them, it is because all affairs are in His hands, you have no concern in it, (so they should neither praise nor blame you in this affair); and as for repentance and forgiveness, it is because Allah is the Owner of everything, He forgives whom He pleases and chastises whom He pleases. Even then, His forgiveness and mercy surpasses His chastisement and anger, because He is Forgiving, Merciful. We have treated the sentence, "And whatever is in the heaven and whatever is in the earth is Allah's", as explaining the reason for the preceding two clauses (whether He turns to them (mercifully) or chastises them), because the concluding clauses specifically explain this matter: "He forgives whom He pleases and chastises whom He pleases." The exegetes have described other ways to show the connection of the words, "That He may cut off a portion...". and the significance of conjunction in the words, "whether He turns to them or chastises them"; also, they have given other justifications for the words, "You have no concern in the affair", and for the sentence, "And whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is Allah's ". We have ignored them, as there was no use of commenting upon them, because they go against the apparent meanings and the context of the verses. Anyone wanting to see them should consult other bigger commentaries.  $  as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "The cause of the battle of Uhud was as follows: When the Quraysh returned from Badr to Mecca - and it had befallen to them from slaughter and imprisonment what had befallen, because seventy of them were killed and seventy imprisoned - Abu Sufyan said: 'O people of Quraysh! Do not let your women weep on your dead, because if tear is shed it would remove the grief and (lessen) the hatred of Muhammad.' And when they fought the Messenger of Allah on the day of Uhud, they allowed their women to weep and lament; and they proceeded from Mecca with three thousand horse and two thousand-foot and brought their women with them. "When the news reached the Messenger of Allah, he gathered his companions and exhorted them to fight. 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy ibn Salul said: 'O Messenger of Allah! Do not go out of Medina, so that we fight in its alleys; thus even a weak man, a woman, a slave-boy and a slave-girl would fight on the entrances of the lanes and on the roofs; because never did any people (who attacked us) defeat us when we

were within our fortresses and homes; and never did we go out to meet an enemy of ours but they vanquished us.' "Then Sa'd ibn Mu'adh and others from the tribe of Aws stood up and said: 'O Messenger of Allah! Never did anyone from the Arabs have any ambition against us while we were polytheist worshipping idols; how can they then be emboldened against us and you are among us? No: (we shall not rest) until we go out to them and fight them; whoever then among us will be killed shall be a martyr, and whoever among us is saved will have fought in the way of Allah.' "So, the Messenger of Allah accepted his advice and came out with a group of his companions, fixing their places at the battle-ground; as Allah says: And when you did go forth early in the morning from your family... But 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy ibn Salul and a group of Khazraj who followed his opinion, held back from lthe Prophet). "The Quraysh appeared at Uhud. The Messenger of Allah had positioned his companions²they were seven hundred men² and lodged 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr with fifty archers at the mouth of the mountain-pass; (the Prophet) was worried that the (enemy) might ambush from that side. Therefore, he said to 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr and his companions: 'If you see that we have defeated them until we have pushed them inside Mecca, you should not leave this place; and if you see that they have overcome us until they have pushed us into Medina, you should not leave (here), but stick to your posts. "Abu Sufyan hid Khalid ibn Walid with two hundred horse with this (very idea of) ambush, and said to him: 'When you see that we (two forces) have mixed together, you come over to them from this mountain-pass, so that you will be (attacking them from) behind them.' "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) mobilized his companions; and gave the standard to the Commander of the faithful ('Ali a.s.). The Helpers attacked the polytheists of the Quraysh, and (the enemy) suffered an ignominious defeat. The companions of the Messenger of Allah laid hold of the masses of the (Quraysh). Khalid ibn Walid came with his two hundred horse over 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr; but they confronted

them with arrows, and Khalid retreated. The group of 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr saw the companions of the Messenger of Allah looting the masses of the enemy; they said to 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr: 'Our companions are taking away (all) the booty; should we remain without any booty?' 'Abdullah told them: 'Fear Allah, because the Messenger of Allah had indeed directed us not to leave our post.' But they did not listen to him, and began slinking away one by one, until they left their station unattended, and 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr was left there with (only) twelve men. "The standard of the Quraysh was in the hand of Talhah ibn Abi Talhah al-'Abdi (from Banu 'Abdu 'd-Dar); 'Ali- (a.s.) killed him; then Abu Sa'id ibn Abi Talhah took the standard and 'Ali killed him. The standard fell down. Then Musafi' ibn Abi Talhah took it but 'Ali killed him too until he killed nine people from Banu 'Abdu 'd-Dar. Finally their standard was taken up by a black-slave of theirs, Sawfib by name. 'All reached him and cut off his right hand; he took the standard in his left hand; 'All struck at it and cut it off too, but he embraced it to his chest with his two amputated hands. Then he turned towards Abu Sufyfin and said: 'Have I absolved Banu 'Abdu 'd-Dar from blame? ' Then 'Ali struck at his head and killed him. The standard fell down; then Ghamrah bint 'Alqamah al-Kinaniyyah took and raised it. "Khalid ibn Walid came down to 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr ² and his companions had fled leaving him with a few persons. (Khalid) killed (all of) them at the mouth of the pass, and then attacked the Muslims from behind. Quraysh were fleeing away when they saw their standard raised again, and they gathered around it, and the companions of the Messenger of Allah suffered utter defeat. They started climbing the mountains helter-skelter. "When the Messenger of Allah saw the rout, he removed the helmet from his head and called (them, saying): 'Come to me; I am the Messenger of Allah; come to me; where are you running away from Allah and His Apostle?' Hind bint 'Utbah was in the middle of the (Quraysh's) army; whenever any Qurayshite fled, she offered him a kohl-stick and a kohl-container, telling him: 'You are but a woman, better use this kohl.' "Hamzah ibn 'Abdi 'I-Muttalib was attacking the enemy. When they saw him, they

fled; none stood against him. Hind had promised Wahshi that if he killed Muhammad or 'Ali or Hamzah, she would give him so-and-so much. (Wahshi was an Ethiopian slave of Jubayr ibn Mut'im). Wahshi said: 'As for Muhammad, I was unable (to harm) him; and as for 'Ali, I found him on his guard, always looking (all around him), so there was no hope of getting at him; therefore, I decided to ambush Hamzah. I saw him knocking the people down, destroying them. Then he passed by me, stepped on an undercut bank of a stream and fell down; I took my spear, shook it (taking aim) and threw it to him; it pierced his waist and came out between his legs (pubic region); then I went to him, ripped his stomach open, took out his liver and brought it to Hind; I said to her, "This is Hamzah's liver." She put it into her mouth trying to chew it. But Allah made it in her mouth like a knee-cap, so she took it out and threw it.' (The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Allah sent an angel who took it and returned it to its place.') Wahshi said: 'Then I came (back) to him, and I cut his genitals, removed his ears and amputated his hands and legs.' "There remained no one with the Messenger of Allah except Abu Dujanah Simfik ibn Kharashah and 'Ali. Whenever any group attacked the Messenger of Allah, 'Ali faced them and repulsed them; (it continued) until his sword was broken; then the Messenger of Allah gave him his sword, Dhu 'l-Fiqar. The Messenger of Allah retired to a side of Uhud and stood there; and 'Ali continued fighting them so (valiantly) that he had got seventy wounds on his head, face, body, belly and legs²as narrated by 'Ali ibn Ibrahim in his at-Tafsir. Thereupon, Jibrial said: 'Verily, this is indeed the support, O Muhammad!' Muhammad (s.a.w.) replied; 'Surely he is from me and I am from him.' Jibril said: 'And I am from you two.'" Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said: "The Messenger of Allah looked at Jibrial (sitting) on a golden chair between the heaven and the earth, and he was saying: 'There is no sword except Dhul 'l-Fiqar, and there is no hero except 'Ali. '" (Majma'u 'I-bayan) al-Qummi narrates: "There (also) remained with the Messenger of Allah Nasibah bint Ka'b al-Maziniyyah ² and she used to go with the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) in his battles to treat the wounded²and her son was with her. He wanted to retreat and go back (to Medina); but she attacked him and said: 'O my son, where are you fleeing from Allah and His Messenger?' Thus she made him come back. Then a man attacked and killed him. Thereupon, she took her son's sword

and attacked that man, and striking at his thigh she killed him. The Messenger of Allah said (to her): 'May Allah bless you, O Nasibah.' She was protecting the Messenger of Allah with her chest and breasts until she was extensively wounded. "Ibn Qami'ah attacked the Messenger of Allah; and he had said: 'Show me Muhammad. May I be damned if he gets away (from me).' Then he hit (the Messenger of Allah) on his shoulder and cried: l have killed Muhammad, by al-Lat and al-'Uzza.'" (at- Talsir) 
 ! There are some other traditions about the events of Uhud, some of them disagree with this one in some details. For example: a) This tradition gives the number of the polytheists as five thousand, while most of the traditions say three thousand. b) It says that it was 'Ali (a.s.) who killed all the nine standard-bearers of the enemy. Other traditions support it; and Ibnu 'l-Athir has narrated it in his history, al-kenil, from Abu Rafi'. But another group of narrations attributes slaying of some of them to some others. But meditation on these events supports what the present tradition says. c) It says that it was Hind who made a covenant with Wahshi regarding the murder of Hamzah. Some Sunni narrations say that' it was not Hind but Wahshi's master, Jubayr ibn Mut'im, who had entrusted this task to Wahshi, promising to emancipate him on his slaying Hamzah. But the fact that Wahshi had taken Hamzah's liver, not to Jubayr, but to Hind, supports the present tradition. d) This tradition says that all Muslims had fled away, except 'Ali and Abu Dujanah. It is agreed upon by almost all traditions. But some other narrations add some more names, and if you add all the names it would appear that there had remained about thirty persons with the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). But those traditions cancel each other. If you ponder on the events and the circumstantial evidence, the truth will become clear to you. You should not forget that these stories and traditions are a sort of witness for various tendencies ² for and against ² and have passed through many bright and dark strata before reaching us.

e) This tradition says that Allah sent an angel who returned Hamzah's liver to its place. This statement is not found in most of the traditions. A different version is found in some other narrations. For example, (the author of) ad-Durru'l-manthur, narrates from Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ahmad and Ibn al-Mundhir from Ibn Mas'ud, inter alia, in a hadith that he said: "Then Abu Sufyan said: 'There was some mutilation of the people (i.e.- of Muslim martyrs), although it was not done by the majority of us. Neither I ordered it nor forbade it; neither I liked it nor disliked it; neither it pleased me nor displeased me.'" (Ibn Mas'ud) said: "Then they looked, and there was Hamzah with his belly ripped open. Hind took his liver and chewed it, but she could not eat it. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) asked: 'Did she eat any part of it?' They said: 'No.' (The Messenger of Allah) said: 'Allah could not allow any part of Hamzah to enter the Fire.'" Traditions, both ours and others', say that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was seriously wounded that day; there was skull fracture in his forehead, and his incisors were broken and middle incisor damaged... Ibn Ishaq, 'Abd ibn Hamid, Ibn Jarir and Ibn al-Mundhir narrate from Ibn Shahab, Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Hayyan, 'Asim ibn 'Amr ibn Qatadah and al-Hasin ibn 'Abdi 'r-Rahman ibn 'Amr ibn Sa'd ibn Mu'adh and others ² all have narrated some of the events of the battle of Uhud: They have said: "When Quraysh suffered on the day of Badr, and the scattered remnants of their army reached Mecca, and Abu Sufyan too returned with his trade - caravan, then 'Abdullah ibn Abi Rabi 'ah, 'Ikrimah ibn Abi Jahl and Safwan ibn Umayyah together with some other Qurayshites (whose fathers, sons and/or brothers were killed in Badr), went to him. They talked with Abu Sufyan and all those who had any trade-goods in that caravan and suggested (as follows): 'O people of Quraysh, surely Muhammad has aggrieved you and killed your best personalities. Therefore, help us with this wealth to fight against him, in order that we may take revenge of our casualties from him.' They did so. Then the Quraysh resolved to fight the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and came out with the flower of their army. They also took their women with them for their protection and also in order that they would not flee (from the battle-ground). Abu Sufyan came out at the head of the army. They proceeded until they came down at 'Aynayn²a mountain in the depth of as-Sanjah on a canal in

the valley adjoining Medina. "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and the Muslims heard about the polytheists that they had come down where they did, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'I have seen (in dream) a cow slaughtered, and saw the tip of my sword jagged, and saw that I had put my hand in an invulnerable coat of mail, and I interpreted it (to mean) Medina. Therefore, if you think (it advisable), you should stay inside Medina and leave them where they have come down; then if they stayed (there) they would be staying in the worst place, and if they entered (our City) we should fight them in it.' "The Quraysh occupied their position at Uhud on Wednesday, and stayed there on Thursday and Friday. The Messenger of Allah proceeded after praying the Fridayprayer and reached the mountain-pass of the Uhud. The two (forces) met on Saturday, 15th Shawwal, the third year (of hijrah). " 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy agreed with the opinion of the Messenger of Allah that they should not go out to meet the enemy; and the Messenger of Allah disliked going out of Medina. But some Muslims ² some from among those whom Allah later honoured with martyrdom in Uhud, and some others who had missed the battle of Badr and were not present on that occasion ² said: 'O Messenger of Allah, come out with us against our enemies, so that they should not think that we were afraid of them or felt weaker.' 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy said: 'O Messenger of Allah, stay inside Medina and do not go out to meet them. Because, by God, we never went out of it to meet an enemy of us but he bested us, and never did an enemy enter Medina to fight us but we vanquished them. Therefore, let them be, O Messenger of Allah; then if they stayed they would stay with difficulty; and if they entered (the City) even the women, children and men would fight them with stones from above (the roofs); and if they returned, they would return disappointed as they had come.' "But the people were still urging the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) (to proceed out of Medina) ² these were the people who wanted to fight against the enemy. (This continued) until the Messenger of Allah entered (his house) and wore his cuirasses ² and it was on Friday after the prayer ² then he came out to (the companions).

In the meantime the people regretted (their persistence) and said (to the Prophet): ' We have compelled the Messenger of Allah and it was not good of us. Therefore you may sit back if you wish.' The Messenger of Allah said: ' It is not proper for a prophet ² once he has put on his cuirasses ² to remove them without waging the war.' "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) came out with one thousand of his companions. When they were proceeding between Medina and Uhud, 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy went back with one-third of the people, (leaving the Prophet). The Messenger of Allah proceeded on. When he was passing through the story field of Banu Harithah, a horse whisked its tail which caught the sword-tip (of the rider) and pulled it out. The Messenger of Allah (who liked good omens but did not believe in bad ones) said to the owner of the sword:: 'Gather your sword, because I find that swords will surely be drawn today.' The Messenger of Allah went on until he came down at the mountain-pass of the Uhud from the run of the valley to the mountain. He kept Uhud at his back, and took position for the battle ² and there were seven hundred persons with him. "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) gave the command of the archers ² and they were fifty in number²to 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr, and said to him: 'Protect us from the mountain (side) by arrow, so that they do not come to us from our behind; you stay at your place, no matter the battle goes against us or for us; (because) we shall be attached from your side.' The Messenger of Allah was wearing two coats of mail." (ad-Durru 'I-manthur) Ibn Jarir narrates from as-Suddi in a hadith, enter alia: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) proceeded to Uhud with one thousand men. He had promised them victory if they would remain patient. Then 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy returned back with three hundred persons. Abu Jabir as-Salami persued them to call them back; but they thwarted his efforts and said to him: 'We do not know how to fight; and if you listen to us you too should come back (to Medina) with us.'" (ibid.) as-Suddi said about the words: When two parties from among you had determined that they should show cowardice: "They were Banu Salmah and Banu Harithah who wanted to return when 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy went back, but Allah protected

them; and the Messenger of Allah remained with seven hundred men." (ibid.) 
 ! These were two clans from among the Helpers: Banu Salmah from the Khazraj and Banu Harithah from the Aws. Ibn Abi Ishaq, as-Suddi, al-Waqidi, Ibn Jarir and others have narrated: "The polytheists reached Uhud on Wednesday in Shawwal, 3 A.H., and the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) proceeded to meet them on Friday; and the battle took place on Saturday, 15th Shawwal. The incisors of the Messenger of Allah were broken and his face was wounded. Then the Emigrants and the Helpers returned after fleeing away; and seventy of the Muslims were martyred. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) stood firm accompanied by those who had remained with him until he removed (the enemies). The polytheists had mutilated a group (of martyrs), but Hamzah was mutilated worst of all." (Majma 'u 'l-bayan) 
 ! There is a great number of traditions about the events of Uhud. We have narrated, and shall narrate later, only a few of them, on which depends understanding of the verses revealed on this subject. These verses throw light on its various aspects: Some deal with the cowardice of those who retreated or disagreed with each other or wanted to return to Medina cowardly. Others admonish and censure those who had fled leaving the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) in the thick of the battle - although Allah had forbidden them to do so. Still others praise those who were martyred before the others had fled, and those who bravely stood firm and did not leave the Prophet, and continued to fight till their last breath. Lastly, there are verses extolling those who steadfastly continued to fight till the end of the battle but were not martyred.

å
 
    

3 4 ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΗ˴˷΍˴ϭ Δ˱ ϔ˴ ϋ ˴ Ύ˴πϣ˵˷ Ύ˱ϓΎ˴ό˸ο΃˴ Ύ˴Αή˶˷ ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϡ˵ϛ˸΄Η˴ ϻ ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˴Ϭϳ˵˷΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ΤϠ˶˸ϔΗ˵ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϡ˴˷ό˴ ϟ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍(130} ˸ΕΪ˴˷ ϋ ˶ ΃˵ ϲ˶Θϟ˴˷΍ έ˴ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΗ˴˷΍˴ϭ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϓ˶ Ύ˴Ϝ˸Ϡϟ˶{131} ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤΣ ˴ ˸ήΗ˵ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϡ˴˷ό˴ ϟ˴ ϝ ˴ Ϯ˵γή˴˷ ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵όϴ˶σ΃˴ϭ˴ {132} Δ˳ Ϩ˴˷Ο ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˶˷έ˴˷ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Γ˳ ή˴ ϔ˶ ˸ϐϣ˴ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϋέ˶ Ύ˴γϭ˴ ΃˵ ν ˵ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍˴ϭ Ε ˵ ΍˴ϭΎ˴Ϥδ ˴˷ ϟ΍ Ύ˴Ϭο ˵ ˸ήϋ ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϘΘ˴˷Ϥ˵ ˸Ϡϟ˶ ˸ΕΪ˴˷ ϋ ˶ {133} φ ˴ ˸ϴϐ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥχ ˶ Ύ˴Ϝ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ ˯΍˷ή˴ π ˴˷ ϟ΍˴ϭ ˯΍˷ή˴ δ ˴˷ ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϙϔ˶ Ϩ˵ϳ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩδ ˶ ˸ΤϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ΐ ˵˷ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˶ϋ ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϓΎ˴ό˸ϟ΍˴ϭ{134} Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϛ˴ Ϋ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ δ ˴ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴χ ˴ ˸ϭ΃˴ Δ˱ θ ˴Σ ˶ Ύ˴ϓ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϡό˴ ϓ˴ ΍˴Ϋ·˶ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍˴ϭ ϓ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴˸όϳ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϡό˴ ϓ˴ Ύ˴ϣ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ˸΍ϭ˷ή˵ μ ˶ ϳ˵ ˸Ϣϟ˴ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ώ ˴ Ϯ˵ϧά˵˷ ϟ΍ ή˵ ϔ˶ ˸ϐϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸Ϣ˶ϬΑ˶ Ϯ˵ϧά˵ ϟ˶ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ˸ϐΘ˴ ˸γΎ {135} Ϣ˵ϫ΅˵ ΍˴ΰΟ ˴ Ϛ ˴ Ό˶ ϟ˴˸ϭ΃˵ ΃˴ Ϣ˴ ˸όϧ˶ ϭ˴ Ύ˴Ϭϴ˶ϓ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶Ϊϟ˶Ύ˴Χ έ˵ Ύ˴Ϭ˸ϧϷ ˴ ΍ Ύ˴ϬΘ˶ ˸ΤΗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ϱ˶ή˸ΠΗ˴ ˲ΕΎ˷Ϩ˴ Ο ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ Α˶˷έ˴˷ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ ˲Γή˴ ϔ˶ ˸ϐϣ˴˷ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϡϣ˶ Ύ˴ό˸ϟ΍ ή˵ ˸Ο{136} ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϡ˶˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ˸ΖϠ˴Χ ˴ ˸Ϊϗ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Αά˶˷ Ϝ˴ Ϥ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Δ˵ Β˴ ϗ˶ Ύ˴ϋ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ ϒ ˴ ˸ϴϛ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήψ ˵ ϧΎ˴ϓ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϴ˶δϓ˴ ˲ϦϨ˴ γ ˵ {137} Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϘΘ˴˷Ϥ˵ ˸Ϡϟ˶˷ ˲Δψ ˴ϋ ˶ ˸Ϯϣ˴ ϭ˴ ϯ˱Ϊϫ˵ ϭ˴ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ Ϡ˷ϟ˶ ˲ϥΎ˴ϴΑ˴ ΍˴άϫ˴ {138} {130} O you who believe! do not devour usury, making it double and redouble, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, that you may be successful. {131} And guard yourselves against the fire which has been prepared for the unbelievers. {132} And obey Allah and the Messenger, that you may be shown mercy. {133} And hasten to forgiveness from your Lord; and a Garden, the extensiveness of which is (as) the heavens and the earth, it is prepared for those who guard (against evil). {134} Those who spend (benevolently) in ease as well as in straitness, and those who restrain (their) anger and pardon men; and Allah loves the doers of good (to others). {135} And those who when they commit an indecency or do injustice to their souls remember Allah and ask forgiveness for their faults-- and who forgives the faults but Allah, and (who) do not knowingly persist in what they have done. {136} (As for) these-- their reward is forgiveness from their Lord, and gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them, and excellent is the reward of the laborers. {137} Indeed there have been examples before you; therefore travel in the earth and see what was the end of the rejecters. {138} This is a clear statement for men, and a guidance and an admonition to those who guard (against evil). å
  The verses call to the good and restrain from the vice and evil. Yet they are not without some connection with the preceding and following verses dealing with the battle of Uhud. They describe some undesirable conditions and reprehensible traits which were found in the believers at that time and which Allah was not pleased with. It were such things which had made them vulnerable to weakness and infirmity and led them to disobedience of Allah and His Messenger. The verses thus focus on the events of Uhud from another angle. Also, the verses guide the believers as to how they can protect themselves from

these devastating entanglements and ruinous obstacles; they invite them to piety, fear of Allah and trust in Him and exhort them to be firm in obedience of the Allah's Messenger. These nine verses therefore contain exhortation and warning: they awaken in the believers longing to hasten towards good, that is, spending in the way of Allah in ease as well as in straitness, restraining their anger and forgiving the people's faults; all is joined together under the heading of spreading good in the society, patience in face of grievance and injury, and refraining from repaying evil with evil. It is the only way of preserving the society and making it strong and energetic. Refraining from interest is a very important concomitant of this spending benevolently and doing good to others. That is why the verses begin with it; it paves the way for exhortation to good-doing and spending. We have already explained - under the verses of spending and interest in the chapter of The Cow - that spending in all its aspects is the cornerstone of society; it is the virtue that vitalizes the human society with the spirit of unity; it channels its scattered resources to achieve happiness and felicity in this life, and strengthens it to ward off every pernicious perversion. Interest is diametrically opposed to benevolent spending in this respect. Allah exhorts them to these virtues. Then He encourages them to return to their Lord again and again even if they have committed sins and errors; they should not lose hope of His mercy even if they have done something which is not liked by Him; they must repent and seek pardon from Him repeatedly without indolence or negligence. By doing good to others and returning to Allah in time and again, they would proceed on the straight path of happy life; they will never go astray nor will they stop at any dangerous point. This Qur'anic description is the best way for guiding man to perfect himself when he finds some defects in his life; the finest means of curing spiritual ailments which sometimes creep into otherwise good souls and threaten man with downfall and ruin.   
 ,!7 ÿ 6  
$,
0î 
 The Qur'an uses a special method or its divine teachings. During the whole period of twenty-three years when it was revealed, it demonstrated all the basic principles through practical primary elements. When the audience put it in practice, the resulting was used as the primary element for teaching the next higher principle. At this stage, if there were any defects in the result of the first practical test, they were

corrected and the good components were reused; the bad elements were condemned and the good and correct ones praised and their doer was promised success and accorded appreciation. The Mighty Book of God is a Book of knowledge and practice - it is not a book of theories and hypothesis, nor a mysterious tome to be accepted blindly. This Divine Book is a like a teacher. The teacher puts before his students academic principles without giving them too much detail in the beginning; then he tells them to act upon it [doing practical tests, or solving mathematical problems]; then he checks what they have done and analyses its correct and wrong procedures; he explains to them where they have gone wrong, where they have strayed from the right path, admonishing them [to be careful in the future] and threatening [to punish them if the same mistake happened again]; he praises where they have used right procedure and arrived at correct result; he promises them of reward and appreciates their diligence. Then he tells them to do it again. he goes on training them until they reach the point of perfection and their efforts are always crowned with success. What we have just said, is among the Qur'anic realities which may be seen by anyone who meditates on the initial stages of Qur'anic teachings. Take the subject of jihad, for example. First it describes the basic principals of jihad: Fighting is enjoined on you... [2:216]. It enjoins the believers to fight in the way of Allah; then it comments on the events of Badr and throws light on its various aspects giving them further guidance;t hen it takes up the story of Uhud, then of another battle, and so on. Likewise, Allah tells the stories of previous prophets and their peoples, and after showing the truth behind them, turns them into lessons to be learnt, and code of life to be followed. There are some verses within these sets which are based on the same principle. For example: "therefore travel in the earth and see what was the end of the rejecters" [3:137]; "And how many a prophet has fought with whom were myriads of godly men..." [3:146]. ([ )! O you who believe! do not devour interest... that you may be shown mercy: We have explained how "devouring" is used for "taking ". The phrase, "making it double and redouble", points to overriding characteristic of interests; interest, per se, multiplies and increases the lender's wealth many-fold by depleting debtor's money adding it to the creditor's capital. The sentence, "And guard yourselves against the fire, which has been prepared for

the unbelievers", indicates that the interest-taker is unbeliever, as has been explained under the verses of interest in the chapter of The Cow: And Allah does not love any ungrateful sinner (2:276). ([ )! And hasten to forgiveness from your Lord, and a Garden... "al-Musara 'ah" (to rush, to make haste); it is commendable in good deeds and reprehensible in bad ones. The Qur'an, in most of the places, joins forgiveness with the Garden. It is because the Garden is a place of purity and cleanliness; the impurities of sins and filth of vices cannot enter it, nor can a person tarnished by them except after forgiveness and removal of that filth. The forgiveness and the Garden described in this verse run parallel to what is mentioned in the following two verses. The forgiveness corresponds with the verse, "And those who when they commit an indecency or do injustice to their souls..."; and the Garden stands face to face with the verse, "Those who spend (benevolently) in ease as well as in straitness..." The clause, "and a Garden, the extensiveness of which is (as) the heavens and the earth ". "al-Ard" (lit: width) denotes here spaciousness, extensiveness; it is a common usage; the expression metaphorically implies that it is spacious to the utmost, or to an extent that human imagination cannot reach it. Also, it has another meaning, which we shall explain under the "Traditions ". The clause, "it is prepared for the pious ones", paves the way for description of the characteristics of the pious ones which is given in the coming verses. The main idea is to describe those characteristics of the believers which are relevant to the present situation, i.e., after the battle of Uhud (when they had displayed, and suffered from, weakness and disobedience), because they were expected to participate in other similar battles and undergo similar situations, where they would be in great need of unity, harmony and solidarity. ([ )! Those who spend (benevolently) in ease as well as in straitness, and those who restrain (their) anger, and forgive men; and Allah loves the doers of good (to others): as-Sarra' and addarra (that which pleases man or displeases him) i.e., ease and difficulty. al-Kazm literally means to tie the mouth of water-skin after filling it;

then it was metaphorically extended to a man filled with anger or sorrow who restrains or suppresses his emotions. al-Ghayz (translated here as "anger") denotes stirring of feeling of revenge, when one faces many unpleasant things; it is different from al-ghadab (generally translated as "wrath") which refers to the intention of revenge or punishment. That is why we say "Allah afflicted them with His wrath", but do not say, "Allah was angry with them". The sentence, "and Allah loves the doers of good (to others)", indicates that the preceding characteristics define "the doers of good", i.e., to other people. As for doing good in relation to Allah is concerned, it is defined in the following verse: ...and as good news for the doers of good. Surely those who say, Our Lord is Allah, then they continue on the right way, they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve. These are the dwellers of the Garden, abiding therein: a reward for what they did (46:12-14). The doing of good, mentioned in the verse under discussion, is delineated by the preceding words, "Those who spend (benevolently) in ease as well as in straitness... "; these good characteristics have no value in the eyes of Allah if they were not done "for Him", as has been described in many preceding verses, e.g.: The likeness of what they spend in this life of the world is as the likeness of wind... (3:117). The above reality may also be inferred from ch. 29, vr. 69: And (as for) those who strive hard for Us, We will most certainly guide them onto Our way; and Allah is most surely with the doers of good. One may be said to be striving hard only if one does something against one's desires and natural instincts. It may happen only when a man firmly believes in matters, which demand such sacrifice and steadfastness in face of natural desires and longings. It requires firm faith and true belief they must say, Our Lord is Allah, and then continue steadfastly on it and demands relevant action, i.e., they must strengthen this belief by striving in sincere worship of Allah, spending benevolently in His way and living in the society with good conduct and irreproachable behavior. It appears from it that doing good, means performing all actions in proper way by remaining firm and steadfast in the divine faith, in the belief in Allah. ([ )! And those who when they commit an indecency... and excellent is the reward of those who act (righteously): "al Fahishah" (indecent, shameful action) it is generally used for fornication. As the word, az-zulm (injustice) has been used parallel to indecency, it should denote

all other big or small sins. Alternatively, if "indecency" is taken to mean big sins, then "injustice" would mean small sins only. The clause, "remember Allah and ask forgiveness for their faults", indicates that the plea for forgiveness should emanate from remembrance of Allah - it should not be just a verbal repetition, based on habit. The sentence, "and who forgives the faults but Allah?", encourages man to return to Allah, and reminds him to take refuge, and seek shelter, in Him. The proviso, "and (who) do not knowingly persist in what they have done", is an essential part of asking forgiveness from Allah. Persistence in sins distorts the psyche to such an extent that remembrance of Allah does not bring any benefit to it; such behavior shows that the person concerned gives no importance to divine command, dishonors the sanctity of religion and behaves arrogantly against Allah; in such a situation neither servitude can survive nor remembrance can be of any use. For the same reason was added another proviso, i.e., "knowingly". This phrase indicates that "injustice" (in the preceding clause) includes small sins too; persistence in sins - whether big or small - shows disregard to the divine command, indifference towards His authority. The phrase, "what they have done", therefore covers big as well as small sins, and refers to the indecency and injustice mentioned in the beginning of the verse: but small sin is not included in indecency, therefore it is injustice to one's soul indeed. Their great reward is described in the next verse, "(As for) these their reward is forgiveness from their Lord, and gardens..." It is the same things which the believers are exhorted to hasten to: "And hasten to forgiveness from your Lord and a Garden...." Looking at this beginning and end, it may be seen clearly that they have been enjoined to hasten to spending benevolently, restraining their anger, forgiving the people and asking forgiveness for their faults. ([ )! Indeed there have been examples before you; therefore travel in the earth and see what was the end of the rejecters: "as-Sunan" is plural of as-sunnah (the way or tradition followed by the society). The believers have been told to travel in the earth, in order that they could learn lessons from archeological remains of ancient people and bygone generations. They should ponder about those pharaohs and nimrods, those kings and emperors where did all of them go to? Their towering palaces, their accumulated treasures, their gilded thrones and their fully-equipped armies - nothing could avail them in the least; now they are just a few names to serve as examples and lesson for those who meditate, and as tourist attraction for the carefree and oblivious persons. As for protecting their monuments, preserving their statues and endeavoring to find

out how great they were in their times and how magnificent their splendor was in that era, it is a matter which the Qur'an does not care about. It is nothing but idolatry in a new disguise. We shall explain this topic, God willing, in a separate discourse in which we shall analyze the meaning of idolatry. ([ )! This is a clear statement... for the pious ones: The classification looks at the degrees of its effect. It is just a clear statement, a faithfully transmitted message for some people, while for others it is an admonition and guidance.  $  The Prophet was asked about the words, a Garden, the extensiveness of which is (as) the heavens and the earth: "If the extensiveness of the Garden is as the heavens and the earth. then where will the Fire be?" He (s.a.w.) said: "Glory be to Allah! When the day comes, where does the night go?" (Majma'u 'I-bayan) 
 : as-Suyuti has narrated in, ad-Durru 'I-manthur, from at-Tanukhi that (the Byzantine Emperor) Heraclius had written to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) a letter in which, inter alia, he had asked about this verse, and the Prophet had replied it as described above. He has also narrated through another chain from Abu Hurayrah that someone asked the Prophet this question and he replied as above. The above reply has been interpreted as follows: The Fire is in the Knowledge of Allah as night remains in the Knowledge of Allah when day comes. å2

Ô)! If it means that the Fire is not away from the Divine Knowledge, then it does not solve the problem, because the question was about the place of the Fire, not about the Knowledge of Allah. If, on the other hand, it means that possibly there could be another place for the Fire beyond the heavens and the earth, then it might be tenable, but then the comparison of the Garden and the Fire with day and night would be out of place - because the night does not go out of the heavens and the earth when the day comes. Obviously this interpretation does not offer an acceptable explanation of the hadith.

I believe that the tradition points to another theme: The hereafter (with all its felicity and infelicity) is similar to this world with all its happiness and sorrow. Likewise, the man in the hereafter will be the same man who was in this world - as appears from the Qur'an and traditions. Nevertheless, the system governing the hereafter will be different from the ones permeating this world. The hereafter is the place of eternity and infinity, while this world is transitory and evanescent. That is why man would eat and drink, marry and enjoy all comforts of the Garden but would not undergo the consequences attendant to those enjoyments in this world. In the same way, man would burn in the fire of the Hell and suffer pain and agony in food and drink, abode and companions, yet would not be affected by it in the way he would have been in this life. In the hereafter, he would live eternal life without being affected by middle or old age or becoming senile or decrepit. It is because these effects and concomitants are products of the system of this world; they are not essential parts of every system - they would not be found in the next world's system. It is this world, not the hereafter, which is the place of conflict and struggle, contrast and contradiction. Now ponder on our own observation of the events. When we look at current happenings, we cannot see the previous events; if we see the night, then the day is absent from us. But nothing is absent from Allah; past, present and future - all is present before Allah, and there is no contrast or contradiction between them on that level. It means that the day and the night and their concomitant events contradict and cancel each other when they are governed by material system and movement. But when the same day and night and their concomitants are put under another system, there remains no contrast and contradiction among them. It may be inferred from the words of Allah: Have you not considered (the work of) your Lord, how He extends the shade? And if He had pleased He would certainly have made it stationary; then We have made the sun an indication of it; Then We take it to Ourselves, taking little by little (25:45-46). If it is possible in contradictory things like day and night, it may equally be possible for the heavens and the earth to house the Garden equal in size to themselves and then accommodate another thing like the Hell of the same size; it will be possible, not under this worldly system, but according to the system prevailing in the hereafter. There may be found similar expressions in traditions.

For example: "Verily grave is an orchard from the orchards of the Garden, or a pit from the pits of the Fire." Or, "The grave of a believer is widened for him to the extent of his sight." In the same way should be explained these words of the Prophet. Otherwise, if it is taken to mean that Allah is not oblivious of the night when He knows the day, it would not dovetail with the question. Likewise, if it were to mean that the night exists somewhere else when the day comes, it would invite another objection: The night cannot co-exist with the day at any place; and if we look at its reality then the night is a conic shade of the earth resulting from the sunlight - the light and shade rotating around the earth. Thus the day and the night are continuously revolving around the earth without one merging into, or canceling, the other. There are other traditions of similar style. For example, it has been narrated about the Qur'anic words: That Allah may separate the impure from the pure... (8:37): "When the sun sets, where does this light, spread on the earth, go?" We shall explain it later on. It has been narrated in, ad-Durru'l-manthur, about the words: and those who restrain (their) anger and forgive men: al-Bayhaqi has narrated from 'Ali ibn alHusayn (a.s.) that a slave girl was pouring water on him in preparation for prayer. The pitcher fell from her hand on his face contusing it. He raised his head (looking) at her. She said: "Verily Allah says: 'and those who restrain (their) anger.'" He said: "I have restrained my anger. " She recited: "and forgive men." He said: "Allah has forgiven you." She recited: "and Allah loves doers of good (to others)." He said: "Go, you are free." 
 ! It is narrated also from the Shi'i chains. The tradition obviously shows that the Imam (a.s.) interprets "good-doing" as something more than the preceding two virtues, and in fact it is so in its general terms, although the above virtues are concomitants of good-doing, and possibly they may be used for defining the "good-doing". There are very numerous traditions on good manners and virtuous conduct, i.e., spending benevolently, restraining anger and forgiving faults, narrated from the

Prophet and the Imams of the Ahlulbayt (a.s.); we shall quote them later in a more appropriate place. It is narrated from 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn Ghanm ad-Dawsi that the verse, And those who when they commit an indecency . . ., was revealed about Bahlul, the gravedigger. He used to dig graves (to steal shrouds). Once he dug the grave of a girl from the Ansar, took out her body and removed her shroud. She was beautiful and of fair complexion; so the Satan tempted him and he committed fornication with her. Then he felt remorse and came to the Prophet, but he turned him out. Then the people dissociated from him; and he too secluded himself from others, spending his time in worship and repentance in some mountains of Medina - until Allah accepted his repentance and revealed this verse about him. (al-Majalis, as.-Saduq) 
 ! It is a detailed tradition, which we have abridged here. If it is a correct hadith, and then it would be a separate cause for the verse's revelation apart from the general reason, which covers all the verses of the story of Uhud. al-Baqir (a.s.) said concerning the words, and (who) do not knowingly persist in what they have done: "Persistence is that a sinner commits a sin and does not ask Allah for forgiveness nor does he make up his mind to repent - so that is persistence." (at- Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) Ahmad has narrated from the Prophet that he said: "Iblis said: 'O Lord, by Thy Honor! I shall not cease leading children of Adam astray as long as their souls shall remain within their bodies.' Allah then said: 'By My Honor! I shall go on forgiving them as long as they ask Me for forgiveness.'" (ad-Durru 'I-manthur) as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "There is no small (sin) with persistence, and there is no big (sin) after seeking (Allah's) forgiveness." (al-Kafi) The same Imam (a.s.) said, inter alia, in a hadith: "... and there is in the Book of Allah a deliverance from ruin, an insight from blindness, and a healing for what is in the breasts; (found) in what Allah has enjoined you to seek (His) forgiveness and to repent. Allah says: 'And those who when they commit an indecency or do injustice to their souls remember Allah and ask forgiveness for their faults - and

who forgives the faults but Allah? - and (who) do not knowingly persist in what they have done.' And He says: 'And whoever does evil or acts unjustly to his soul, then asks forgiveness of Allah, he shall find Allah Forgiving, Merciful' (4:110). So this is what Allah has enjoined about asking (His) forgiveness, and has put with it the condition of repentance and refraining from what Allah has forbidden. (It is) because He says: 'To Him do ascend the good words and the good deed lifts them up' (35:10). This verse implies that the plea of forgiveness is not lifted up to Allah except by good deed and repentance." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! The Imam (a.s.) has inferred abstinence from sin and not repeating it after repentance from the word, do not knowingly persist; likewise the fact, that repentance and plea of forgiveness require good deed afterwards, has been inferred from the generality of "good words" in the verse, To Him do ascend the good words. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "When the verse, And those who when they commit an indecency..., was revealed, Iblis ascended a mountain in Mecca, Thawr by name, and screamed very loudly to his afreets. They all gathered near him and said: 'O our leader, why have you called us?' He said: 'This verse has been revealed; now who would deal with it?' An afreet from among the satans stood up and said: 'I will see to it with such and such means.' (The Iblis) said: 'You cannot do it.' Then another (afreet) stood up and said something similar (to the first one) and (Iblis) said: 'You are not for it.' Then the Whispering Slinking (satan) said: 'I shall deal with it. (Iblis) said: 'By what means?' He said: 'I shall promise them and tempt them until they would commit a sin; and when they have committed it, I would make them oblivious of asking for forgiveness.' (Iblis) said: 'You are (fit) for it.' Then he entrusted this task to him up to the Day of Resurrection." (al-Majalis, as-Saduq) 
 ! This tradition has also been narrated through Sunni chains. å
 
    

' *4

Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸Άϣ˵˷ Ϣ˵ΘϨ˵ϛ ϥ˶· ϥ ˴ ˸ϮϠ˴˸ϋϷ ˴ ΍ Ϣ˵ Θ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ ΍Ϯ˵ϧΰ˴ ˸ΤΗ˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ΍Ϯ˵ϨϬ˶ Η˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ {139} Ϛ ˴ ˸ϠΗ˶ ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˵˸Μϣ˶˷ ˲Ρ˸ήϗ˴ ϡ˴ ˸ϮϘ˴ ˸ϟ΍ β ˴˷ ϣ˴ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϓ˴ ˲Ρ˸ήϗ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ˸δδ ˴ ˸Ϥϳ˴ ϥ˶· Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˴ Ϡ˴˸όϴ˴ ϟ˶ϭ˴ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ˸ϴΑ˴ Ύ˴Ϭϟ˵ϭ˶ ΍˴Ϊϧ˵ ˵ϡΎ˷ϳ˴ Ϸ ˴΍ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˶Ύ˷ψ ˴ ϟ΍ ΐ ˵˷ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ ϻ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˯΍˴ΪϬ˴ η ˵ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϩ˶ϣ ά˴ Ψ ˶ Θ˴˷ϳ˴ ϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍{140} κ ˴ Τ ˶˷ ˴Ϥϴ˵ ϟ˶ϭ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϓ˶ Ύ˴Ϝ˸ϟ΍ ϖ ˴Τ ˴ ˸Ϥϳ˴ ϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍{141} Ϩ˶ϣ ˸΍ϭ˵Ϊϫ˴ Ύ˴Ο Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˶ Ϡ˴˸όϳ˴ Ύ˷Ϥ˴ ˴ϟϭ˴ Δ˴ Ϩ˴˷Π ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϠΧ ˵ ˸ΪΗ˴ ϥ˴΃ ˸ϢΘ˵ ˸Βδ ˶Σ ˴ ˸ϡ΃˴ Ϣ˴ Ϡ˴˸όϳ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήΑ˶ Ύ˷μ ˴ ϟ΍{142} ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήψ ˵ Ϩ˴Η ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ ϩ˵ Ϯ˵ϤΘ˵ ˸ϳ΃˴˴έ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϓ˴ ϩ˵ ˸ϮϘ˴ ˸ϠΗ˴ ϥ˴΃ Ϟ ˶ ˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ε ˴ ˸ϮϤ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ ˸ϮϨ˴˷Ϥ˴ Η˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϟ˴ϭ˴ {143} ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ ˲ΪϤ˴˷ Τ ˴ ϣ˵ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ϋ ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ˸ΒϠ˴Ϙ˴ ϧ΍ Ϟ ˴ Θ˶ ϗ˵ ˸ϭ΃˴ Ε ˴ Ύ˷ϣ˴ ϥ˶Έϓ˴ ΃˴ Ϟ ˵γ ˵ ή˵˷ ϟ΍ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˶˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ˸ΖϠ˴Χ ˴ ˸Ϊϗ˴ ˲ϝϮ˵γέ˴ Ύ˱Ό˸ϴη ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ή˴˷ π ˵ ϳ˴ Ϧ˴Ϡϓ˴ Ϫ˶ ˸ϴΒ˴ Ϙ˶ ϋ ˴ ϰ ˴ Ϡ˴ϋ ˴ ˸ΐϠ˶Ϙ˴ Ϩ˴ϳ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸Ϣ˵ϜΑ˶ Ύ˴Ϙ˸ϋ΃˴ ϰ˴Ϡ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϛ˶ Ύ˷θ ˴ ϟ΍ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϱ˶ΰ˸Πϴ˴ γ ˴ ϭ˴ {144} Ϫ˶ Η˶ ˸Άϧ˵ Ύ˴ϴ˸ϧΪ˵˷ ϟ΍ Ώ ˴ ΍˴ϮΛ˴ ˸Ωή˶ ϳ˵ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ ϼ ˱ Ο ˴˷ Ά˴ ϣ˵˷ Ύ˱ΑΎ˴Θϛ˶ Ϫ˷˴Ϡϟ΍ ϥ ˶ ˸ΫΈ˶Α˶ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ε ˴ Ϯ˵ϤΗ˴ ˸ϥ΃˴ β ˳ ˸ϔϨ˴ ϟ˶ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ύ˴ϣ˴ϭ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ Ύ˴Ϭ˸Ϩϣ˶ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϛ˶ Ύ˷θ ˴ ϟ΍ ϱ˶ΰ˸ΠϨ˴ γ ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˴Ϭ˸Ϩϣ˶ Ϫ˶ Η˶ ˸Άϧ˵ Γ˶ ή˴ Χ ˶ ϵ΍ Ώ ˴ ΍˴ϮΛ˴ ˸Ωή˶ ϳ˵ {145} Ύ˴Ϥϓ˴ ˲ήϴ˶Μϛ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷ϴ˵ Α˶˷έ˶ Ϫ˵ ό˴ ϣ˴ Ϟ ˴ Η˴ Ύ˴ϗ ϲ ˳˷ Β˶ ϧ˴˷ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϧ˷ϳ˶ ΄˴ϛ˴ ϭ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήΑ˶ Ύ˷μ ˴ ϟ΍ ΐ ˵˷ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧΎ˴ϜΘ˴ ˸γ΍ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϔό˵ ο ˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ϴ˶Βγ ˴ ϲ˶ϓ ˸ϢϬ˵ Α˴ Ύ˴λ΃˴ Ύ˴Ϥϟ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϫ˴ ϭ˴ {146} ϥ˴΃ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴˸Ϯϗ˴ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˶ ˸ϮϘ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ Ύ˴ϧ˸ήμ ˵ ϧ΍˴ϭ Ύ˴Ϩϣ˴ ΍˴Ϊ˸ϗ΃˴ ˸ΖΒ˶˷ ˴Λϭ˴ Ύ˴ϧή˶ ˸ϣ΃˴ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴Ϩϓ˴ ΍˴ή˸γ·˶ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϨΑ˴ Ϯ˵ϧΫ˵ Ύ˴Ϩϟ˴ ˸ήϔ˶ ˸Ϗ΍ Ύ˴ϨΑ˴˷έ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήϓ˶ Ύ˴Ϝ{147} Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ Ύ˴Η΂˴ϓ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Γ˶ ή˴ Χ ˶ ϵ΍ Ώ ˶ ΍˴ϮΛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ˸δΣ ˵ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϴ˸ϧΪ˵˷ ϟ΍ Ώ ˴ ΍˴ϮΛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩδ ˶ ˸ΤϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ΐ ˵˷ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ {148} {139} And be not infirm, and be not grieving, and you shall have the upper hand if you are believers. {140} If a wound has afflicted you (at Ohud), a wound like it has also afflicted the (unbelieving) people; and We bring these days to men by turns, and that Allah may know those who believe and take witnesses from among you; and Allah does not love the unjust. {141} And that He may purge those who believe and deprive the unbelievers of blessings. {142} Do you think that you will enter the garden while Allah has not yet known those who strive hard from among you, and (He has not) known the patient. {143} And certainly you desired death before you met it, so indeed you have seen it and you look (at it) {144} And Muhammad is no more than a messenger; the messengers have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed will you turn back upon your heels? And whoever turns back upon his heels, he will by no means do harm to Allah in the least and Allah will reward the grateful. {145} And a soul will not die but with the permission of Allah the term is fixed; and whoever desires the reward of this world, I shall give him of it, and whoever desires the reward of the hereafter I shall give him of it, and I will reward the grateful. {146} And how many a prophet has fought with whom were many worshippers of the Lord; so they did not become weak-hearted on account of what befell them in Allah's way, nor did they weaken, nor did they abase themselves; and Allah loves the patient. {147} And their saying was no other than that they said: Our Lord! forgive us our faults and our extravagance in our affair and make firm our feet and help us against the unbelieving people. {148} So Allah gave them the reward of this world and better reward of the hereafter and Allah loves those who do good (to others). å
  The verses, as you see, complete the talk which had begun with the words, O you who believe!... (3:130), while those verses with their orders and prohibitions had paved the way for these which contain the main purpose including command,

prohibition, praise and stricture. ([ )! And be not infirm, and be not grieving, and you shall have the upper hand if you are believers: "al-Wahn", according to ar-Raghib (in mufradaatul Qur'an), is infirmity and weakness in body or character. Here it refers to their weakness of will-power, carelessness in establishing the religion and lack of courage in face of its enemies. al-Huzn (grief) is opposite of al-farh (joy, happiness); it afflicts a man when he loses a favorite possession, or something which he thinks belongs to him. The words, "and you shall have the upper hand if you are believers". If a wound has afflicted you (at Uhud), a wound like it has also afflicted the (unbelieving) people;', indicate that the believers had felt infirmity and grief because they had seen themselves afflicted by wounds and found the unbelievers gaining upper hand. Although the polytheists could not get total victory over the believers, nor the battle ultimately ended with the believers' decisive defeat, yet what had afflicted them was really hard and painful - martyrdom of seventy of their brave warriors. Add to it the humiliation that they had been overwhelmed on their own ground. All these factors together had caused extreme dejection and pessimism. The clause, "and you shall have the upper hand if you are believers" (which stands as the reason of these two prohibitions), shows that the prohibition was related to actual infirmity and grief, not to some expected behavior in future. The promise, "you shall have the upper hand", is general and unrestricted, but it is followed by the proviso, "if you are believers". It therefore gives the following meaning: You should not be weak in your will-power, nor should you grieve for the lost victory, if you are true believers. It is because belief - is bound to give you upper hand over your enemies - belief is accompanied by piety and patience, and these two are the basis of victory and triumph. As for the wound, which has afflicted you in this battle, you are not alone in it; the unbelievers too had suffered similar casualties. If you think it over, they have not gained over you in any way. Therefore, you should not feel depressed or grieved. The address had started with the words, O you who believe; yet their gaining upper hand has been made conditional on their being believers. It implies that although the masses were not devoid of faith and belief, they had not adhered to the concomitants and requirements of that belief, like patience and piety; otherwise it would have brought out the desired effects.

This phenomenon is found in every group which is composed of people having different grades of belief; while there are some true believers, there are some of weak faith and yet others of sick hearts. This type of talk creates enthusiasm in believing souls, admonishes and revives the weak ones and censures and reprimands the hearts ailing with hypocrisy. ([ )! If a wound has afflicted you (at Uhud), a wound like it has also afflicted the (unbelieving) people: "al-Qarh" is used for effect of an external wound, while al-qurh denotes the effect of an internal wound like pimple or pustule. This difference has been given by arRaghib. The word metaphorically refers to all the calamities that had befallen the Muslims on the day of Uhud; it looks at the whole Muslim community as a single body which had received a wound inflicted by the enemy - the wound referring to the martyrdom of the martyrs and injuries of the injured, and the tragedy that victory slipped through their fingers. The sentence, "If a wound had afflicted you... and destroy the unbelievers", gives the reason of the command, "And be not infirm, and be not grieving"; as does the sentence, "and you shall have the upper hand if you are believers" The difference between the two sets of reasons is as follows: The sentence, "and you shall have the upper hand if you are believers", corrects their misconception. They had become disheartened and pessimistic because they thought that the polytheists had gained upper hand. Allah points out to them that it is they, not the polytheists, who have got the essential prerequisite of victory 'if they are believers'; and Allah had already declared: and helping the believers is ever incumbent on Us (30:47). The second reason describes the condition of the two parties - the believers and the polytheists - or explains the underlying rationale, that is, the inverting Divine practice to turn the fortunes among men. ([ )! and We bring these days to men by turns: "al-Yawm" (day) is a considerable span of time that is necessary for an occurrence - thus its duration would differ from occurrence to occurrence. Generally it is used for the period between sunrise and sunset. Often it is used for kingdom, reign, power, etc., putting the time in place of the thing covered by it. They say, 'day of this group', 'day of such and such dynasty', i.e., their precedence and rule over

others; sometimes it denotes the period itself. It is this connotation which is meant in this verse al-Mudawalah (taking of a thing by many people one after another). The sentence thus means: It is an invariable practice of Allah that He rotates these days among men by turns; these are not restricted to any one group nor prevented from another people; this system is based on common benefits only a part of which may be comprehended by your minds. ([ )! and that Allah may know those who believe and take witnesses from among you...eradicate the unbelievers: The conjunction "and" joins it to a deleted clause; it was deleted to imply that human understanding cannot comprehend all of its aspects, it may know only a few features of it. What the believers would benefit from is mentioned in these two verses: "that Allah may know those who believe and take witnesses from among you;... that Allah may purge those who believe and eradicate the unbelievers." As for the words, "that Allah may know those who believe", they imply manifestation of their belief after its being hidden. Allah's knowledge of events and things is the same as their existence. The things are known to Allah by their very existence. His knowledge is not like ours - because our knowledge and perception come through a form abstracted from the thing concerned. To say that Allah wills to know a thing, is the same as saying that Allah wills to bring it into being. In the verse under discussion, Allah says, "that Allah may know those who believe"; the clause shows that there were believers already in existence; therefore, it would mean that He wished to make their belief manifest. As every thing in this world is governed by the system of cause and effect, it was necessary that some things should happen which would make the belief of the believers manifest after it was hidden. (Try to understand it.) It is followed by the clause, "and take witnesses from among you " ash-Shuhada' refers to the witnesses of deeds. The Qur'an has never used this word for "martyrs". Its use in the meaning of "those who are killed while fighting in the way of Allah" is a later usage, as we had explained under the verse, And thus We have made you a medium nation that you may be witnesses for the people ... (2:143) . Moreover, the word "take " which has been used here, is not very appropriate for the martyrs of the battlefield; it is not said' 'Allah has taken Zayd as a martyr in His way'. But it is said: 'Allah has taken Ibrahim as a friend'; or 'Allah has taken Musa as one spoken to; or 'Allah has taken the Prophet as a witness for giving evidence for his ummah on the Day of Resurrection'.

Significantly, Allah has said, "and take witnesses from among you", instead of saying, take you as witnesses. Although verse 143 of the chapter of The Cow ascribes witnessing to the ummah (And thus We have made you a medium nation that you may be witnesses for the people...), but as we explained under that verse? it is a metaphorical use, ascribing to the whole nation what in fact belongs to a particular group of the nation-it is not the whole ummah but only a few of them who will bear witness for the nation. This interpretation may possibly be supported by the ending clause, "and Allah loves not the unjust." Then comes the verse, "And that Allah may purge those who believe and eradicate the unbelievers. "at-Tamhis" (to purge) denotes purifying something from extraneous pollutions. al-Mahq (to eradicate, to efface) signifies gradual depletion of a thing, eradicating it bit by bit. The said purification is one of the benefits of rotating the days among the people. It is separate from the above-mentioned benefit that Allah may know the believers. Distinguishing a believer from an unbeliever is one thing, and purifying his belief from pollutions of disbelief, hypocrisy and immorality is another. That is why it has been put side by side with eradication of the unbelievers. Allah removes the ingredients of disbelief from a believer's character little by little until nothing remains there but the belief, pure and unsullied; and likewise He eradicates ingredients of disbelief, polytheism and deceit from the unbeliever bit by bit, until all is destroyed. These are some of the reasons why Allah brings the days to men by turn, and why power does not remain confined to a particular group forever; and all affairs belong exclusively to Allah, He does whatever He pleases; and He does not do except that which is most suitable and most beneficial (to His creatures); as He says: ...thus does Allah compare truth and falsehood; then as for the scum, it passes away as a worthless thing; and as for that which profits the people, it remains in the earth (13:17). Also, He has said shortly before the verses under discussion: That He may cut off a portion from among those who disbelieve, or abase them so that they should return disappointed of attaining what they desired. You have no concern in the affair whether He turns to them (mercifully) or chastises them, for surely they are unjust (3:127-8). Allah has denied here that His Prophet had any authority in the affair, reserving that power exclusively to Himself; He decides about His creatures as He pleases. Look at the matters described in these verses: The days rotate among the people; it is done for the purpose of test and trial, in order that believers may be separated from unbelievers; believers may be purged and purified and unbelievers obliterated

gradually. Add to it the declaration that the Prophet had no authority in this matter. All this together shows that a majority of the believers was under the impression that there being on the true religion was the complete cause of their victory wherever they happened to fight. They thought that just because they were on truth, they must overpower the falsehood, no matter what their own condition; to them belonged all affairs, and they could not be deprived of it. They were further encouraged in this miscalculation when angels were sent to help them in Badr and they found themselves quite unexpectedly victorious over unbelievers. But that was a misunderstanding, which could nullify the system of test and purification; and that in its turn would negate the underlying rationale of command and prohibition, reward and punishment. That would lead to destruction of the foundation of religion. After all, divine religion is a religion of nature; it is not based on nullification of the customary procedure or of divine practice permeating the universe - the system that victory and defeat result from their normal causes. After explaining that the days rotate among the people for their test and trial, Allah now begins admonishing them for this serious misunderstanding of theirs, and explaining the real position to them. ([ )! Do you think that you win enter the Garden... while you look (at it): The misconception that they would enter the Garden without being tested, was an inseparable concomitant of the previously mentioned misunderstanding. They thought that because they were on truth and truth is not overwhelmed, they would always be victorious; that they would never be defeated, would never be vanquished. Obviously, if it were true, then every one who believed in the Prophet and entered into the believers' society, would find' felicity in this world through victory and booty, and felicity in the hereafter in the form of forgiveness and the Garden. Then there would be no difference between the felicity in the hereafter in the form of forgiveness and the Garden. Then there would be no difference between the appearance of belief and its reality, no distinction between various ranks (of belief and piety); the belief of a fighter and that of a patient fighter would be of the same value; a man who intended to do a good deed and actually did it when its time came, would be equal to him who intended but turned on his heels when faced with it. Accordingly, the words, "Do you think that you will enter ...", have metaphorically put the effect in place of the cause. The complete meaning therefore is as follows: You thought that power is reserved for you; you would not be put to test, rather

you would enter the Garden without going through a trial to separate the deserving from undeserving, to distinguish believers of higher ranks from those of lower grades. The next verse demonstrates that that thinking was wrong. The words, "And certainly you desired death before you met it, so indeed you have seen it (even) while you look (at it)", show that they had desired death before arriving at the battlefield; but when the desired death came to them and they looked at it, they did not come forward to get what they longed for; instead they showed cowardice and fled away. How can it be possible for them to enter into the Garden merely because of that expressed desire without being tested, without any procedure of purification? Was it not necessary to test them (to separate the truth from the falsehood)? It shows that there is a deleted clause near the end of the verse. The complete sentence would be as follows: So indeed you have seen it, yet you did not come forward to get it even while you looked at it. Another possible interpretation: You just looked at the death, i.e. without doing any thing to meet it. Thus "looking" would metaphorically imply not grappling with the death. It is a reproach and censure. 
 $[
 There is no doubt that the Qur'an exclusively reserves the guidance to Allah. But according to the Qur'an, it is not limited to the voluntary guidance leading to the felicity, and happiness of this world or the hereafter. Allah says: Who gave to everything its creation, then guided it (to its goal) (20:50). Everything is guided by Allah - those endowed with cognizance and understanding as well as the others. Also, the verse has left the guidance unrestricted so far as the goal and destination is concerned. Also, He says: Who created, then made complete, and Who made (things) according to a measure, then guided (them to their goal) (87:2 -3). These verses too are unrestricted like the former. Obviously, this (general) guidance is other than the special guidance which is used as opposite of misleading, leading astray. This special guidance has in several. cases been negated, giving way to error and straying, but the general guidance cannot be negated or erased from any creature. Allah says: and Allah does not

guide the unjust people (62:5); and Allah does not guide the transgressing people (61:5). Also, it is obvious that this general guidance is separate from that guidance which merely points the way to the believer and the unbeliever alike. As Allah says: Surely We have shown him the way: he may be thankful or unthankful (76:3). And as to Thamud, We showed them the right way, but they chose error above guidance (41:17). The guidance, mentioned in these two and similar other verses, is reserved for those who have understanding and cognizance, while that mentioned in (20:50 and 87:2-3) "then guided it", and, "Who made (things) according to measure, then guided", is comprehensive and general in its subject as well as the goal. Moreover the latter verse bases the guidance on measuring; but the particular (voluntary) guidance does not mesh with measurement, i.e. preparation of causes in order to guide a thing to the goal of its creation. Although the voluntary guidance, being a part of the general system of this world, is also covered by divine measure, but here we are not looking at it from that angle. However, this general guidance means that Allah guides every thing to the perfection of its existence, and conveys it to the goal of its creation. It is because of this guidance that every thing longs for, and resorts to, its basic requirements, like growth and development, completion and perfection, movements and action, etc. (This topic needs further explanation; God willing, we shall write on it later on.) The divine words prove that the things are driven to their destinations and goals by a general divine guidance; nothing is outside this guidance. Allah has made it incumbent on Himself and He does not break His promise. He says: Surely on Us is the guidance, and most surely Ours is the hereafter and the former (92:12-13). Added to the previously mentioned two verses, this verse too, in its generality, covers collective guidance for the societies as well as the individual guidance. It is a right of the things on Allah that He should guide them, creatively, to their destined perfection, and legislatively to their appointed perfection. You have seen in the discourse of the Prophethood, how legislation becomes a part of creation, and how it is encompassed by divine decree and measure. Human species has an

existence, which demands for its completion a series of voluntary actions; and those actions in their turn spring from ideological beliefs and practical cognizance. It is therefore necessary for man to live under some laws and rules, no matter whether those laws are good or bad, right or wrong. Accordingly, it was necessary for the Creator to prepare for him a series of orders and prohibitions (i.e. the Shari'ah), and another chain of collective events and individual happenings. These events, interacting with those laws, shall bring man's potentials to fruition, turn his abilities into accomplishments. On reaching this stage, he shall be either happy or unhappy - the hidden secrets of his existence will be open. When this happens, then those events and that shari'ah will be called for test or trial. Whoever does not heed the divine call and thus becomes liable to infelicity, the word of punishment is proved true against him - if he continues in that condition. All the things that happen to him-which are covered by divine commandment and prohibition - and which bring his potential to accomplishment, add more to his infelicity and unhappiness, even if he considers himself pleased with his current condition and feels happy with him- self. This apparent happiness is just a divine plan (to let him sink deeper into error). Ultimately he will find his infelicity and unhappiness in the very thing, which, he thought, was the source of his felicity and happiness; his failure will spring from what he mistook for his achievement. Allah says: And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners (3:54); ...and the evil plan does not beset any save the authors of it... (35:43); ...that they may plan therein; and they do not plan but against their own souls, and they do not perceive (6:123); ...We draw them near (to destruction) by degrees from whence they know not. And I grant them respite; surely My scheme is effective (7:182-183). The conceited man, in his ignorance of divine schemes, brags of his disobedience and recalcitrance thinking that he has succeeded in going ahead against the divine commands - while in fact his every step fulfils the divine plan against him. Allah says: Or do they who work evil think that they will escape Us? Evil is it that they judge (29:4). The most wonderful word on this subject is found in the verse 42 of ch.13: ...but all planning is Allah's... All this planning, disobedience, injustice and transgression that these people

indulge in against their religious responsibilities; all the events and happenings which they are faced with, and which serve to expose their hidden intentions, are all just a divine plan, a respite and a reprieve. They had a right on Allah that He should guide them to the end of their affairs - and He has done it; and Allah is predominant on His affairs. When the same things are ascribed to the Satan, then (the terminology changes, and) various types of disbelief and disobedience are called Satanic misguidance; temptation towards them becomes Satanic call, his whispering, and his misleading inspiration; the events leading to that transgression are called Satanic embellishment and are regarded as his instruments, tools and traps. We shall describe it in the seventh chapter, God willing. As for the believer in whose heart the belief is firmly rooted, whatever acts of obedience and worship are done by him and likewise the events occurring in his life that lead to those good deeds - they, in a way, deserved to be called divine help, Allah's guardianship and His especial guidance. Allah says: ...and Allah aids with His aid whom He pleases... (3:13); ...and Allah is the Guardian of the believers (3:68); Allah is the Guardian of those who believe; He brings them out of darkness into the light... (2:257); ...their Lord will guide them by their faith. .(10:9); Is he who was dead then We raised him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people... (6:122). These terms are used when these affairs are attributed to Allah. If they are ascribed to the angels, then they are called angelic helping and strengthening. Allah says: ...these they are in whose hearts He has impressed faith and whom He has strengthened with a spirit for Him (58:22). One thing more: The general guidance begins with the first moment of a thing's creation and accompanies it to the last point of its existence - as long as it is proceeding on its return journey to Allah. Likewise, it is being pushed on by the divine measure continuously, as is shown by the words, And Who made (things) according to a measure then guided (them to their goal) (87:3). It is divine measures which cover the causes that govern the existence of things, and it is the same measures which launch a thing progressively from one condition to the next and so on. Thus the measures constantly push the things forward.

As the measures drive them from behind, the appointed term (the last point of a thing's existence) pulls them from the front, as the divine words show: We did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them two, save with truth and (for) an appointed term; and those who disbelieve turn aside from what they are warned of (46:3) . This verse ties the things with their final stage, i.e. the appointed terms. When one of the two related things dominates the other, then its relationship with the weaker partner is called attraction; and as the appointed terms are decisive and unalterable, they obviously pull and attract the things from the front. Accordingly, every thing is encompassed by divine forces: There is a force to push it, another to pull it, and a third to accompany it and bring it up. These are the basic forces confirmed by the Qur'an, apart from other forces which protect, watch over and accompany it like angels, satans and things like that. Sometimes we arrange a thing's affairs in such a way as to ascertain whether it is fit for a certain purpose. It is called test or trial. Sometimes you do not know whether it is fit for the said purpose or not. At other times you know it but you want its hidden ability to be known to all. In both cases you oblige it to undergo certain relevant procedures - in order that by accepting or rejecting them, it may expose its hidden characteristics. This procedure is called test, trial or examination. This same meaning fits the divine managements. Allah obliges rational creatures (like man) to follow the rules of the shari'ah, and involves him into various happenings and events. All these (creative and legislative) impositions demonstrate the man's real worth, vis-a-vis; the purpose to which he is invited through religious call. And they are therefore called 'divine tests'. But there is a difference between our test and the divine one. We generally do not know the hidden reality of the things; therefore when we conduct an examination, our real aim is to discern its hitherto unknown reality. But it is impossible for Allah not to know, and with Him are the keys of the unseen. Therefore, when He examines us, His aim is to train us by calling us to good result and felicity. He, by such test and trial, demonstrates to one and all the reality of the person so examined, in order that it may be known to all what should be his destination, whether he should be sent to the place of good reward or to the abode of

chastisement. That is why Allah has named such arrangements of His - legislating the shari'ah and assigning visitation and tribulation - as test and examination. In some verses He has described the general rule: Surely We have made whatever is on the earth an embellishment for it, so that We may try them (as to) which of them is best in deed (18:7); Surely We have created man from a small drop of intermingled life-germ; We mean to try him, so We have made him hearing, seeing (76:2); ...and We try you by evil and good by way of probation... (21:35). Some other verses give specific details. For example: And as for man, when his Lord tries him, then treats him with honor and makes him lead an easy life, he says: "My Lord has honored me. " But when He tries him (differently), then straitens to him his means of subsistence, he says: "My Lord has disgraced me" (89:15-16); Your possessions and your children are only a trial... (64:15); ...but that He may try some of you by means of others... (47:4); ...thus did We try them because they transgressed (7:163); ...and that He may test the believers by a gracious trial... (8:17); Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, We believe, and not be tried? And certainly We tried those before them, so Allah will certainly know those who are true and He will certainly know the liars (29:2-3). Even for a prophet like Ibrahim, He says: And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words... (2:124). He says regarding the sacrifice story of Isma'il: Most

surely this is a manifest trial (37:106); and says to Musa: . . . and We tried you with (a severe) trying... (20:40). There are many verses of this connotation. As you see, these verses prove that test and trial bestrides every thing related to man. It includes his existence and its various aspects like hearing, sight and life; the extraneous things that are somehow connected to him, like children, spouses, family, friends, possessions and prestige; and the things which he makes use of in one way or the other. The same is the case with their opposites, like death and all the troubles, hardships and misfortunes affecting a man. In short, the verses count every thing, affair and situation of the world, related in any way to man, as a test and trial prescribed by Allah for him. The verses also prove the generality of test as about the examinees. Each and every man has to undergo the test - be he a believer or unbeliever, a good man or bad, a prophet or someone else. It is an all-encompassing system and law, and none is exempted from it. It appears from the above that the test is an established divine system, a practical procedure based on another creative system, i.e., the general divine guidance - as far as it is related to those creatures who are held responsible for their actions like man - together with the measure and the appointed term which precedes and follows it, respectively. It shows that this system is not that which can be abrogated, because its abrogation would be tantamount to undermining the creation itself - which is impossible. This reality is implied by the verses, which say that the creation is with truth and that Resurrection is truth. Allah says: We did not create heavens and the earth and what is between them two, save with truth and (for) an appointed term (146:3); What! did you then think that We had created you in vain and that you shall not be returned to Us? (23:115); And We did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them in sport. We did not create them both but with the truth, but most of them do not know (44:38-39); Whoever be hoping to meet Allah, the term appointed by Allah will then surely come (29:5). There are many other verses of the same theme; and they prove that the creation is with the truth; it was not created in vain or without an aim, a goal. As all things are proceeding towards their

destinations with truly appointed terms, pushed forward by true measures, and accompanied by true guidance, a general collision is bound to occur; and especially the persons held responsible for their actions are bound to be put to test; the test would involve them in such affairs which would bring their potentials - perfection and defect; happiness and unhappiness - into the realm of reality. This is what is called test and examination - so far as the man is obliged to follow the dictates of religion is concerned. (Try to understand it.). The above discourse also clarifies the meanings of eradication and purge. When a believer undergoes test and trial, it separates his hidden virtues from vices; also when a group labors under difficulties, it sets the believers apart from the hypocrites are called purge, that is, purification, distinction. Likewise, when an unbeliever or a hypocrite - with apparently good characteristics and enviable conditions - is regularly put under the divine tests, it gradually brings out his hidden evil and vice; and whenever a bad characteristic comes to surface, it removes and obliterates an apparent virtue. This is what the Qur'an calls eradication, i.e., gradual obliteration of his shallow virtues. As Allah says: ...and We bring these days to men by turns and that Allah may know those who believe and take witnesses from among you; and Allah loves not the unjust. And that Allah may purge those who believe, and eradicate the unbelievers (3:140-141). The unbelievers also face another type of eradication: Allah informs us that the world is relentlessly driven towards the good of human beings when the religion will be purely for Allah. The Qur'an says: ...and the (good) end is for guarding (against evil) (20:132);... that the earth shall inherit it My righteous servants (21:105). ([ )! And Muhammad is no more than a messenger; the messengers have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels? And whoever turns back upon his heels, he will by no means do harm to Allah in the least; and Allah will reward the grateful: Death is passing away, end of the body's life. Slaying or killing denotes death arising from extraneous cause - intentional or otherwise. When the words, 'death'

and 'killing', are used separately, the 'death' signifies a general meaning which includes killing too; but when they are used side by side, then 'death' means natural death as opposed to killing. Turning back upon one's heels means returning. arRaghib has said: "They say, He turned back upon his heels, when he returns, 'he turns back upon his heels' is synonymous to 'it turns on its hooves'; also it is like the (Qur'anic) words: so they returned retracing their footsteps (18:64), or the idiom, 'he went back to his origin'." Turning back on one's heels is dependent on the conditional clause, "if then he dies or is killed"; it implies their apostasy - going out of religion - not merely retreating from the fight; because fleeing from battle-ground has no connection with death or martyrdom of the Prophet, while there is a clear relation between his death or martyrdom and people's renouncement of Islam for disbelief. Moreover, it was not only in Uhud that they had fled away from the battlefield; they had done so in some other battles too like, Hunayn, Khaybar, etc.; but Allah did not address them in such a severe tone, nor did He use such expression for their retreat. For example, He says regarding the battle of Hunayn: ...and on the day of Hunayn, when your great numbers made you vain, but they availed you nothing and the earth became strait to you notwithstanding its spaciousness, then you turned back retreating (9:25). Therefore, it is clear that 'turning back upon your heels' in this verse means 'returning to your previous disbelief ' The meaning of the verse - in its context of censure and stricture is as follows: Muhammad is but a messenger of God, like other messengers sent earlier by Him; his task is to convey the message of His Lord; he has no authority in the affairs; all the affairs are in the hand of Allah, and the religion is His religion; it will continue with Allah's authority because Allah is to preserve it. Why should then your belief depend on Muhammad' s life? Why should you behave as if your religion would not survive the Prophet? Why do you give rise to the assumption that if Muhammad were to die or be killed you would run away from Allah's religion, would return back on your heels to your previous disbelief? Will you go back to misguidance after finding the guidance? This context provides a very strong proof that when the fighting became fierce on the day of Uhud, the Muslims thought that the Prophet was killed, and they fled

away from the battlefield. It confirms the reports of the traditions and history. For example, Ibn Hisham narrates in his as-Sirah that Anas ibn an-Nadr (uncle of Anas ibn Malik) reached where 'Umar ibn al-Khattab and Talhah ibn 'Ubaydillah had gathered with other persons of the Emigrants and the Helpers - and they had given themselves up. He asked: "What is holding you back?" They said: "The Messenger of Allah has been killed." He said: "Then what will you do with life after him? Die on what the Messenger of Allah has died on." Then he faced the (unbelieving) people, and fought them until he was martyred. This retreat, this surrender, this giving themselves up, had only one meaning: Their belief depended on the Prophet; it would continue as long as he lived, and would disappear the moment he died. In other words, they wanted reward of this world for their belief, and it was this matter for which they were reprimanded by Allah. This connotation is supported by the concluding clause, "and Allah will reward the grateful ". Note that the same clause has been repeated in the next verse, after the words, "and whoever desires the reward of this world. We shall give him of it and whoever desires the reward of the hereafter, We shall give him of it." (Ponder on its significance.) The clause, "and Allah will reward the grateful", is a sort of exception as the context shows; and it proves that among them there were a few who were grateful, who did not turn back on their heels nor did they retreat. What is the reality of gratefulness? It is manifestation of the favor, display of the bounty. Its opposite is ungratefulness, which means hiding the bounty. How does one display a favor? It is done by using it in the place the donor had intended, in the way he would be pleased with, and to remember and mention the donor by tongue (and it is called praise) and heart (without forgetting him). For thanking Allah for any of His favors and bounties, you should remember Him at the time of using it, and should use it in the way He is pleased with without transgressing the limits. There is nothing in this world but it is a bounty from the bounties of Allah; and He does not want us to use any of His bounties but in the way of His worship, in His obedience. He says: And He gives you of all that you ask Him; and if you count Allah's bounties, you will not be able to compute them; most surely man is

very unjust, very ungrateful (14:34). Accordingly, His absolute thank - without any restriction - means to remember Him without forgetting Him, and to obey Him without disobeying Him. Allah says: ...and be thankful to Me, and do not be ungrateful to Me (2:152). It means as follows: Remember Me without polluting the remembrance with forgetfulness; and obey My command without spoiling it with disobedience. (The reader should not listen to him who says that it would oblige us to do something beyond our power. Such comment arises from not paying attention to these divine realities, from being distant from the plane of servitude.) We have explained in previous volumes the difference between verb and adjective. The verb shows the active agent (the doer) doing the work - no matter how temporary, how transitory, his relation with that work may be. But an adjective shows permanent relation between the agent and the attribute; it implies that the attribute has become an inseparable characteristic of the man. There is a word of difference between the phrases, 'those who worshipped idols', 'those who were patient', 'those who did injustice', and 'those who transgressed', on one hand, and the adjectives, 'the idol-worshippers', 'the patient ones', 'the unjust', and 'the transgressors', on the other. Herein the verse under discussion, Allah has used the adjective, "the grateful"; it refers to those in whom the attribute of gratefulness is firmly rooted, who have inseparable connection with this virtue. Also, we have described that absolute gratitude demands that man should never remember any thing - as every thing is a divine bounty without remembering Allah; and should not use anything the divine bounty except in His obedience. It is now clear that gratitude and thank cannot be complete except with total sincerity towards Allah, with purification in knowledge and action. The grateful ones are those who are purified, sincere servants of Allah-those in whom the Satan can have no hope, who are beyond the Satanic designs and plans. This fact is clear from the words of the Satan quoted in the Qur'an: He (Satan) said: "Then by Thy Might I will surely beguile them all, except Thy servants from among them, the purified one" (38:82-83);He said: "My Lord! because Thou hast left me to stray, I will certainly make (evil) fair-seeming to them on earth, and I will certainly cause them all to go astray, except Thy servants from among them,

the freed (purified) ones" (15:39-40). Note that Allah did not refute this claim of the Satan. Again Allah quotes him as saying: "He said: 'As Thou hast caused me to go astray, I will certainly lie in wait for them in Thy straight path. Then I will certainly come to them from before them and from behind them, and from their right-hand side and from their left-hand side; and Thou shalt not find most of them thankful'" (7:16-17). The last clause is an implied exception that some of them shall be thankful. Here the adjective, "purified " has been changed to "thankful". It can only mean that it is the purified ones who shall be grateful, and on whom the Satan has got no hold. The Satan's design is to make man forget his Lord and to call him to sin and disobedience; (but he cannot ensnare the purified and grateful servants in this trap). This explanation is further supported by a verse, coming later, which was revealed about this very battle: (As for) those of you who turned back on the day when the two armies met only the Satan sought to cause them to make a slip on account of some deeds they had done, and certainly Allah has pardoned them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing (3:155). Read it in conjunction with the end of the verse under discussion, "and Allah win reward the grateful", and the end clause of the next verse, "and We will reward the grateful"; and keep in mind that these clauses are a sort of exceptions. Think over these verses together and you will discover sublime realities. But someone has given a really astonishing explanation. He thinks that the verse just quoted, ((As for) those of you who turned back... only the Satan sought to cause them to slip ...) refers to the story which says that the Satan cried aloud on the day of Uhud that Muhammad was killed; and this cry made the believers lose their hearts and flee from the battle ground. Looking at this explanation, in light of the one given by us, one is amazed as to how trivially they have treated the Book of Allah, bringing it down from that height of reality and knowledge to such a lowly level. The verse shows that there were a few believers on the day of Uhud who did not show any weakness nor did they lose courage; nor did they give up the cause of Allah. It is they whom Allah calls "the grateful ones", and has confirmed that the Satan has got no power over them, nor has he any hope of ensnaring them. They

have remained steadfast, grateful, not only in this battle; it is an inseparable characteristic of theirs, a deeply-rooted attribute. The Qur'an has nowhere used the adjective "the grateful" in appreciation except in these two verses, that is, "And Muhammad is no more than a messenger... and Allah will reward the grateful. And it is not for a soul to die... and We will reward the grateful." Yet, He has not mentioned in either place what their reward will be; this silence speaks a lot about its greatness and value. ([ )! And it is not for a soul to die but with the permission of Allah(according to) the term that is fixed;... and We will reward the grateful: It is an adverse allusion to their talk about their slain brethren which is referred to in a forthcoming verse: O you who believe! be not like those who disbelieve and say of their brethren when they travel in the earth or engage in fighting: Had they been with us, they would not have died and they would not have been slain... (3:156); also it refers to the talk of a group among them: "Had we any hand in the affair, we would not have been slain here" (3:154) . It should be noted here that these people were from among the believers, not the hypocrites who had already left the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and had not participated in the fighting at all. This talk of theirs implies that a person's death was not dependent on Allah's permission, nor was it a decisive process emanating from firm divine decree. If such an idea were correct then it would negate the Kingdom of Allah, nullify the precise divine arrangements. (We shall explain, God willing, in the beginning of the chapter of The Cattle, what fixation of the term means.) It necessarily follows that those who had spoken such words, had accepted Islam because they thought that all affairs were in the hands of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and the believers. In other words when they accepted Islam, their aim was to who desisted from such thoughts; their goal was the hereafter. That is why Allah says: "and whoever desires the reward of this world, We shall give him of it, and whoever desires the reward of the hereafter, We shall give him of it." Here Allah has said, "We shall give him of it", instead of saying, "We shall give him it." It points to a fine distinction: Often man has some desires, but fails to provide total causes leading to the total desires, and consequently is not given all that he had

desired. Therefore, if the causes conform with all the desires, he shall be given all desires; and if the causes agree with some of the desires, he will get only some of it. Allah says: Whoever desires this present life, We hasten to him therein what We please for whomsoever We desire, then We assign to him the hell; he shall enter it despised, driven away And whoever desires the hereafter and strives for it as he ought to strive and he is a believer; (as for) these their striving shall surely be thanked (17:18-19). Also He says: And that there is not for man (aught) except what he strives for (53:39). Thereafter, He has specially mentioned the grateful ones, excluding them from both groups; saying, "and We will reward the grateful". It is because they work only for the sake of Allah, without looking at any thing of this world or the hereafter - as we have explained earlier. ([ )! And how many a prophet has fought... and Allah loves those who do good (to others): "Ka-ayyin" (how many), indicates great number; min (from), here is an explicative particle. ar-Ribbiyyun, plural of ar-ribbi, like ar-rabbani, denotes a divine person, someone who is exclusively attached to God. Also it is said that it is plural of raba (thousand) and thus means, thousands. al-Istikanah (to submit, to abase oneself). The verse contains advice, sermon and lesson with a shade of admonition, together with some encouragement to the believers to follow in those Godly men's footsteps, so that Allah should give them the reward of this world and an excellent reward of the hereafter (as he had given those Godly men) and should love them for their good-doing, as He had loved them for it. Allah has described some of their words and deeds in order that the believers may learn lessons from it, and adopt it as their motto. Then they would not be afflicted with what had afflicted them on the day of Uhud (where they were involved in undesirable words and deeds, which Allah was not pleased with). If they followed those Godly men, then Allah would join for them the rewards of both worlds and He had done for those Godly men.

Allah has characterized the rewards of the hereafter as "excellent"; it point to its sublimity and high prestige in comparison to this world' reward. å
 
    

*' GG ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵όϴ˶τΗ˵ ϥ˶· ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ά˴˷ϟ΍ Ύ˴Ϭϳ˵˷΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήγ ˶ Ύ˴Χ ˸΍Ϯ˵ΒϠ˶Ϙ˴ Ϩ˴Θϓ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˶ Ύ˴Ϙ˸ϋ΃˴ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ϭ˷Ω˵ ή˵ ϳ˴ {149} Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ϭ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ϻ˸Ϯϣ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ Α˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ήλ ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ ή˵ ˸ϴΧ ˴ {150} ϫ˵ ΍˴ϭ˸΄ϣ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˱ϧΎ˴τ˸Ϡγ ˵ Ϫ˶ Α˶ ˸ϝΰ˶˷ Ϩ˴ ϳ˵ ˸Ϣϟ˴ Ύ˴ϣ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟΎ˶Α ˸΍Ϯ˵ϛή˴ ˸η΃˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ ΐ ˴ ˸ϋή˵˷ ϟ΍ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ώ ˶ Ϯ˵Ϡϗ˵ ϲ˶ϓ ϲ˶Ϙ˸ϠϨ˵ γ ˴ Ϣ˵ Ϩ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˶Ύ˷ψ ˴ ϟ΍ ϯ˴Ϯ˸Μϣ˴ β ˴ ˸ΌΑ˶ ϭ˴ έ˵ Ύ{151} ϲ˶ϓ ˸Ϣ˵Θ˸ϋί˴ Ύ˴ϨΗ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ˸Ϡθ ˶ ϓ˴ ΍˴Ϋ·˶ ϰ˷Θ˴ Σ ˴ Ϫ˶ ϧ˶ ˸ΫΈ˶Α˶ Ϣ˵Ϭϧ˴ Ϯ˷δ ˵Τ ˵ Η˴ ˸Ϋ·˶ ϩ˵ Ϊ˴ ˸ϋϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϝ˵ ϗ˴ Ϊ˴ λ ˴ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϟ˴˴ϭ ϣ˴˷ Ϣ˵ϜϨ˶ϣϭ˴ Ύ˴ϴ˸ϧΪ˵˷ ϟ΍ Ϊ˵ ϳ˶ήϳ˵ Ϧ˷ϣ˴ Ϣ˵ϜϨ˶ϣ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷Β˵ ˶ΤΗ˵ Ύ˷ϣ˴ Ϣ˵ϛ΍˴έ΃˴ Ύ˴ϣ Ϊ˶ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϣ˵Θ˸ϴμ ˴ ϋ ˴ ϭ˴ ή˶ ˸ϣ˴Ϸ΍ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϋ ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϓ˴ ή˴ λ ˴ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ Γ˴ ή˴ Χ ˶ ϵ΍ Ϊ˵ ϳ˶ήϳ˵ Ϧ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ Ϟ ˳ ˸πϓ˴ ϭ˵Ϋ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϩ˴ϋ Ύ˴ϔϋ ˴ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϟ˴ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϴ˴ Ϡ˶Θ˴ ˸Βϴ˴ ϟ˶{152} ϝ ˵ Ϯ˵γή˴˷ ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϊ˳ ˴Σ΃˴ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵Ϯ˸ϠΗ˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵Ϊό˶ ˸μΗ˵ ˸Ϋ·˶ Ϝ˴ ϟ˶˷ Ϣ˳˷ ϐ˴ Α˶ Ύ˷Ϥ˱ Ϗ ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˴ Ύ˴Λ΄˴ϓ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ΍˴ή˸Χ΃˵ ϲ˶ϓ ˸Ϣϛ˵ Ϯ˵ϋ˸Ϊϳ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠϤ˴ ˸όΗ˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ ˲ήϴ˶ΒΧ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸Ϣ˵ϜΑ˴ Ύ˴λ΃˴ Ύ˴ϣ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Η˴ Ύ˴ϓ Ύ˴ϣ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧΰ˴ ˸ΤΗ˴ ˴ϼ˸ϴ{153} ϧ˴΃ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸ΘϤ˴˷ ϫ˴ ΃˴ ˸Ϊϗ˴ ˲Δϔ˴ ΋˶ Ύ˴σϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϩ˷ϣ˶ Δ˱ ϔ˴ ΋˶ Ύ˴σ ϰ˴θ˸ϐϳ˴ Ύ˱γΎ˴όϧ˵˷ Δ˱ Ϩ˴ ϣ˴ ΃˴ Ϣ˶˷ ϐ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϊ˶ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϣ˵Ϝ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ϝ ˴ ΰ˴ ϧ˴΃ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟΎ˶Α ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷Ϩ˵ ψ ˵ ϳ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ δ ˵ ˵ϔ Ϧ ˴˷ χ ˴ ϖ ˶˷ Τ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ή˴ ˸ϴϏ ˴ ϣ˴˷ Ϣ˶Ϭδ ˶ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϔ˸Ψϳ˵ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ˶ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϛ˵ ή˴ ˸ϣϷ ˴ ΍ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸Ϟϗ˵ ˯˳ ˸ϲη ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ή˶ ˸ϣϷ ˴ ΍Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ύ˴Ϩϟ˴˷ Ϟ˴ϫ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϟϮ˵Ϙϳ˴ Δ˶ ϴ˴˷Ϡ˶ϫ˶ Ύ˴Π˸ϟ΍ ˸Ϯϟ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϟϮ˵Ϙϳ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˴ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵Ϊ˸Βϳ˵ ϻ ˴ Ύ ϛ˵ ˸Ϯϟ˴˷ Ϟ˵ϗ Ύ˴Ϩϫ˵ Ύ˴ϫ Ύ˴Ϩ˸ϠΘ˶ ϗ˵ Ύ˷ϣ˴ ˲˯˸ϲη ˴ ή˶ ˸ϣϷ ˴ ΍Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ύ˴Ϩϟ˴ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ ˸ϢϬ˶ ό˶ Ο ˶ Ύ˴πϣ˴ ϰ˴ϟ·˶ Ϟ ˵ ˸ΘϘ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ˶Ϭ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ΐ ˴ Θ˶ ϛ˵ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ί˴ ή˴ Β˴ ϟ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Η˶ Ϯ˵ϴΑ˵ ϲ˶ϓ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ έ˶ ϭ˵Ϊμ ˵˷ ϟ΍ Ε ˶ ΍˴άΑ˶ ˲Ϣϴ˶Ϡϋ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˶ Ϯ˵Ϡϗ˵ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴ϣ κ ˴ Τ ˶˷ Ϥ˴ ϴ˵ ϟ˶ϭ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ έ˶ ϭ˵Ϊλ ˵ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˴ϣ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϲ ˴ Ϡ˶Θ˴ ˸Βϴ˴ ϟ˶ϭ˴ {154} ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϩ˶ϣ ΍˸Ϯϟ˴˷Ϯ˴ Η˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ Θ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ Ϗ ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϋ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ύ˴ϔϋ ˴ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϟ˴ϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Βδ ˴ ϛ˴ Ύ˴ϣ ξ ˶ ˸όΒ˴ Α˶ ϥ ˵ Ύ˴τ˸ϴθ ˴˷ ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ ˷ϟ˴ΰ˴ Θ˴ ˸γ΍ Ύ˴Ϥϧ˴˷·˶ ϥ ˶ Ύ˴ό˸ϤΠ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϙ ˲Ϣϴ˶ϠΣ ˴ ˲έϮ˵ϔ{155} {149} O you who believe! if you obey those who disbelieve they will turn you back upon your heels, so you will turn back losers. {150} Nay! Allah is your Patron and He is the best of the helpers. {151} We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they set up with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and their abode is the fire, and evil is the abode of the unjust. {152} And certainly Allah made good to you His promise when you slew them by His permission, until when you became weak-hearted and disputed about the affair and disobeyed after He had shown you that which you loved; of you were some who desired this world and of you were some who desired the hereafter; then He turned you away from them that He might try you; and He has certainly pardoned you, and Allah is Gracious to the believers. {153} When you ran off precipitately and did not wait for any one, and the Messenger was calling you from your rear, so He gave you another sorrow instead of (your) sorrow, so that you might not grieve at what had escaped you, nor (at) what befell you; and Allah is aware of what you do. {154} Then after sorrow He sent down security upon you, a calm coming upon a party of you, and (there was) another party whom their own souls had rendered anxious; they entertained about Allah thoughts of ignorance quite unjustly, saying: We have no hand in the affair. Say: Surely the affair is wholly (in the hands) of Allah. They conceal within their souls what they would not reveal to you. They say: Had we any hand in the affair, we would not have been slain here. Say: Had you remained in your houses, those for whom slaughter was ordained would certainly have gone forth to the places where they would be slain, and that Allah might test what was in your breasts and that He might purge what was in your

hearts; and Allah knows what is in the breasts. {155} (As for) those of you who turned back on the day when the two armies met, only the Shaitan sought to cause them to make a slip on account of some deeds they had done, and certainly Allah has pardoned them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing. å
  It is the continuation of the verses revealed about the battle of Uhud. These verses exhort and encourage the believers to obey none except their Lord, because He alone is their Guardian and Helper; it calls them as witness that Allah had fulfilled His promise to them, and the debacle and disaster which they suffered on that day was brought upon them by their own hands, because they had transgressed the limits of what Allah had told them and His Messenger had invited them to; in spite of that Allah has forgiven them of their sins because He is Forgiving, Forbearing. ([ ): O you who believe! if you obey those who disbelieve... He is the best of the helpers: It may possibly be inferred from the context that the unbelievers - after the battle of Uhud, when these verses were revealed - were putting ideas in the believers' minds (just as "friendly" advice!) to hold them back from fighting and to incite strife and disunity among them, in order to create rift and division in the camp of Islam. This implication might probably get support from the verses 173-175 coming later: Those to whom the people said: "Surely men have gathered against you, therefore fear them"... It is only the Satan that frightens his friends; so do not fear them, and fear Me if you are believers. It has also been said that the verse alludes to the shouting by the Jews and the hypocrites on the day of Uhud, "Muhammad has been killed; you should return to Your families." But this explanation is nothing. The verse first made it clear to the Muslims that if they obeyed the unbelievers and were inclined towards their friendship seeking their help, they would suffer a great loss, that is, they would turn back to infidelity, would become unbelievers themselves. Then it strikes at this idea by showing them the bright reality that "Allah is your Guardian and He is the best of the helpers." ([ )! We will cast terror into the hearts... and evil is the abode of the unjust:

It is a beautiful promise to the believers that Allah will help them through terror and scare. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to mention "scare" among the special bounties which Allah had reserved for him - not giving it to any other prophet. Such traditions have been narrated by both sects. The clause, "because they set up with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority", points to the fact that the polytheists set up such things as partners or colleagues for Allah, which have got no authority, no proof for it. The Qur'an repeatedly says that there is no authority, no proof, which could prove any partner or colleague for Allah. Among many types of polytheism is the rejection of the Creator by saying that some thing other than Allah - like time or matter - has caused the creation and goes on managing it. ([ )! And certainly Allah made good to you His promise, ...and Allah is Gracious to the believers: "al-Hass" (to extirpate by slaying). The traditions unanimously say, and history records, that on the day of Uhud, at first the believers overpowered the enemy and defeated them; they started slaughtering them and plundering their goods. But then most of the archers left their position at the mountain-pass, and Khalid ibn Walid with his group attacked and slaughtered 'Abdullah ibn Jubayr and the few archers who had remained with him. Now the way was clear for them to attack the believers from the rear ² which they did. Seeing this, the fleeing seventy of the companions and bringing utter defeat upon them. Accordingly, the words, "And certainly Allah made good to you His promise", affirms that Allah's promise of help ² on the condition that they should remain on guard and be patient ² was certainly fulfilled; the, clause, "when you were extirpating them by His permission", is applicable to the victory which Allah gave to them to begin with on the day of Uhud; and the next clause, "until when you became weak-willed and disputed about the affair and disobeyed after He had shown you that which you loved", may be pointing to what the archers had done; they disputed one with the other, an overwhelming majority of them left their position and ran away to join those companions who were busy in gathering the booty. In this way they showed their lack of will-power; they differed among themselves end' disobeyed the Prophet's order not to leave their place no matter what happened to the others. Accordingly, al-fashal (generally translated as 'to lose heart', 'to be weak-hearted'), would imply here, weakness or lack of will-power; obviously the meaning of weak-heartedness or cowardice would not be appropriate in this context, because they had not left their position because of any fear; rather it

was because of the avarice of war-booty. If we take al-fashal for cowardice, then it would apply to the whole 'army'; and in that case, the adverb, "then", in the clause, "then He turned you away from them", would denote ordinal sequel, not sequence of time. The word, "disputed", proves that not all of them were united in that weakwilledness and disobedience; some of them were determined to carry on the order, and to continue in the obedience. That is why Allah follows it with the comment: "of you were some who desired this world, and of you were some who desired the hereafter" ([ )! then He turned you away from them that He might try you: Allah stopped you from entangling with the idol-worshippers, after you manifested your lack of will-power, disputed one with the other and disobeyed the Prophet ² in short, after you became disunited. He did so in order that He might examine you and test your faith and patience in His cause. When the hearts and minds are disunited, it provides the strongest reason to conduct an examination, so that a believer may be distinguished from a hypocrite; such a test would also separate a believer who is firmly-rooted in belief and steadfast in conviction from the one who is inconsistent and fickle. Nevertheless, Allah has forgiven them by His grace, as He says, "and He has certainly pardoned you". J
 : When you ran off precipitately and did not turn towards any one and the Messenger was calling you from your rear: "al Is'ad" (to go far away on the ground) is different from as-su'ud which means to rise up, to ascend. They say, As'ada fi janibi 'I -barr (he went far in the land), and Sa'ada fi 's-sullam (he climbed up the ladder). It is said that al-is'ad is, sometimes, used in the meaning of as-su'ud. The adverb, "when", is related to an implied verb, "remember" (i.e. remember when you ran off ...); or to the verb in the preceding verse, "He turned you away "; or to the one after that, "He might try you", according to various explantions. alLayy (to turn towards, to incline). According to Majma'u 'l -bayan, it is always used in negative (and never in affirmative), i.e. they do not say, Lawaytu 'ala kadha (I turned towards so-and-so). The clause, "and the Messenger was calling you from your rear", the word, "rear" here is opposite of front. The fact that the Prophet was calling them from their

rear, shows that they had fled away en masse from around him in such a way that the mob in forefront was far off from the Prophet and the rear group was nearer; he was calling them but nobody was turning towards him ² neither those in the front nor those in the rear. They ran off precipitately to save their own skins, leaving the Messenger of Allah (blessings of Allah be on him and his progeny), almost alone surrounded by the hordes of the bloodthirsty enemies. Of course, the words in the verse 144, and Allah will a few among them whose determination was not shaken; they did never retreat ² neither in the beginning nor after the rumor spread that the Prophet was martyred, as is clear from the words, "if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels?" The words under discussion, "and did not turn towards any one, and the Messenger was calling you from your rear", clearly show that the rumor of the Prophet's martyrdom spread among them after they had retreated and run away from him. J
 : so He gave you and other sorrow instead of (your) sorrow,... of what you do: He changed their sorrow to another sorrow in order to divert their attention from this grief. This "another sorrow" that afflicted them was, in any case, a divine grace; because Allah says: "so that you might not grieve at what had escaped you, nor (at) what befell you;" and He has condemned such grief in His Book where He says: So that you may not grieve for what has escaped you, nor be exultant at what He has given you (57:23). Obviously, this another sorrow that would prevent them from that disliked grieving would be a grace and bounty. Accordingly, this "another sorrow" should refer to the remorse that overwhelmed them for what they had done, to the distress they felt for the victory that had slipped from their hands because of their weak will-power. Consequently the second sorrow mentioned in the clause, "instead of (your) sorrow", would refer to that undesirable grieving; the preposition "bi" in "bi-ghammin" (instead of sorrow) indicates exchange. The meaning is therefore as follows: you were grieving at what had escaped you and what had befallen you; Allah changed it to the remorse and distress for the lost victory. Another alternative: "athabakum" (translated here as "He gave you") may contain the connotation of change. The meaning in this case will be as follows: He changed your remorse and distress to the grief, entitling you for its reward. The meanings of the two "sorrows" will interchange, vis-à-vis, the preceding

explanation. In either case the sentence "so He gave you another sorrow", branches out from the clause, "and He has certainly pardoned you"; and the next verse, "Then after sorrow He sent down security upon you....", is closely related to it. The meaning: He pardoned you, then changed your sorrow to another sorrow to prevent you from that grief of yours which He was not pleased with, then He sent down upon you security in the form of slumber which overtook you. A third alternative is apparently supported by the context, in that the sentence, "so He gave you another sorrow....",would branch from the immediately preceding clause, "When you ran off precipitately..."; in this case, "another sorrow" would refer to their running off and retreating from the battlefield; and the next phrase, bi-ghammin would be translated "because of the sorrow" (taking the preposition bi for the cause); it would then refer to the polytheists' attack on them from the rear which in its turn was the direct result of their disputation and disobedience. It is a good meaning. In this case, the clause, "so that you might not grieve....", would mean as follows: We explain these facts to you so that you might not grieve. Thus, it would fall into line with the words of Allah: No misfortunate befalls you on the earth nor in your own souls, but it is in a book before We bring it into existence; surely that is easy to Allah: So that you may not grieve for what has escaped you, nor be exultant at what He has given you; and Allah does not love any arrogant boaster (57:22-23). (The meaning: He gave you another sorrow that you ran away from the battleground, because the polytheists attacked you from the rear when you disputed among yourselves and disobeyed the Prophet. We explain it to you so that you might not grieve at what had escaped you, nor at what befell you.) These three possible grammatical structures maintain the order of the verse and keep the sentences well-connected to each other. The exegetes have written many other possibilities. For example, to which sentence does the conjunctive, "so", join the words, "so He gave you another sorrow". What are the connotations of the first and the second "sorrow"? What is the import of the preposition "bi" in "bihammin" (translated here as "instead of ")? What is the significance of "so that you might not"? But they are not tenable in the least, and there is no use of quoting and commenting on them. In the light of the first two meanings given by us, "what had escaped you", (in the clause, "so that you might not grieve at what had escaped you, nor (at) what befell

you") would refer to victory and war booty; and "what befell you " to their slaughter and injuries. J
 : Then after sorrow He sent down security upon you, a slumber coming upon a party of you: al-Amanah" (security); an-nu'as (lethargy before sleep; light sleep; slumber); "slumber" is appositional substantive standing for "security". It is also possible to take al-amanah as plural of al-'amin (peaceful) like at-talib and at-talabah; in that case it will be circumstantial clause related to "you" in "upon you"; and "slumber" will become object of the verb, "sent down ". al-Ghashayan (to cover, to envelop). The verse shows that this slumber had overtaken only some, and not all, of the believers, as the clause, "a party of you", clearly says. These were the people, who had come back to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) after retreating and running off precipitately, and felt remorse and sorrow for what they had done. Far be it from Allah to pardon them mercifully while they were still fleeing away from the jihad, and were thus engaged in one of the greatest sins. Allah says about them, "and He has certainly pardoned you, and Allah is Gracious to the believers", and it is unthinkable that Allah's grace would cover a sinner when he was actively engaged in open defiance and sin ² until and unless he repented. But as explained above, Allah looked on them graciously when He changed their sorrow to another sorrow in order that they might not grieve, lest their hearts be polluted with something disliked by Allah; (and it proves that they had come back and repented before that). So, these were some of the believers; they were those who felt remorse for what they had done, and returned to the Prophet gathering around him. Probably it was at the time when the Prophet separated himself from the hordes of the polytheists and reached the mountain-pass ² although they returned to him gradually, one by one, when it was known that the Prophet was not slain. The other group is referred to in the next sentence, "and (there was) another party who cared only for their own selves" J
 and (there was) another party who cared only for their own selves: This was another group of the believers. The word "believer" is used here only to distinguish them from the hypocrites who have been mentioned later on (in 3:167168): And that He might know the hypocrites and it was said to them: "Come, fight

in Allah's way, or defend yourselves." The said: "If we knew fighting, we would certainly have followed you"... Allah did not give this second group (that cared only for itself) the honor accorded to the first one (who were pardoned, then given another sorrow and lastly provided security and slumber). This second party, on the other hand, was left on their own; they were wholly engrossed in their own selves, oblivious of every thing else. Allah mentioned here their two characteristics although one was a concomitant or branch of the other. First, that they cared only for themselves. It does not mean that they wanted for their own selves the happiness ² in its real sense. After all, even the believers want the same thing ² the happiness for themselves. Not only the man, every creature that has a little bit of will and volition thinks only about itself. What this clause connotes is that their whole attention was riveted to save their own skins ² lest they lose their lives and be slain. In other words, their only aim in accepting the religion ² or doing any other work ² was to let their own selves have the usufruct of this world. They had professed Islam only because they thought that it was an unconquerable factor, and that Allah would not like it to be overwhelmed by His enemies²even if the enemies had all the factors in their favor. These people sought to gain benefits from the religion as long as it went on giving them something to their advantage. But if the situation changed and the tables were turned against them, they would turn back on their heels, retreating into disbelief. J
 : they entertained about Allah thoughts of ignorance... the affair is wholly (in the hands) of Allah: They entertained about Allah a thought that was not correct, was actually a thought of ignorance. They ascribed to Him a characteristic that was not true, and was like that which the people of ignorance used to ascribe to Him. Whatever that thought, it was related to their words, "Do we have any hand in the affair?". It may also be inferred from the reply Allah taught His Prophet, i.e., "Say: 'Surely the affair is wholly (in the hands) of Allah.' " This reply evidently shows that according to their thinking some affairs were in their own hands. That is why as soon as they were defeated and massacred, they started having doubts about religion, and said to each other, "Do we have any hand in the affair?" It is clear from the above that they thought that outright victory and triumph was their right. Why? Because they were Muslims! They believed that the true religion cannot be vanquished, and consequently the followers of that religion cannot be defeated ² because, according to them, it was incumbent on Allah to help it

unconditionally, without any restriction, because He had promised to help. So that was the unjust thought, the thought of ignorance. The idol-worshippers of the days of ignorance believed that Allah was the Creator of every thing; that at the same time there was a separate Lord for every phenomenon, like sustenance, life, death, love, war, etc. Also, every species and every part of creation like man, earth, river, etc., had a Lord of its own; each Lord managed the affair of his subjects and none could overpower him within his jurisdiction. They worshipped those lords so that they would provide them with sustenance, give them happiness, and protect them from evil and misfortune; and Allah was like an overlord, allotting each group of His subjects and each part of His Kingdom to a lord who had full authority to do whatever he liked within his jurisdiction and in his domain. If someone thinks that the true religion could not be over powered in its advancement, and that the Prophet ² being the first to receive it from his Lord and be responsible for it²could not be defeated in his mission or could not die or be killed, then surely such a man entertains about Allah thoughts of ignorance. He has taken a partner for Allah, and idolized the Prophet as a deity who has been given domain over victory and war booty ² while in fact Allah is One Who has no partner, and in Whose hand lies every power and every authority; and none else besides Him has any authority at all. That is why when Allah said in a preceding section, "That He may cut off a portion from among those who disbelieve, or abase them so that they should return disappointed of attaining what they desired", He cut short the speech, turning towards His Prophet to tell him, "You have no concern in the affair". He did so, lest someone thought the Prophet had any concern or authority in that cutting off a portion of unbelievers or abasing them. It is Allah Himself Who has established the system of cause and effect. The stronger the cause the surer the appearance of its effect, no matter whether that effect is right or wrong, virtue or vice, good or bad, guidance or misguidance, justice or injustice. Also, it makes no difference whether the person involved is believer or unbeliever, beloved or hated, Muhammad (s.a.w.) or Abu Sufyan. Of course, Allah has special providence for His religion and for His friends. It is because of that concern that the system in the creation is run in such a way that it would finally lead to the victory of religion, and prepare the earth for His friends ² and the end is for the pious ones (7:128). It is a universal law and no exception has been made for prophet-hood and divine mission. That is why we find that when the normal factors and causes were present for the advancement of the religion and victory of the believers (as was the case in

some battles of the Prophet), the believers triumphed; and when there was any weak link in the chain (for example, hypocrisy raised its head, or they disobeyed the Prophet, or became weak-hearted or nervous) the polytheists got the upper hand, defeating the believers. The same was true in case of other prophets, vis-àvis, their people. The enemies were men of the world, whose only aim was to gain benefits of this life; they had overwhelming powers and gathered strength upon strength, and mobilized army after army. Naturally, they got upper hand and crushed the prophets ² some were slain like Zakariyya, others were beheaded like Yahya, yet, others had to leave their place like 'Isa and so on. Nevertheless, if the truth of the religion could not be established without disturbing the normal casualty ² in other words when it was a question of life or death for the truth ² then it was necessary for Allah to strengthen the religion in an extraordinary and supernatural way, lest evidence of its truth be destroyed. Some details of this subject were given in the discourses on Miracle in volume one, and on Deeds in volume three. However, to return to our topic: When these people (who did not care except for their own selves) asked each other whether they really had any authority in the affair, it showed that they entertained doubts about the truth of the religion, and as we have explained above, their religion had the spirit of idolatry in its body. Therefore, Allah told His Prophet to reply them in these words: "Surely the affair is wholly (in the hands) of Allah". Before that He had told the Prophet himself that he had no concern, no authority, in the affair. All this made it clear that the religion of nature, the religion of monotheism, is the one. In which all authority is reserved for Allah; the rest of the things ² including the Prophet ² have got no authority at all; rather they are links in the chain of cause and effect, governed by the divine system that leads to the law of test and trial. J
 They conceal within their souls what they would not reveal to you... and Allah knows what is in the breasts: It exposes their lack of belief in a much more harsher light than their words, "Do we have any hand in the affair?", had shown. Those words had expressed their doubt in the form of a question. But the idea hidden in their hearts ("Had we any hand in the affair, we would not have been slain here"), is an argument to prove according to their thinking untruth of the religion! That is why although they had dared to utter the former question before the Prophet, they kept the later words concealed in their hearts, as it would have clearly shown that they gave preponderance to disbelief over belief.

Allah therefore told His Prophet to reply their undisclosed thought in these words: "Say: 'Had you remained in your houses, those for whom slaughter was ordained would certainly have gone forth to the places where they (now) lie;' and that Allah might test what was in your breasts and that He might purge what was in your hearts. " These words made it clear to them that: Î
When the martyrs were slain in the battlefield, it was not because you were not on truth nor because the authority was not in your hands ² as you think. Rather, it had happened because the divine decree ² which is enforced without fail ² had ordained that those martyrs would lie in this place. If you had remained behind, those for whom martyrdom was ordained would surely have gone ahead to the place of their martyrdom. There is no way of escaping from the appointed time of death; when it comes nobody can delay it an hour nor can he bring it on before its times.

 It is a divinely established system that test and purge would encompass each and every human being; it would inevitably cover one and all, you as well as them. Neither you could avoid coming out of your homes nor the battle could be put off. All this was necessary in order that the martyrs might arrive at their right positions and achieve their high ranks, and you might reach your due places. In this way, everyone would be placed in his proper place ²either felicity or infelicity, happiness or unhappiness ² after the testing of the thoughts and ideas hidden in your breasts, and the separation of belief and polytheism concealed in your hearts. It is amazing to see a number of exegetes writing that the group mentioned in this verse refers to the hypocrites ² when the context clearly shows that it describes the condition of some believers. As for the hypocrites (i.e., the group of 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy that had withdrawn from the battle in the very beginning even before the battle had started), their condition has been described much later. Of course, that explanation might be in place if they use the word, "hypocrites", for those of weak faith, who were so confused in their belief that it ultimately boi1ed down to rejection of faith (in reality) although they professed Islam (in words). It is they whom Allah describes as 'those in whose hearts was disease'. He says: When the hypocrites and those in whose hearts was disease said: "Their religion has deceived them" (8:49); and among you there are those who hearken for their sake (9:47). Or may be they want to say that all hypocrites had not gone back to Madina with 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy.

Even more amazing is some others' assertion that these people were good believers. They say that these people thought that the affair of divine help and victory was in their hands because they were on the true religion, and they had seen how in the battle of Badr they were given victory and how angels were sent to help them. According to these exegetes, when they said, "Do we have any hand in the affair?", and thought, "Had we any hand in the affair, we would not have been slain here", it was actually their way of confessing that the affair was in the hands of Allah, not theirs, otherwise they would not have been massacred. If we accept this interpretation then the replies (Say: "Surely the affair is wholly (in the hands) of Allah", and, Say: "Had you remained in your houses, those for whom slaughter was ordained would certainly have gone forth to the places where they (now) lie "), would be totally irrelevant. Some people have realized this defect and then have tried to explain it away in a way that has compounded the confusion. In any case, we have already explained its true meaning to you. J
 (As for) those of you who turned back on the day when the two armies met, only the Satan sought to cause them to make slip on account of some deeds they had done: "Istazalahumu 'sh-shaytain" (the Satan wanted them to slip); he wanted so only because they had acquired some evil traits in their psyches, and done some bad deeds; one evil leads to another, because it emanates from following the heart's desires ²and the heart desires only that which has some affinity to it. Someone has taken the preposition "bi" (on account of) as indicative of instrument, and said that "some deeds" refers to their fuming back on the day of fighting. But this interpretation is far fetched; because "some deeds they had done" manifestly shows that their deeds had preceded there turning back; the two cannot refer to the same thing. In any case, the verse shows that some sins and evil deeds done by them had given the Satan power to mislead them by making them retreat and flee from the jihad. Consequently, there is no ground to suppose that the verse points to the Satanic cry on the day of Uhud that the Prophet was killed (as has been narrated in some traditions), because such interpretation is not supported by the wordings of the verse in any way. J
 and certainly Allah has pardoned them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing:

This pardon was granted to those who turned back on the day of battle, as mentioned in the beginning of the verse. The verse is unrestricted, and therefore covers all those who fled on that day. In other words it includes both groups: those on whom slumber was sent down and those who cared only for their own selves. But there is a difference between the two, as the former has been honored by Allah, but not the latter. Because of that difference, this general pardon (which; covers both groups) does not mention the aspects of honor) related to the formers pardon (as mentioned earlier). It also shows that the pardon mentioned in this verse is not the same as the one described (in 3:152) above, "and He has certainly pardoned you". That the two pardons are different may be gathered from different tones used in the two verses. Look first at the former where Allah says, "and He has certainly pardoned you, and Allah is Gracious to the believers". It clearly, shows Allah's grace and mercy on them, and mentions them as "believers"; thereafter it goes on saying that He changed their sorrow to another sorrow in order that they might not grieve then tells them that He sent down security on them in the form of slumber. How different is that tone from the one employed in this verse where it merely says: "and certainly Allah has pardoned them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing". Note that it speaks only about the pardon, but is silent about all the above-mentioned aspects of honor; then it ends with the adjective, "Forbearing" - focusing the attention on the fact that Allah does not make haste in giving punishment. A pardon accompanied by forbearance indicates that although the Master has overlooked the sin but still He is not pleased with the sinner.


 Those who think that both groups are equal in rank do so because both have been granted pardon.
 The former pardon is different from the latter in its connotation, although both denote pardoning. There is no proof to show that pardon, forgiveness and things like that have the same connotation everywhere; and we have explained how the two differ in these verses. î   Î 
 J  What is pardon? As ar-Raghib has said (and it is the meaning derived from its various uses): "al-'Afw (pardon) originally means to proceed straight away to get something. They say: 'afah or i'tafah (he proceeded towards him to take a certain thing from him); 'afati 'r-rihu 'd-dar (the wind proceeded to the house taking away

its traces or vestiges)." They say, 'afati 'd-dar when they want to say that the house has become effaced, obliterated; probably there is a fine literary point in this usage: It is as though the house itself came cover its traces and decorations, got hold of them and disappeared from sight. It is in this meaning that al-'afw is attributed to Allah; as though Allah goes to His servant and takes away whatever sins he might be having²thus the servant is left without any sin. It appears from the above that al-maghfirah (forgiveness; lit. = to cover) in a way emanates from al-'afw. The sin is first taken away then it is covered up so that it cannot be seen - neither by the sinner nor by others. The Qur'an says: and pardon us and forgive us [2:286]; and Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving [4:99]. Also it is clear that pardon and forgiveness - although having different meanings, the one branching out from the other, academically - are one and the same for all practical purposes. Also, these meanings are not reserved for Allah; these words may be used for others too in the same meanings. Allah says: ...unless they remit ya'funa or he remits ya'fuwa in whose hand is the marriage tie [2:237]; Say to those who believe (that) they forgive those who do not hope the days of Allah [45:14]; pardon them therefore and ask forgiveness for them, and take counsel with them in the affair[3:159]. Here Allah enjoins His Prophet to pardon them; he should not mete out to them the consequences of their disobedience, like censuring and admonishing them or shunning and avoiding them. He should also beseech Allah to forgive them (and He will grant that prayer without fail) in order that they are saved from punishment of their sins. Also, it is clear that the theme of pardon and forgiveness may be related with creative phenomena and legislative effects, as well as with affairs of this world and the next. Allah says: And whatever affliction befalls you, it is on account of what your hands have wrought, and (yet) He pardons most(of your faults)[42:30]. This verse definitely includes pardon of worldly consequences of the sins and faults. The same is the apparent significance of the words of Allah: ...and the angels declare His glory with the praise of their Lord and ask forgiveness for those on earth[42:5]. Also the words of Adam and his wife, quoted in the Qur'an, point to this reality: They said: "Our Lord! We have been unjust to ourselves, and if Thou forgive us not, and have (not) mercy on us, we shall certainly be of the losers"[7:23]. Certainly this injustice to their own selves and the forgiveness asked for were not related to the hereafter, because the prohibition which they had contravened was in nature of an advice, not of a law. Many Qur'anic verses prove that nearness and proximity to Allah and enjoyment of

the paradise's blessings cannot take place unless and until the rust of polytheism and sins are removed by repentance, etc., followed by the divine forgiveness. For example, Allah says: Nay! rather, what they used to do has become (like) rust upon their hearts [84:14]; and whoever believes in Allah He guides aright his heart[64:11]. Pardon and forgiveness are, in short, like removal of impediments and eradication of contrary antagonistic factors. Allah has counted belief and the hereafter as "life "; and the effects of belief, the deeds of the people of the hereafter and their lively progress as "light". He says: Is he who was dead then We raised him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people like him whose likeness is that of one in utter darkness whence he cannot come forth? [6:122]; and as for the next abode, that most surely is the life[29:64]. Thus, polytheism is death, and sins are utter darkness. Allah says: Or like utter darkness in the deep sea: there covers it a wave above which is another wave, above which is a cloud, (layers of) utter darkness one above another; when he holds out his hand, he is almost unable to see it; and to whomsoever Allah does not give light, he has no light[24:40]. Forgiveness then removes the death and darkness; it takes shape through the life (i.e., belief) and the light (i.e., divine mercy). An unbeliever has neither life nor light. A believer, whose sins are forgiven, has the life and the light both; on the other hand, a believer who is encumbered with sins is alive but with diminished light; his light will become perfect when he is forgiven. Allah says: their light shall run on before them and on their right hands; they shall say: "Our Lord! make perfect for us our light and grant us forgiveness[66:8]. The above discourse makes it clear that when pardon and forgiveness is attributed to Allah regarding creative affairs then it means removal of impediment (by creating a factor to erase it); in the context of legislative matters, it indicates removal of such factors that would prevent man's success in the hereafter; while in the circle of happiness and unhappiness it would entail removal of those things that would impede his happiness.

å
 
    

G * ΃˴ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ˸΍Ϯ˵Αή˴ ο ˴ ΍˴Ϋ·˶ ˸ϢϬ˶ ϧ˶ ΍˴Ϯ˸ΧϹ ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷Ύ˴ϛ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧϮ˵ϜΗ˴ ϻ ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ ˴Ϧϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˴Ϭϳ˵˷΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧΎ˴ϛ ˸Ϯϟ˴˷ ϯ˷ΰ˱ Ϗ ˵ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧΎ˴ϛ ˸ϭ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸ϢϬ˶ Α˶ Ϯ˵Ϡϗ˵ ϲ˶ϓ Γ˱ ή˴ ˸δΣ ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˴ ˴ό˸Πϴ˴ ϟ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϠΘ˶ ϗ˵ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ΗΎ˴ϣ Ύ˴ϣ Ύ˴ϧΪ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ ˲ήϴ˶μΑ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠϤ˴ ˸όΗ˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Ζ ˵ ϴ˶Ϥϳ˵ ϭ˴ ϲ˶ϴ˸Τϳ˵ Ϫ˵ {156}

ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵όϤ˴ ˸Πϳ˴ Ύ˷Ϥ˴ ϣ˶˷ ˲ή˸ϴΧ ˴ ˲ΔϤ˴ ˸Σέ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ˶˷ϣ ˲Γή˴ ϔ˶ ˸ϐϤ˴ ϟ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵˷ϣ˵ ˸ϭ΃˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ϴ˶Βγ ˴ ϲ˶ϓ ˸Ϣ˵Θ˸ϠΘ˶ ϗ˵ Ϧ˶Όϟ˴ϭ˴ {157} Ϫ˷Ϡ˴ϟ΍ ϰ˴ϟϹ ˶ ˸ϢΘ˵ ˸ϠΘ˶ ϗ˵ ˸ϭ΃˴ ˸Ϣ˷Θ˵ ϣ˵˷ Ϧ˶Όϟ˴ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήθ ˴ ˸ΤΗ˵ {158} Ϥ˴ Β˶ ϓ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϋ ˴ ϒ ˵ ˸ϋΎ˴ϓ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶˸ϮΣ ˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˷π ˵ ϔ˴ ϧ˴ϻ ΐ ˶ ˸ϠϘ˴ ˸ϟ΍ φ ˴ ϴ˶ϠϏ ˴ Ύ˷ψ ˱ ϓ˴ Ζ ˴ Ϩ˵ϛ ˸Ϯϟ˴ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ Ζ ˴ Ϩ˶ϟ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Δ˳ Ϥ˴ ˸Σέ˴ Ύ ϛ˶˷ Ϯ˴ Θ˴ Ϥ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ΐ ˵˷ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ˸Ϟϛ˴˷ Ϯ˴ Θ˴ ϓ˴ Ζ ˴ ˸ϣΰ˴ ϋ ˴ ΍˴ΫΈ˶ϓ˴ ή˶ ˸ϣϷ ˴ ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ˸έϭ˶ Ύ˴η˴ϭ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ ˸ήϔ˶ ˸ϐΘ˴ ˸γ΍˴ϭ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϡ{159} Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϛ˵ ˸ήμ ˵ Ϩ˴ϳ ϥ˶· Ϩ˵ ϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ϛ˴˷ Ϯ˴ Θ˴ ϴ˴ ˸Ϡϓ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ϭ˴ ϩ˶ Ϊ˶ ˸ό˴Α Ϧ˷ϣ˶ Ϣ˵ϛή˵ μ ˵ Ϩ˴ϳ ϱ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ΍˴Ϋ Ϧ˴Ϥϓ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ˸ϟά˵ ˸Ψϳ˴ ϥ˶·ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϟ˴ ΐ ˴ ϟ˶Ύ˴Ϗ ϼ ˴ ϓ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ{160} ϲ ˳˷ Β˶ Ϩ˴ ϟ˶ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ύ˴ϣ˴ϭ Ϣ˴˷ Λ˵ Δ˶ ϣ˴ Ύ˴ϴϘ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ Ϟ ˴˷ Ϗ ˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ε ˶ ˸΄ϳ˴ ˸ϞϠ˵˸ϐϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϟ ˴˷ ϐ˵ ϳ˴ ϥ˴΃ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤϠ˴˸ψϳ˵ ϻ ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϭ˴ ˸ΖΒ˴ δ ˴ ˴ϛ Ύ˷ϣ˴ β ˳ ˸ϔϧ˴ Ϟ ˵˷ ϛ˵ ϰ˷ϓ˴ Ϯ˴ Η˵ {161} ϊ˴ Β˴ Η˴˷΍ Ϧ ˶ Ϥ˴ ϓ˴ ΃˴ ή˵ ϴ˶μϤ˴ ˸ϟ΍ β ˴ ˸ΌΑ˶ ϭ˴ Ϣ˵ Ϩ˴˷Ϭ˴ Ο ˴ ϩ˵ ΍˴ϭ˸΄ϣ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ ς ˳Ψ ˴δ ˴ Α˶ ˯Ύ˴Α Ϧ˴Ϥϛ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ ΍˴Ϯ˸οέ˶ {162} Ύ˴Ϥ˶Α ˲ήϴ˶μΑ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ ˲ΕΎ˴Οέ˴ Ω˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠϤ˴ ˸όϳ˴ {163} ϟ˴ϴ˷ϛ˶ ΰ˴ ϳ˵ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Η˶ Ύ˴ϳ΁ ˸ϢϬ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ Ϯ˵Ϡ˸Θϳ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ δ ˶ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ ˸Ϧϣ˶˷ ϻ ˱ Ϯ˵γέ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ϴ˶ϓ Κ ˴ ό˴ Α˴ ˸Ϋ·˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴˷ ϣ˴ ˸ΪϘ˴ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ Ϥ˵ Ϡ˶˷ό˴ ϳ˵ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ Ϧ ˳ ϴ˶Βϣ˵˷ ϝ ˳ ϼ˴ο ϲ˶ϔϟ˴ Ϟ ˵ ˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϧΎ˴ϛ ϥ˶·ϭ˴ Δ˴ ˴Ϥ˸ϜΤ ˶ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍{164} {156} O you who believe! be not like those who disbelieve and say of their brethren when they travel in the earth or engage in fighting: Had they been with us, they would not have died and they would not have been slain; so Allah makes this to be an intense regret in their hearts; and Allah gives life and causes death and Allah sees what you do. {157} And if you are slain in the way of Allah or you die, certainly forgiveness from Allah and mercy is better than what they amass. {158} And if indeed you die or you are slain, certainly to Allah shall you be gathered together. {159} Thus it is due to mercy from Allah that you deal with them gently, and had you been rough, hard hearted, they would certainly have dispersed from around you; pardon them therefore and ask pardon for them, and take counsel with them in the affair; so when you have decided, then place your trust in Allah; surely Allah loves those who trust. {160} If Allah assists you, then there is none that can overcome you, and if He forsakes you, who is there then that can assist you after Him? And on Allah should the believers rely. {161} And it is not attributable to a prophet that he should act unfaithfully; and he who acts unfaithfully shall bring that in respect of which he has acted unfaithfully on the day of resurrection; then shall every soul be paid back fully what it has earned, and they shall not be dealt with unjustly. {162} Is then he who follows the pleasure of Allah like him who has made himself deserving of displeasure from Allah, and his abode is hell; and it is an evil destination. {163} There are (varying) grades with Allah, and Allah sees what they do. {164} Certainly Allah conferred a benefit upon the believers when He raised among them a Messenger from among themselves, reciting to them His communications and purifying them, and teaching them the Book and the wisdom, although before that they were surely in manifest error. å
  It is the continuation of the verses revealed especially about the battle of Uhud. It deals with another affair affecting them, i.e., the grief and sorrow that had overwhelmed them because so many of their braves and notables had been slaughtered. The overwhelming majority of the martyrs was from the Helpers; as

reportedly no more than four of the Emigrants were martyred. It gives rise to the surmise that most of the resistance was from the Helpers' side and that the Emigrants had left the battleground long before them. In short, these verses explain the error and mistake in sorrowing and grieving; then turn to another matter resulting from that grief, that is, their critical attitude towards the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a), thinking that it was he who had brought them to that disaster and put them into that perdition. It may be inferred from their talk alluded to herein: "Had they been with us, they would not have died and they would not have been slain." In other words, if they had listened to them and not obeyed the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a) they would have been alive today. It means that it was he who had led them to the slaughter. The verses make it clear that it was not meet for the Prophet that he should deceive anyone; he is Allah's Messenger, noble of heart, sublime in character; he is lenient to them by mercy of Allah, pardons them and seeks Allah's forgiveness for them and takes their counsel by permission of Allah; and Allah has conferred His favor on them by sending him to them in order that he may take them out of error bringing them to the guidance. ([ )! O you who believe! be not like those who disbelieve... and Allah sees what you do: The word, "those who disbelieve", refers to the unbelievers not to the hypocrites, as some people think. It is not the hypocrisy, per se, which incites such talks ² although the hypocrites had uttered these words. Such talk, in reality, is a product of disbelief. Thus it was necessary to ascribe it to the unbelievers. ad-Darb fil-ard (lit., striking in the earth) metaphorically means travelling. Al-Ghuzza is plural of al-ghaizi (fighter) like at-talib and at-tullab or ad-darib and ad-durrab "so Allah makes this to be an intense regret in their hearts", i.e., so that Allah may punish them through this intense regret; it has thus put the means in place of the end. The words, "Allah gives life and causes death", explain the reality about which the unbelievers had gone astray, and had said, "Had they been with us, they would not have died and they would not have been slain." The words, "death", as used here, covers natural death as well as slaughter - we have explained earlier that when used alone, this word covers every type of death. The clause, "and Allah sees what you do", explains the reason for the prohibition contained in the words, "be not like

those who disbelieve". In the clause, "they would not have died and they would not have been slain", death is mentioned before slaying; the sequence follows that of the preceding clause, "when they travel... or engage in fighting". Also, unlike slaying (which is an abnormal happening) death is a natural and normal phenomenon; therefore the normal was mentioned before the abnormal. The verse, in short, admonishes the believers not to be like the unbelievers; they should not say about someone who dies outside his home town or among strangers, or is slain when engaged in jihad, that if he had been with them he would not have died or been killed. This type of talk throws one into mental agony and divine punishment - it is the intense grief put in their hearts. Moreover, it emanates from sheer ignorance: Being near them or away from them neither gives life nor causes death. Giving life and death is among the affairs exclusively reserved for Allah the One Who has no partner or colleague. Therefore, the believers should fear Allah and not be like the unbelievers; and Allah sees what they do. ([ )! And if you are slain in the way of Allah or you die, certainly forgiveness from Allah and mercy is better than what they amass: Obviously, "what they amass", refers to property and wealth as well as to its concomitants, as these are the best objects of desire in this life. This verse mentions martyrdom before normal death, because being slain in the way of Allah is nearer to divine forgiveness compared to other deaths. This fine point has caused this change of sequence. Thereafter, the next verse, "And if indeed you die or you are slain...", reverts to the normal pattern, putting death before slaughter, because there is no such fine point there to justify any change. ([ )! Thus it is due to mercy from Allah... should the believers rely: "al-Fazz" (rude, rough); hard-heartedness metaphorically means unkindness, illnature and intolerance; al-infidad (to disperse).

The verse turns away from the believers, addressing the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) directly, although the real import is as follows: It is due to Our mercy that Our Messenger is lenient to you; that is why We have ordered him to pardon you, ask forgiveness for you and take counsel with you in the affair, and to place his trust in Us when he has taken any decision. In spite of that meaning, the mode of address was changed (and we have explained this reason in the beginning of this topic of Uhud) because there is a current of censure, admonition and stricture running throughout the narrative, and the Qur'an turns its face from the believers whenever a chance occurs. This situation is one of them, because it touches a condition of theirs, which tends to put blame on the Prophet. Their grieving for the slaughter of their martyrs might sometimes lead them to find fault with the Prophet's actions and to accuse him of bringing them to the hazardous eventuality where they were killed and extirpated. That is why Allah turned away from them and addressed His Prophet directly: "Thus it is due to mercy from Allah that you are lenient to them..." This talk is based on another implied one which may be understood from the context: "If they are entangled, as you see, in such undesirable condition that they resemble the unbelievers and intensely grieve for their martyrs, then it is only due to Our mercy that you are lenient to them, otherwise, they would have dispersed from around you." (And Allah knows better). The clauses, "pardon them therefore and ask forgiveness for them, and take counsel with them in the affair", endorse the precedent established by the Prophet, as he was doing all this from the beginning, and he had taken their counsel shortly before the battle of Uhud. The verse points to the fact that the Prophet does what he is told by Allah to do, and Allah is pleased with his performance. Allah told His Prophet to pardon them (i.e., he should not mete out to them the consequences of their disobedience), and to ask Allah to forgive them (and in that case He would certainly do so). The word, although general and unrestricted, does not include the shari'ah's penal code and things like that; otherwise it would result in discarding the whole shari'ah. Moreover, the next clause, "and take counsel with them in the affair", implies that the preceding two orders too are related to the

matters of government and public affairs ² in which he is required to take counsel with them. Now we have reached the last sentences: "but when you have decided, then place your trust in Allah, surely Allah loves those who trust (in Him)." When He loves, He will be your Guardian and Helper; and will never forsake you. The next verse makes it clear and even invites the believers to have trust in Him: "If Allah assists you, then there is none that can overcome you, and if He forsakes you, who is there then that can assist you after Him?" Then He orders the believers to have trust in Him and says: "and on Allah should the believers rely." The sentence metaphorically puts the effect in place of the cause. They should rely on Allah because they believe in Him, and there is no helper or supporter except Him. ([ )! And it is not attributable to a prophet that he should defraud... and Allah sees what they do: "al-Ghill" (to defraud, to act faithlessly). We have mentioned in verse 3:79 (It is not meet for a man that Allah should give him the Book and the wisdom and prophethood, then he should say to men: "Be my servants rather than Allah's") that this mode of speech is intended to declare the purity and blamelessness of the Prophet showing that he was far removed from evil and indecency. This verse means as follows: Far be it from a prophet to defraud or be faithless to his Lord or the people (and defrauding the people too is another form of defrauding Allah); it is because he who defrauds will have to meet his Lord with that which he has defrauded and shall be paid back fully what he has earned. Then He declares that accusing the Prophet of defrauding is an unjust and untenable idea, because he follows the pleasure of Allah, he never goes beyond His pleasure; and the man who defrauds, brings upon himself severe wrath of Allah and his abode is the hell, and it is an evil destination. The verse, "Is then he who follows the pleasure of Allah...", gives the above connotation. Then He says that the various groups (i.e., those who follow the pleasure of Allah and those who bring wrath of Allah upon themselves) are of diverse grades; and Allah sees what they do. The people should not think that Allah loses sight of even

an iota of good or evil done by them; they should not be careless in following His pleasure or avoiding His wrath. ([ )! Certainly Allah conferred (His) favor... they were surely in manifest error: Again the mode of address has changed, taking the believers as absent. The general reason of such changes has already been explained. As for this particular verse, the reason is as follows: The verse intends to describe Allah's favor upon the believers - because of their belief. That is why it has used the adjective, "the believers", and not the verb, "those who believe", because only an adjective shows inseparable relationship, and only the adjective could show the causality (as has been said) or could show it more perfectly. The verse's meaning is clear. There are other matters worth explaining in this verse; and, God willing, some will be given in appropriate places. å
 
    

G & ΍ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸ϢϜ˵ δ ˶ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ Ϊ˶ Ϩ˶ϋ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ˸Ϟϗ˵ ΍˴άϫ˴ ϰ˷ϧ˴ ΃˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ˸Ϡϗ˵ Ύ˴Ϭ˸ϴϠ˴˸Μϣ˶˷ Ϣ˵Θ˸Βλ ˴ ΃˴ ˸Ϊϗ˴ ˲ΔΒ˴ ϴ˶μϣ˵˷ Ϣ˵Ϝ˸ΘΑ˴ Ύ˴λ΃˴ Ύ˷Ϥ˴ ϟ˴ϭ˴ ΃˴˲ήϳ˶Ϊϗ˴ ˯˳ ˸ϲη ˴ Ϟ ˶˷ ϛ˵ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ˴ϪϠ˴˷ϟ {165} Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˴ Ϡ˴˸όϴ˴ ϟ˶ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˶ ˸ΫΈ˶Β˶ ϓ˴ ϥ ˶ Ύ˴ό˸ϤΠ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϰ˴ϘΘ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α˴ Ύ˴λ΃˴ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ {166} ˸΍Ϯ˵ϠΗ˶ Ύ˴ϗ ΍˸Ϯϟ˴Ύ˴όΗ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ Ϟ ˴ ϴ˶ϗϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϙϓ˴ Ύ˴ϧ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ά˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˴ Ϡ˴˸όϴ˴ ϟ˶ϭ˴ ˸όΒ˴ Η˴˷ϻ ˴˷ ϻ ˱ Ύ˴Θϗ˶ Ϣ˵ Ϡ˴˸όϧ˴ ˸Ϯϟ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ ˸΍Ϯ˵όϓ˴ ˸Ω΍ ϭ˶ ΃˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ϴ˶Βγ ˴ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˷ϣ˴ Ϣ˶Ϭϫ˶ ΍˴Ϯ˸ϓ΄˴Α˶ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϟϮ˵Ϙϳ˴ ϥ ˶ Ύ˴Ϥϳ˶Ϻϟ˶ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶ Ώ ˵ ή˴ ˸ϗ΃˴ ά˳ Ό˶ ϣ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ ή˶ ˸ϔϜ˵ ˸Ϡϟ˶ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ˸Ϣϛ˵ Ύ˴Ϩ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϤΘ˵ ˸Ϝϳ˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ϣ˵ Ϡ˴˸ϋ΃˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ˸ϢϬ˶ Α˶ Ϯ˵Ϡϗ˵ ϲ˶ϓ β ˴ ˸ϴϟ˴{167} ΍ϭ˵΅έ˴ ˸ΩΎ˴ϓ ˸Ϟϗ˵ ΍Ϯ˵ϠΘ˶ ϗ˵ Ύ˴ϣ Ύ˴ϧϮ˵ϋΎ˴σ΃˴ ˸Ϯϟ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵Ϊό˴ ϗ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ϧ˶ ΍˴Ϯ˸ΧϹ ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ά˴˷ϟ΍ ϋ ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϗΩ˶ Ύ˴λ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ ϥ˶· Ε ˴ ˸ϮϤ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϝ˵ δ ˶ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ ˸Ϧ{168} ˸ϢϬ˶ Α˶˷έ˴ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ ˯Ύ˴ϴ˸Σ΃˴ ˸ϞΑ˴ Ύ˱Η΍˴Ϯ˸ϣ΃˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ϴ˶Βγ ˴ ϲ˶ϓ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϠΘ˶ ϗ˵ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϧ ˴˷ Β˴ δ ˴ ˸ΤΗ˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϗί˴ ˸ήϳ˵ {169} ˸Ϡϳ˴ ˸Ϣϟ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷Ύ˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήθ ˶ ˸ΒΘ˴ ˸δ˴ϳϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˶˸πϓ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ Ύ˴Η΁ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Σή˶ ϓ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ˲ϑ˸ϮΧ ˴ ϻ ˴˷ ΃˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ ϔ˶ ˸ϠΧ ˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶˷ Ϣ˶ϬΑ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΤ ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϧΰ˴ ˸Τϳ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ {170} Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ή˴ ˸Ο΃˴ ϊ˵ ϴ˶πϳ˵ ϻ ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ΃˴ϭ˴ Ϟ ˳ ˸πϓ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Δ˳ Ϥ˴ ˸όϨ˶ Α˶ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήθ ˶ ˸ΒΘ˴ ˸δϳ˴ {171} {165} What! when a misfortune befell you, and you had certainly afflicted (the unbelievers) with twice as much, you began to say: Whence is this? Say: It is from yourselves; surely Allah has power over all things. {166} And what befell you on the day when the two armies met (at Ohud) was with Allah's knowledge, and that He might know the believers. {167} And that He might know the hypocrites; and it was said to them: Come, fight in Allah's way, or defend yourselves. They said: If we knew fighting, we would certainly have followed you. They were on that day much nearer to unbelief than to belief. They say with their mouths what is not in their hearts, and Allah best knows what they conceal. {168} Those who said of their brethren whilst they (themselves) held back: Had they obeyed us, they would not have been killed. Say: Then avert death from yourselves if you speak the truth.

{169} And reckon not those who are killed in Allah's way as dead; nay, they are alive (and) are provided sustenance from their Lord;{170} Rejoicing in what Allah has given them out of His grace and they rejoice for the sake of those who, (being left) behind them, have not yet joined them, that they shall have no fear, nor shall they grieve. {171} They rejoice on account of favor from Allah and (His) grace, and that Allah will not waste the reward of the believers. å
  It is the conclusion of the verses about the battle of Uhud. These verses describe the position of some hypocrites who had deserted the believers when they were proceeding from Madina to Uhud, and refute what they were saying about those who were slain in the way of Allah; then the verses extol the condition of the martyrs saying that they were enjoying Allah's bounties in His presence and were happily waiting for their brothers who were left behind in this world. ([ )! What! When a misfortune befell you... Allah has power over all things": First they were told not to be like the unbelievers ² grieving and feeling intense sorrow for their slain brethren. It was explained to them that life and death were exclusively in the hands of Allah, they had no concern in this affair; and it would have made no difference whether the martyrs were near them or far from them, or whether they had gone forth to fight or sat behind. After making all this clear, now Allah explains the immediate cause of that disaster according to the law of causality. He tells them that debacle was caused by their disobedience which they committed on that day: the disobedience of the archers when they left their position, and then the disobedience of all those who fled away from the battlefield. In short, the disaster took place because they disobeyed the Messenger, their Commander, and showed lack of courage and disputed among themselves. All this led to their retreat according to the law of nature and custom. The verse's meaning is therefore as follows: Do you know how this misfortune befell you? Was it not a misfortune that you had previously inflicted twice as much on your enemies, the unbelievers? This time the disaster was brought on you by your own selves. It were you who undermined the means of victory with your own

hands; it were you who did not follow the clear order of your Commander, fell into temptation and disputed one with the other. The clause, "while you had certainly afflicted (the unbelievers) with twice as much", prompts them to compare their losses in Uhud (martyrdom of seventy believers) with those suffered by the unbelievers in Badr when they had suffered twice as many casualties ² as seventy of the unbelievers were slain and seventy taken prisoners. This description is intended to soothe the believers' feelings, making the calamity look less devastating. After all, they have suffered only half of that, which they had inflicted on their enemies; so they should not grieve, should not be distressed. Some people have explained it differently. According to them the clause, "It is from your own selves", means that you yourselves had opted for this misfortune. It happened like this: They had chosen to release the prisoners of Badr in exchange for ransom. But the initial order was to kill them; and they were warned that if they accepted the ransom, a similar number from their side would be killed next year; but they said: "We agree to this condition. We shall take the ransom and enjoy its benefits; and if one of us is killed later on, he shall be a martyr." The ending clause of this verse (surely Allah has power over all things) supports, or rather proves, this latter explanation; as this clause does not connect properly with the former meaning. We shall quote in the next "Traditions" ahadith from the Imams of the Ahlulbayt (a.s.) regarding this topic. ([ )! And what befell you on the day «and Allah best knows what they conceal: The first of these two verses supports the above theme that the clause, "Say: 'It is from you own selves'", refers to their opting for the ransom in exchange of Badr's prisoners and agreeing to the attached condition. Only in this way, it can be said that the misfortune that befell them in Uhud was with Allah's permission. As for the former explanation, (that the immediate cause of this misfortune was your disobedience), it has no relevance with this verse; obviously, there is no sense in

saying that their disobedience was by permission of Allah. Accordingly, the statement that the misfortune that had befallen them was by Allah's permission explains the preceding declaration that it was from their own selves. It paves the way of the next clause, "and that He might know the believers", which in its turn opens the way to deal with the hypocrites, together with their talk and its refutation; and to unveil the reality of this especial death, i.e., martyrdom in the way of Allah. The clause, "or (at least) defend yourselves", intends to persuade them to fight; if you do not fight in the way of Allah, then at least defend your families and your own selves. "They were on that day much nearer to unbelief than to belief." The preposition "li" in "li 'l-kufr" (to unbelief) and "li 'l-iman" (to belief) has been used in meaning of "to". It shows their position vis-à-vis open disbelief; as for hypocrisy, they had certainly fallen in it. The word, "with their mouths", in the sentence, "They say with their mouths what is not in their hearts", has been put here for emphasis and as a counter-balance to the clause, "in their hearts". ([ )! Those who said of their brethren... if you are truthful: The word, "brethren" refers to those with whom they had family ties from among the martyrs. Allah has mentioned here their "brotherhood", side by side with the comment, "while they (themselves) held back"; it is meant to put them to shame in a most vivid and crushing way, showing that they held back from helping their own brothers who were meanwhile massacred by the enemy. The sentence, "Say: 'Then ward off death from yourselves'", refutes their talk. ad-Dar' (to ward off; to avert). ([ )! And reckon not those who are killed in Allah's way... provided sustenance from their Lord: Again the speaker turns away from the Muslims and speaks with the Prophet alone; and its reason has been mentioned several times in Commentaries of the relevant

verses. Also, it is possible to treat this address as continuation of the preceding sentence where it addresses the Prophet, "Say: Then ward off death...'. Death in this verse means nullity of consciousness and action. That is why Allah explains the martyrs' life by showing that they receive sustenance (and it is action) and rejoice in Allah's grace (and it shows their feeling which proves consciousness). ([ )! Rejoicing in what Allah has given them... nor shall they grieve: "alFarah " is opposite of "al-huzn" (sorrow). al-Bisharah and al-bushra (good news); al-istibshar (to seek happiness through a good news). The verse means: They rejoice in what they have received of Allah's grace and which is always present with them; they feel happy when they receive the good tidings regarding those who have not yet joined them - are still in this world - that they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve. Two things are clear from the above:  ! Those who are killed in the way of Allah continue to receive the news about good believers whom they had left alive in this world. %
 $! The good news concerns the reward of the believers' deeds ²that they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve. It happens that they see this reward in the abode, which they abide in. It is because their knowledge of things emanates from observation, not from arguments. The verse therefore proves that after death man's existence continues between his death and the Day of Resurrection. We have described it in detail under "The Life of al-Barzakh" under the verse, And do not speak of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead (2:154). ([ )! They rejoice on account of favor from Allah and (His) grace... the reward of the believers:

This rejoicing is more comprehensive and covers their joy for others as well as for themselves. It is proved from the clause, "and that Allah will not waste the reward of the believers", which being unrestricted covers all the believers. Perhaps this is the reason why the "rejoicing" and also "grace" have been repeated here. Meditate on this verse. The words, "favor" and "grace", have been used as common nouns, and "sustenance" has been left unspecified. This style gives the hearer's imagination full rein; he is free to visualize whatever he likes. Likewise fear and grief are left vague, so that put in negative form they would signify comprehensiveness. One finds on meditating on the verse that:  ! The verses intend to describe the believers' reward; %
 $! That reward consists of their sustenance near Allah;  $! That sustenance is a favor and grace from Allah;  ! That favor and grace is mirrored in the fact that they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve. The clause, "that they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve", is really wonderful; the more you meditate on it, the more expansive and extensive its meaning will be, with its subtlety, sublimity and graceful flow. The thing that comes before the eyes is that the fear and sorrow are removed from the martyrs. Fear takes shape when there is possibility of something occurring which would nullify an existing happiness of man; sorrow appears when that thing has already happened. Misfortune ² or any undesirable phenomenon ² is feared as long as it has not befallen; but once it has begun, the fear gives way to sorrow. There is no fear after a misfortune has taken shape, and no sorrow before that. Fear, with all its aspects, may be removed from man only when there is no chance of deterioration or extinction for any bounty that he enjoys and possesses. Sorrow,

with all its aspects, may be removed from him only when he is not deprived of any such bounty to begin with, nor has he lost it after finding it. When the Qur'an says that Allah has removed general fear and general sorrow from a man, it means that He has given him all possible bounties and favors for his enjoyment; and those bounties and favors will never deteriorate or be taken away from him. In other words, man will remain alive forever enjoying the everlasting happiness. It is evident that removal of fear and sorrow means the same as man's receiving sustenance from Allah; He says: and that which is with Allah is best for the righteous (3:198); and what is with Allah is enduring (16:96). These two verses show that what is with Allah is everlasting and enduring bounty, not tainted by any affliction, not liable to extinction. Also, it is clear that negation of fear and sorrow is one with affirmation of favor and grace that is, divine bounty. But we have explained in the beginning of the book (and further details will be given under the verse,... with those upon whom Allah has bestowed favors...4:69) that "favor", whenever used in the Qur'an, means divine guardianship. Therefore, this verse means that Allah is their Guardian Who manages their affairs and bestows on them exclusive grace. Some people have supposed that "grace" means a bounty given in excess of what a man's deeds have made him eligible to; and "favor" means the bounty equal to the deeds. But it does not enmesh with the end clause, "and that Allah will not waste the reward of the believers". The word, "reward", shows that they are "eligible" for grace and favor both; and you have seen that all these clauses, "are provided sustenance from their Lord", "Rejoicing in what Allah has given", "They rejoice on account of favor from Allah and (His) grace", "and Allah will not waste the reward of the believers", lead to one and the same reality. There are other aspects of these verses, some of which were explained under the verse, And do not speak of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead (2:154); hopefully Allah will help us to complete, according to our capacity, other related matters in other appropriate places, God willing. å
 
    

& &G

΍˸ϮϘ˴ Η˴˷΍˴ϭ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϣ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩδ ˴ ˸Σ΃˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϠ˴˷ϟ˶ Ρ ˵ ˸ήϘ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ Α˴ Ύ˴λ΃˴ Ύ˴ϣ Ϊ˶ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ϝ ˶ Ϯ˵γή˴˷ ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ΑΎ˴ΠΘ˴ ˸γ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ˲Ϣϴ˶ψϋ ˴ ˲ή˸Ο΃˴{172} ϝ ˴ Ύ˴ϗ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϣ˴ ˸όϧ˶ ϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ύ˴ϨΒ˵ ˸δΣ ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗϭ˴ Ύ˱ϧΎ˴Ϥϳ˶· ˸Ϣ˵ϫΩ˴ ΍˴ΰϓ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ˸Ϯθ ˴ ˸ΧΎ˴ϓ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϟ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵όϤ˴ Ο ˴ ˸Ϊϗ˴ α ˴ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ α ˵ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ ϟ˴ Ϟ ˵ ϴ˶ϛϮ˴ ˸ϟ΍ {173} Δ˳ Ϥ˴ ˸όϨ˶ Α˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ΒϠ˴Ϙ˴ ϧΎ˴ϓ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ ΍˴Ϯ˸οέ˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵όΒ˴ Η˴˷΍˴ϭ ˲˯Ϯ˵γ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸δδ ˴ ˸Ϥϳ˴ ˸Ϣϟ˴˷ Ϟ ˳ ˸πϓ˴ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Ϣ˳ ϴ˶ψϋ ˴ Ϟ ˳ ˸πϓ˴ ϭ˵Ϋ Ϫ˵ {174} ϑ ˵ Ϯ˶˷ Ψ ˴ ϳ˵ ϥ ˵ Ύ˴τ˸ϴθ ˴˷ ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ Ϝ˵ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ Ύ˴Ϥϧ˴˷·˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ˸Άϣ˵˷ Ϣ˵ΘϨ˵ϛ ϥ˶· ϥ ˶ Ϯ˵ϓΎ˴Χϭ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ Ϯ˵ϓΎ˴ΨΗ˴ ϼ ˴ ϓ˴ ϩ˵ ˯Ύ˴ϴϟ˶˸ϭ΃˴{175} {172} (As for) those who responded (at Ohud) to the call of Allah and the Messenger after the wound had befallen them, those among them who do good (to others) and guard (against evil)shall have a great reward. {173} Those to whom the people said: Surely men have gathered against you, therefore fear them, but this increased their faith, and they said: Allah is sufficient for us and most excellent is the Protector. {174} So they returned with favor from Allah and (His) grace, no evil touched them and they followed the pleasure of Allah; and Allah is the Lord of mighty grace. {175} It is only the Shaitan that causes you to fear from his friends, but do not fear them, and fear Me if you are believers. å
  These verses have connection with those revealed about the battle of Uhud, as may be understood from the clause, "after the wound had afflicted them", when read in conjunction with the preceding words; "If a wound has afflicted you (at Uhud), a wound like it has also afflicted the (unbelieving) people". ([ )! (As for) those who responded to the call of Allah and the Messenger... shall have a great reward: "al-Istijabah" and "al-ijabah" both reportedly have the same meaning: You ask for something and get positive response. Allah and His Messenger both have been mentioned here, although either word would have sufficed. Perhaps it is because the Muslims in Uhud disobeyed Allah and the Prophet both. They disobeyed Allah by fleeing and retreating from the battlefield, while Allah had ordered them to fight and forbidden them to flee. They disobeyed the Prophet when the archers violated his order not to leave their post in any case, and when the rest of the Muslims ran off precipitately and did not respond to his call although he was calling them from their rear. Now that they did respond positively on this later occasion, they were described as responding to Allah and the Messenger both, to set the matter in parallel. The clause, "those among them who do good (to others) and guard (against evil)

shall have a great reward", restricts the promise to only a group among those who had responded. It is because the response is an external action, which does not necessarily spring from the reality of doing good and guarding against evil - on which the great reward depends. It is an amazing watchfulness of the Qur'an that one topic does not distract it from other realities. It is evident from above that not all of the responders were sincere to Allah in this matter; some of them were not true doers of good to others nor did they sincerely guard, themselves against evil and these are the important characteristics, which make one eligible for great reward from Allah. Some people have said that "min" (from, among) in 'minhum" (among them), is not here to indicate a portion; rather it is explanatory, in the same way as it is in verse 48:29, where it says: Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are severe against the unbelievers... Allah has promised those among them who believe and do good, forgiveness and a great reward. But it is an interpretation, which does not agree with the context. Also, it is clear that their praise contained in later verses, "Those to whom the people said ...', is intended for a selected band of them although in wordings it is attributed to the whole group. ([ )! Those to whom the people said: "Surely men have gathered against you... and-Allah is the Lord of mighty grace: "an-Nas" (people, men) is used for human beings when no distinguishing factor (to separate one from another) is taken into account. The first an-nas (translated here as "people") is different from the second (translated as "men");the latter refers to the enemy that was gathering army to fight the believers, while the former were those who had forsaken the believers in Uhud and held back from them and were now talking with them in this way to keep them back, so that they (the believers) would not proceed forth to fight the polytheists. In other words, the latter refers to the polytheists and the former to their agents within the Muslim camp who insidiously worked against the believers. The verse manifestly shows that they were a group not one person. It supports the report that the verses were revealed not about the events of the lesser Badr, but about the Prophet's campaign when, after Uhud, he went forth with the remnants of his companions in pursuit of the polytheists. Both events will be narrated in the coming "Traditions". "Surely men have gathered against you", that is, they have gathered to attack you again. (And Allah knows better.) "but this (only) increased their faith": It is but

natural that when a man intends to do something, and someone whom he does not trust - advises him not to do it, then that prohibition gives an impetus to do it by all means; his powers and faculties become geared to do that work, and his intention becomes firmer. The more the said advisor persists in prohibition, the more determined the man becomes to do it. This effect is even more stronger when the man so advised believes that he is on right and that he must do what his duty requires him to do. That is why whenever someone blamed the believers regarding some divine orders or put hindrance in their way, their belief increased even more and their determination and courage became much more stronger. Possibly one factor that helped to increase their faith was the confirmation that such news produced of the revealed information that they had had in advance that they would have to suffer trouble, harm and damage in the divine cause until their affairs were favorably settled by Allah's permission. Allah had promised to help them, and naturally that type of help presupposes fighting and war. "and they said: 'Allah is sufficient for us and most excellent Protector is (He)'": 'hasbuna (sufficient for us); this word is derived from al-hisab (to count, to reckon), because sufficiency is reckoned, vis-à-vis, the need. The sentence portrays their total dependence on Allah, because of their faith - without caring, about external causes, which the divine system has created in the world. al-Wakil (agent, manager, representative) refers to one who manages the affairs on behalf of someone. The connotation of the verse is therefore similar to that of the verse 65:3: and whoever trusts in Allah, He is sufficient for him; surely Allah attains His purpose. That is why this clause (and they said: "Allah is sufficient for us and most excellent Protector is (He) ") has been followed by the words, "So they returned with favor from Allah and (His) grace; no evil touched them." Therefore, when they followed His pleasure, He praised them in these words, "and they followed the pleasure of Allah; and Allah is the Lord of mighty grace".    The fact is that fulfillment of desire and success of design in this material world depends on some material and other psychological causes. When man intends to do something and produces its necessary material causes, then the only thing that can prevent his realization of his wishes is some, shortcoming in its psycho-logical causes, in his mental attitude; like weakness of will-power, fear or sorrow, recklessness or covetousness, foolishness or distrust, and things like that - and they are important and common factors. But when a man relies on Allah, he is

connected to the unconquerable cause that can never fail - the cause above all the causes. This connection strengthens his will to such an extent that no adverse psychological cause can overpower it - and it spells success and triumph. There is another aspect to the trust in Allah which in effect joins it to super-natural miraculous phenomena, as is evident from the words of Allah: and whoever trusts in Allah, He is sufficient for him; surely Allah attains His purpose (65:3). Some aspects of this subject have already been described under the topic of "Miracle". (In English volume 1) ([ )! That is only the Satan that frightens... and fear Me if you are believers: Evidently the demonstrative pronoun "dhaalikum" (that) refers to the people who had brought the quoted news. It is therefore one of the occasions where the Qur'an has used the word, "Satan", for man; as is apparent also from the verses: ...from the evil of the whispering of the slinking (Satan), who whispers into the hearts of men, from among the jinn and the men. (114:4-6). This explanation is supported by the next sentence, "So do not fear them", that is, do not fear the people who have spoken to you in that manner, because they are only Satans. (We shall later on explain this matter, unveiling the reality behind it, if Allah so wills.)  $  Innumerable traditions have been, narrated concerning the battle of Uhud; but there is so much contradiction and conflict among them - about various aspects of the event - that it. is difficult to trust all of them. The most glaring contradictions are seen in those traditions which try to explain the reasons of revelation of most of the verses (there are nearly sixty verses in all). One is amazed to look at those traditions; a contemplating reader finds himself bound to decide that various sectarian inclinations have filled them with their own spirits - making them to speak what would benefit narrators in their sectarian causes. That is why we have not quoted them in this discourse; whoever is interested, should consult various collections of traditions and bigger books of exegesis. Ibn Abl Hatim narrates from Abu'd-Duha that he said: "The verse was revealed: and take "ash-shuhadaa" witnesses from among you (3:140); so seventy of them were martyred on that day: four from the Emigrants - Hamzah ibn 'Abdi'1Muttalib, Mus'ab ibn 'Umayr (from Banu 'Abdu'd-Dar), ash-Shammas ibn 'Uthman

al-Makhzumi and 'Abdullah ibn Jahsh al-Asadi - and the rest were from the Helpers." (ad-Durru'l-manthur) 
 ! The tradition shows that Abu 'a-Duha has taken the word ashshuhada" for 'martyrs'; and an overwhelming majority of the exegetes has followed suit. But we have explained in the relevant Commentary that apparently no proof can be found in the Book for this meaning; evidently the word refers to the witnesses of the deeds. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about the words of Allah, Do you think that you will enter the Garden while Allah has not yet known those who strive hard from among you...: "Certainly Allah did know what He was going to create before He created it, when they were tiny particles; (likewise) He knew who would strive and who would not, as He knew that He would give death to His creatures (even) before He caused their death - while their death was not yet seen, (and) they were still alive." öatTafslr, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! The tradition points to what has been explained earlier that there is a difference between knowledge before creation and the factual knowledge which is the same as the action. When this verse says, Allah has not yet known those who strive . . . it does not speak about the knowledge before creation. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about the words of Allah, And certainly you desired death before you met it, so indeed you have seen it (even) while you look (at it): "When Allah, the High, informed the believers what (favor) He had done to their martyrs of Badr in their abodes in the Garden, they coveted that (honor), and said: 'O Allah, show us (i.e. provide for us) a fighting in which we should be martyred.' Therefore Allah showed it to them on the day of Uhud; but they did not remain firm except him whom Allah wished among them. So this is the word of Allah, And certainly you desired death..." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) 
 ! This meaning has been narrated in ad-Durru 'l-manthur from Ibn 'Abbas, Mujahid, Qatadah, al-Hasan and as-Suddi. The Imam said: "Surely the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was wounded on the day

of Uhud, and observers saw him in that condition; then they started telling whomever they met, 'Certainly the Messenger of Allah has been killed; (look for) safety.' So when they returned to Medina, Allah revealed: And Muhammad is no more than a Messenger, the messengers have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you then turn back upon your heels? (He means: to the disbelief?) And whoever turns back upon his heels, he will by no means do harm to Allah in "the least." (ibid.) Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abu Hatim have narrated from ar-Rabi' about the above verse; "It was on the day of Uhud when they were afflicted with what afflicted them of slaughter and injury, and they talked among themselves about the Prophet of Allah; they said: 'He has been killed.' Others among them said: 'Had he been a- prophet he would not have been killed.' But some high-ranking Companions of the Prophet said: 'Fight for what your Prophet had fought for, until Allah gives you victory or you join him (after martyrdom).1 And we have been told that an Emigrant passed by a Helper who was struggling in his blood, and said: 'O so-and-so! do you know that Muhammad has been killed?' The Helper said: 'If Muhammad has been killed, then surely he had (already) conveyed (the divine message); so fight in the cause of your religion.' Then Allah revealed: And Muhammad is no more than a Messenger, the messengers have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you then turn back upon your heels? He means: Will you then turn back to disbelief after believing?" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) Ibn Jarir has narrated from as-Suddi that he said: "(A rumour) spread among the people on the day of Uhud that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was killed. Then some Companions of the rock (i.e. the people who had fled on the mountains) said: 'Would that we had a messenger to 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy so that he could obtain protection for us from Abu Sufyan. O people! Muhammad has been killed; so return back to your people (to polytheism), before they come to you and kill you.' (Hearing this) Anas ibn an-Nadr said: 'O people! If Muhammad has been killed, the Lord of Muhammad has not been killed. Fight therefore for what Muhammad had fought for. O Allah! I apologize to Thee from what these people say, and disavow before Thee what they have brought.' (Saying this) he drew his sword and fought until he was martyred. Then Allah revealed: And Muhammad is no more then a Messenger...." (ibid,)


 ! This theme has been narrated through numerous other chains of narrators. al-Baqir (a.s.) said: "Surely 'Ali was afflicted with sixty wounds. The Prophet told Umm 'Salama and Umm 'Atiyyah .to treat him. They said: 'No sooner do we dress him (his wounds) in one place than another place is torn apart; and we are afraid about him (his life).' Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) entered, and the Muslims were visiting him ('Ali) - and he (his body) was one (big) wound. (The Prophet) started wiping him ('Ali's body) with his hand; and was saying: 'Certainly a man who met this (much affliction) in (the way of) Allah, has proved himself brave and is absolved (from every blame).' And no sooner did the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) touch a wound than it was healed. Then 'Ali said: 'Praise be to Allah as I did not flee and did not turn (my) back.' So Allah thanked him for it in two places in the Qur'an; and it is His word, and Allah will reward the grateful, and, We will reward the grateful." (al-Kafi) 
 ! It means that Allah thanked 'Ali's steadfastness and firmness, not his words, 'Praise be to Allah.' as-Sadiq (a.s.) recited, "And how many a prophet has fought with whom were myriads of Godly men", and said: "Thousands and thousands." Then he said: "Yes, by Allah, they were martyred." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! This recitation and meaning has been reported in ad-Durru 'lmanthur from Ibn Mas'ud and others; and it has been narrated that Ibn 'Abbas was asked about this word and he said: "gatherings." 'Abd ibn Hamid and Ibn Abu Hatim have narrated from Mujahid that he said about the words of Allah, after He had shown you that which you loved: "Allah helped the believers against the polytheists until the women of the polytheists rode every spirited and feeble (camel). After that the polytheists were let to triumph over them because of their (the Muslims') disobedience of the Prophet." (ad-Durru 'lmanthur)

Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Rahwayh, 'Abd ibn Hamid, Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim and al-Bayhaqi (in his Dala'ilu 'n-nubuwwah) have narrated from az-Zubayr that he said: "You would have seen me with the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.); when the fear overwhelmed us, Allah sent sleep on us; then there was not a man among us but his chin was on his breast. Then, by Allah, I was hearing the talk of Mu'tab ibn Qushayr - and I heard it as if it were in a dream - 'Had we any hand in the affair, we would not have been slain here.' So I remembered it from him; and it was about it that Allah revealed: Then after sorrow He sent down security upon you, a slumber coming upon a party of you,« we would not have been slain here, because of the talk of Mu'tab ibn Qushayr." (ibid.) 
 ! This information has been narrated from az-Zubayr ibn al'Awwam through numerous chains of narrators. Ibn Mandah has narrated in, Ma'rifatu 's-sahdbah, from Ibn 'Abbas that the verse," (As for) those of you who turned back on the day when the two armies met..., was revealed about 'Uthman, Rafi' ibn al-Mu'alla and Harithah ibn Zayd." (ibid.) 
 ! Nearly similar traditions have been narrated through several chains from 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn 'Awf, 'Ikrimah and Ibn Ishaq. In some of them the names of Abu Hudhayfah ibn 'Aqabah, al-Walid ibn 'Aqabah, Sa'd ibn 'Uthman and 'Aqabah ibn 'Uthman, have been added. In any case, the names of 'Uthman and others have been mentioned in these traditions as examples only. Otherwise, the verse covers all those Companions who had fled away and disobeyed the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). Of course, there is a reason why 'Uthman has especially been mentioned in the traditions: He and those who fled with him continued running away until they reached al-Jal'ab (a mountain in the region of Medina near al-Aghwas), and they remained there for three days; then they came back to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), who said to them: "You had indeed gone very far in it!" As for the Companions of the Prophet in general, there are numerous traditions that all of them had fled; and there was none left with the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) except two persons from the Emigrants and seven from the Helpers; then the

polytheists attacked the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and all the Helpers, one after the other, gave their lives defending the Prophet; none of them survived. It has variously been reported that eleven persons remained with the Prophet, or eighteen or even thirty - but this tradition is the weakest of all. Perhaps, this difference emanates from different information reaching the narrators, or for some other reasons. The traditions which describe how Nasibah alMaziniyyah defended the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) prove that at that particular time nobody was with the Prophet and that those who had remained steadfast - had not fled away - were busy in fighting the polytheists. The only person who, the traditions unanimously say, had not fled was 'Ali; and probably Abu Dujanah alAnsari, Simak ibn Kharashah also comes into this category; but he fought with the sword of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), thereafter when the Companions left the Prophet alone, Abu Dujanah continued shielding him with his own body, deflecting the arrows from him with his shield until he fell down seriously wounded. May Allah be pleased with him. As for the rest of the Companions, some returned to the Prophet when they recognized him and realized that he was not killed; some others came back after sometime. It was these returning Companions on whom Allah had sent the slumber. However, Allah pardoned all of them. You have seen in the preceding Commentary what pardon means. Some exegetes have said that pardon in this verse means that Allah diverted the polytheists from them, so that they (the polytheists) did not exterminate them (the Muslims) completely. Ibn 'Adiyy and al-Bayhaqi (in his Shu'abu 'l-fmdn) have narrated through good chain from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "When the verse (and take counsel with them in the affair) was revealed, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'As for Allah and His Messenger, they are in no need of it (counsel); but Allah has made it a mercy for my ummah; therefore whoever among them shall consult (others) will not be deprived of guidance, and whoever leaves it will not avoid misguidance.'" (ibid.) at-Tabaranl has narrated in his, al-Awsat} from Anas that he said: "the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'He who asks (Allah) for good, does not go wrong; and he

who takes counsel does not regret.'" (ibid.) "He who proceeds independently in his opinion is destroyed, and he who seeks advice of men becomes partner in their wisdom." (Nahju 'l-balaghah) "To seek advice is the guidance itself; and he who proceeds independently with his opinion incurs the danger." (ibid.) The Prophet said: "There is no solitude more dreary than pride; and no support stronger than consultation." (at-Tafsir as-Safi) 
 ! There are numerous traditions about consultation. The consultation is valid in those matters where one has the choice of doing or not doing a thing as would seem more preferable. As far as the definite divine rules and laws are concerned, there is no question of consultation about them, as no one has got any authority to change them. Otherwise, it would be as though current events and new trends would abrogate the words of Allah! as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "People's pleasure cannot be controlled, and their tongue cannot be restrained. Did not they accuse him (i.e., the Prophet) on the day of Badr that he had taken for himself a red velvet from the war booty? Until Allah informed him of (the whereabouts of) the velvet and absolved His Prophet from (embezzlement and) faithlessness; and revealed in His Book: And it is not attributable to a prophet that he should defraud.. ." (al-Majalis) 
 ! al-Qummi has reported it in his, at-Tafsir; and there it says: "Then a man came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and said: 'Surely so-and-so has fraudulently taken a red velvet and has buried it in that place.' So the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) ordered to dig that place; and the velvet was found out." This and nearly similar meanings have been narrated hi ad-Durr 'l-manthur through numerous chains. Perhaps when the traditions say that this verse was revealed about that event, they mean that it points to that; otherwise, as we have already explained, the context shows that it was revealed after the battle of Uhud.

al-Baqir (a.s.) said: "He who defrauds something will see it on the Day of Resurrection in the Fire; then he will be charged to enter therein and take it out of the Fire." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) 
 ! It is a fine inference from the words of Allah: "and he who defrauds shall bring (with him) that which he has defrauded." as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about the words of Allah, They are of (diverse) grades with Allah: "Those who follow the pleasure of Allah are the Imams, and they are, by Allah, of grades with Allah for the believers; and through their love and devotion to us, Allah increases then deeds for them, and Allah enhances (their) high grades for them; and those who have brought upon themselves the wrath from Allah are those who rejected the right of 'Ali (a.s.) and the right of the Imams from us, Ahlulbayt; so in this way they brought upon themselves Allah's wrath." (at-Tafsfr, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! It is based on the 'flow' of the Qur'an, and applies the verse to its most prominent example. ar-Rida (a.s.) said: "The 'grade' is (the distance) between the heaven and the earth." (ibid.) as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about the words of Allah, What! when a misfortunate befell you while you had certainly afflicted (the unbelievers) with twice as much... "The Muslims had afflicted at Badr one hundred and forty (unbelievers) people - they had killed seventy men and imprisoned seventy. When there came the day of Uhud, the Muslims were afflicted with seventy men, and they were grieving for them; so (this verse) was revealed." öibid.) Ibn Abu Shaybah, at-Tirmidhi (who said that this tradition is good), Ibn Jarir and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated from 'Ali (a.s.) that he said: "Jibreel came to the Prophet and said: 'O Muhammad! Surely Allah is displeased with what your people have done in taking the prisoners; and He has ordered you to give them option between two things: Either they (the prisoners) are brought forward and beheaded;

or they (the Muslims) take ransom (for the prisoners) on the condition that an equal number from among them (the Muslims) shall be killed (later).' So the Messenger of Allah, (s.a.w.) called the people and explained the matter to them. They said: 'O Messenger of Allah! (they are) our clans and our people; we shall take their ransom and shall strengthen ourselves by it for fighting against our enemy; and there shall be martyred from among us equal to their number but it is not something that we might be displeased with.' Thus were martyred seventy men from among them on the day of Uhud - the number of the prisoners of Badr." (adDurru l-manthur) 
 ! (at-Tabrisi) has narrated it in Majma'u l-bayan from 'Ali (a.s.); and also al-Qummi has quoted it in his at-Tafsir. al-Baqir (a.s.) has said about the verse, And reckon not those who are killed in Allah's way as dead..., that it was revealed about the martyrs of Badr and Uhud together. (Majma'u 'l-bayan) 
 ! Numerous traditions of the same meaning have been narrated in ad-Durru 'l-manthur and other books. But you have seen that the verses are general and cover everyone who is actually martyred in the way of Allah or is counted as a martyr. Sometimes it is said that these verses were revealed about the martyrs of Bi'r (i.e. Well of) Ma'unah. They were seventy or forty Companions of the Prophet whom he had sent to call 'Amir ibn at-Tufayl and his people to Islam; and they were near that water. (The Companions) sent Abu Milhan al-Ansari ahead to convey the message; but they killed him, then they attacked the rest of the Companions of the Prophet and fought them until they (the enemy) killed all of them. May Allah be pleased with them. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about this verse our Shi'ahs. When their souls enter the Garden and they receive the honor from Allah, the Mighty, the Great, they acquire knowledge and certainty that surely they were on the truth and on the religion of Allah, the Mighty, the Great; so they rejoice on account of those who have not yet joined them, from among their brothers, who are behind them from among the

believers." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! It is based on the "flow" of the Qur'an. That they would acquire knowledge and certainty of their being on the truth, means that they would perceive it by the eye of certainty, after they had known it in this world by knowledge of certainty. It does not mean that before that they had any doubt or uncertainty about it. Ahmad, Hannad, 'Abd ibn Hamid, Abu Dawud, Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, alHakim (who said that this tradition is correct) and al-Bayhaqi (in his Dala'ilu 'nnubuwwah) have narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'When your brethren were afflicted (i.e. martyred) in Uhud, Allah put their souls inside the green birds, who come to the Garden's rivers, and eat from its fruits and lodge in golden candelabra suspended in shadow of the Throne. 'So when they found the goodness of their food and drink, and beauty of their resting place, they said: "Would that our brothers knew what Allah has done for us." ' Another narration says.: 'They said: "(Would that our brothers knew that) we are alive in the Garden, getting sustenance, so that they would not abandon jihad and would not shrink from fighting" Thereupon, Allah said: "I shall convey to them (this message) on your behalf." So Allah sent down these verses: And reckon not those who are killed ...'" (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) 
 ! There are numerous traditions of this theme, narrated from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, Abu 'l-'Aliyah, Ibn Abbas and others. Some of these traditions, like that of Abu 'l-'Aliyah, use the phrase, 'in the forms of green birds'; others like that of Abu Sa'id say, 'in the green birds'; yet others like that of Ibn Mas'ud say, 'like green birds'; but all the wordings convey almost similar meanings. It has come to us through the chains reaching to the Imams of the Ahlulbayt that the above tradition was put before them and they denied that it was said by the Prophet; some traditions say that they interpreted that tradition in some other way; and there is no doubt that - keeping in view the confirmed and accepted principles -

that tradition has to be interpreted away, if it is not rejected altogether. In any case, those traditions do not purport to describe the martyrs' condition in the Garden of the hereafter; rather they refer to the Garden of al-Barzakh. It is proved by the tradition of Ibn Jarir from Mujahid in which he says: "They are given sustenance from the fruit of the Garden and feel its scent but they are not in it.' Also, Ibn Jarir narrates from as-Suddi in which he says: 'Surely the souls of the martyrs are inside the green birds in golden candelabra hanging from the Throne; so they pick then-food in the Garden in morning and evening, and lodge at night in the candelabra.' As you have seen in the earlier discourse on al-Barzakh that these themes may fit the Garden of this world, but not on that of the hereafter. As regards the verses: (As for) those who responded to the call of Allah and the Messenger... Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir and al-Bayhaqi (in his ad-Dala'il) have narrated from 'Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Amr ibn Hazm that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) came out (proceeding) towards Hamra'u 'l-Asad; and Abu Sufyan (and his retreating army) had unanimously decided to return to (reattack) the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and his Companions. They said (to each other): 'We have returned before annihilating them (i.e. the Muslims); certainly we must attack their remnants again.' Then news reached him (i.e. Abu Sufyan) that the Prophet had come out with his Companions in his pursuit. This (news) dissuaded Abu Sufyan and his army (from pursuing their plan); Some riders from the tribe of 'Abdu 'l-Qays passed them; so Abu Sufyan said to them: 'Give the news to Muhammad that we (the Quraysh) have decided to re-attack his Companions aiming at their annihilation.' The riders met the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) at Hamra'u'1-Asad, and informed him as Abu Sufyan had asked them to do. But the Messenger of Allah and the believers with him said: 'Allah is sufficient for us and most excellent Protector is He/ Thereupon Allah revealed about it: (As for) those who responded to the call of Allah and the Messenger . . . (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) 
 ! al-Qummi has narrated it in his at-Tafsir in detail; he reports, inter alia, that the Prophet had taken with him to Hamra'u 'l-Asad only those of the Companions who had been wounded (at Uhud). Some other traditions say that he

had taken only those who were with him at Uhud. Practically the import of both reports is the same. Musa ibn Aqabah (in his al-Maghazi) and al-Bayhaqi (in his al-Dala'il) have narrated from Ibn Shahab that he said: "Surely the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) called the Muslims together to be at the appointed time at Badr for (fighting) Abu Sufyan (about a year after the battle of Badr). The Satan thereupon instigated his friends among the men who went to the people frightening them and saying: 'We have been informed that they (the polytheists) have gathered for fighting you an army like the (dark) night, they hope to attack you and plunder you. Therefore, beware, beware.' But Allah protected the Muslims from the frightening (campaign) of the Satan; and they responded to the call of Allah and His Messenger, and came out with their (trade) articles; they said: 'If we meet Abu Sufyan, then it is for what we have come forth; and if we did not meet him then we would sell our articles.' (Badr was the site of an annual trade-fare.) So, they went forth until they reached the fare-ground of Badr, and they fulfilled their needs there; while Abu Sufyan failed to reach the rendezvous - neither he nor his companions did come forth. Meanwhile, Ibn Hamam passed from near them (the Muslims) and asked: 'Who are these?' People told him: '(They are) the Messenger of Allah and his Companions (who are) waiting for Abu Sufyan and his group of the Quraysh.' He then went to the Quraysh and told them the news. This frightened Abu Sufyan who went back to Mecca. And the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) returned to Medina with Allah's favour and grace. This al-ghazwah is called the Expedition of the army of as-sawiq; and it was in Sha'ban, the third year of hijrah." (ad-Durru 'l-manthur) 
 ! (as-Suyuti) has narrated it from another chain too. (at-Tabrisi) has narrated it in Majma'u 'l-bayan, in detail, from al-Baqir (a.s.), in which he, inter alia, says that the verses were revealed about the ghazwah of lesser Badr; and that the army of sawiq refers to that of Abu Sufyan, because he had come out from Mecca with an army of the Quraysh; and they had with them loads of sawiq (as provision). They camped out of Mecca and sustained themselves with the sawiq, and then they returned to Mecca because they became frightened of meeting the Muslims at Badr. Therefore, the people called them the "army of sawiq", in

mockery and derision. an-Nasa'f, Ibn Abl Hatim and at-Tabarani have narrated through correct chain from Tkrimah from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "When the polytheists returned from Uhud, they said (to each other): 'Neither you killed Muhammad, nor you took buxom girls with you (as captives) on the camels. Wretched is what you have done! Return (to attack the Muslims).' The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) heard the news; so he called the Muslims and they gathered until he reached Hamra'u 'l-Asad or the Well of Abu 'Utbah. (The doubt is from Sufyan, (one of the narrators)). Then the polytheists said: 'We shall come back next year.' Therefore, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) too returned. So it was counted as al-ghazwah. Thereupon Allah revealed, (As for) those who responded to the call of Allah and the Messenger . . . Indeed Abu Sufyan said to the Prophet: 'Your appointed place and time is the fare of Badr where you had slain our companions. ' So as for the coward, he returned, and as for the brave, he took (his) fighting arms and trade-articles; then they came there.(i.e. Badr) but did not find anyone there; so they sold and bought (at the fare); then Allah revealed: So they returned with favor from Allah and (His) grace . . ." (ad-Durru'l-manthur) 
 ! We have quoted this tradition here although it goes against the principle of brevity and abridgement which we generally observe in the traditions. We have quoted here comprehensive examples of every theme, in order that a discerning research scholar may understand that what the scholars have written regarding the causes of revelation is - all or most of it - based on personal views; that is, generally they would describe historical events, then write after it the Qur'anic verses which would correspond with the theme; and then they would count that event as the cause of that verse's revelation. Often this results in fragmentation of a single verse, or a set of verses of a single context, and then they ascribe each part to an independent cause of revelation - even if it disturbs the verse's structure or negates its context. It is one of the causes of weakness in those traditions that are narrated about the occasions of revelation. Add to it what we have mentioned in the beginning of this topic that sectarian differences and inclinations have greatly influenced the style and tone of these

traditions as everyone has tried to pull them in the direction of his particular belief and view. Moreover, political environment and ruling atmosphere has in every era strongly put its stamp on the realities either by hiding it completely or covering it in ambiguity. Therefore, a thinking scholar should never close his eyes from these factors which have utmost relevance to the understanding of realities. And Allah is the Guide. å
 
    

& 43 Ϟ ˴ ό˴ ˸Πϳ˴ ϻ ˴˷ ΃˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϊ˵ ϳ˶ήϳ˵ Ύ˱Ό˸ϴη ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˸΍ϭ˷ή˵ π ˵ ϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϟ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϧ˴˷·˶ ή˶ ˸ϔϜ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϋέ˶ Ύ˴δϳ˵ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϛ ˴ ϧ˵ΰ˸Τϳ˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ϭ˴ Γ˶ ή˴ Χ ˶ ϵ΍ ϲ˶ϓ Ύ˷ψ ˱Σ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ ˲Ϣϴ˶ψϋ ˴ ˲Ώ΍˴άϋ ˴ {176} Ϧ˴ϟ ϥ ˶ Ύ˴Ϥϳ˶ϹΎ˶Α ή˴ ˸ϔϜ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍ϭ˵ ή˴ Θ˴ ˸η΍ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˲Ϣϴ˶ϟ΃˴ ˲Ώ΍˴άϋ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ϭ˴ Ύ˱Ό˸ϴη ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˸΍ϭ˷ή˵ π ˵ ϳ˴{177} Ϧ ˴˷ Β˴ δ ˴ ˸Τϳ˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ ά˴ ϋ ˴ Ϣ˵ Ϭ˵ ϟ˴ϭ˴ Ύ˱Ϥ˸Λ·˶ ˸΍ϭ˵Ω΍˴Ω˸ΰϴ˴ ϟ˶ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ ϲ˶Ϡ˸Ϥϧ˵ Ύ˴Ϥϧ˴˷·˶ ˸ϢϬ˶ δ ˶ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΄ϟ˶˷ ˲ή˸ϴΧ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ ϲ˶Ϡ˸Ϥϧ˵ Ύ˴Ϥ˷ϧ˴ ΃˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ˲Ϧϴ˶Ϭϣ˵˷ ˲Ώ΍{178} έ˴ ά˴ ϴ˴ ϟ˶ ˵ϪϠ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ύ˷ϣ˴ ˸ΆϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍˸ϴϐ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ό˴ Ϡ˶˸τϴ˵ ϟ˶ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ Ύ˴ϛ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ΐ ˶ ϴ˶˷τ ˴˷ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Κ ˴ ϴ˶ΒΨ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ ΰ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϳ˴ ϰ ˴ Θ˴˷Σ ˴ Ϫ˶ ˸ϴϠ˴ϋ ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ϧ˴΃ Ύ˴ϣ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϩϣ˶ ϲ˶ΒΘ˴ ˸Πϳ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˷Ϧ ˴ Ϝ˶ ϟ˴ϭ˴ ΐ ˶ ΃˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϡ˴ϓ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΘ˴˷Η˴ ϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ˸ΆΗ˵ ϥ˶·ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˶γ ˵ έ˵ ϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟΎ˶Α ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ΂˴ϓ ˯Ύ˴θϳ˴ Ϧ˴ϣ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˶γ ˵ έ˵˷ Ϧ˶ϣ ˲Ϣϴ˶ψϋ ˴ ˲ή˸Ο{179} ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠΨ ˴ ˸Βϳ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϧ ˴˷ Β˴ δ ˴ ˸Τϳ˴ ϻ ˴ ˴ϭ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ Ϫ˶ Α˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϠΨ ˶ Α˴ Ύ˴ϣ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϗϮ˴˷ τ ˴ ϴ˵ γ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˴˷ϟ ˲ή˷ η ˴ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ ˸ϞΑ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴˷ ΍˱ή˸ϴΧ ˴ Ϯ˴ ϫ˵ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˶˸πϓ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ Ϣ˵ ϫ˵ Ύ˴Η΁ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ε ˶ ΍˴ϭΎ˴Ϥδ ˴˷ ϟ΍ Ι ˵ ΍˴ήϴ˶ϣ Ϫ˶ ˴˷Ϡϟ˶ϭ˴ Δ˶ ϣ˴ Ύ˴ϴϘ˶ Η˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍˴ϭ ˲ήϴ˶ΒΧ ˴ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ϠϤ˴ ˸ό{180} {176} And let not those grieve you who fall into unbelief hastily; surely they can do no harm to Allah at all; Allah intends that He should not give them any portion in the hereafter, and they shall have a grievous chastisement. {177} Surely those who have bought unbelief at the price of faith shall do no harm at all to Allah, and they shall have a painful chastisement. {178} And let not those who disbelieve think that Our granting them respite is better for their souls; We grant them respite only that they may add to their sins; and they shall have a disgraceful chastisement. {179} On no account will Allah leave the believers in the condition which you are in until He separates the evil from the good; nor is Allah going to make you acquainted with the unseen, but Allah chooses of His messengers whom He pleases; therefore believe in Allah and His messengers; and if you believe and guard (against evil), then you shall have a great reward. {180} And let not those deem, who are niggardly in giving away that which Allah has granted them out of His grace, that it is good for them; nay, it is worse for them; they shall have that whereof they were niggardly made to cleave to their necks on the resurrection day; and Allah's is the heritage of the heavens and the earth; and Allah is aware of what you do. å
 

The verses have some connection with those revealed about the battle of Uhud. These and especially the first four of them are probably a sort of epilogue to the preceding ones. The most important theme of the preceding talk was the principle of test and trial, which Allah makes His servants to undergo. Therefore, these are like the sum total of the verses of Uhud. Allah describes here that the test and trial is an established and continual system from which no one - neither a believer nor an unbeliever - can escape; Allah will certainly test both in order to expose and unveil the hidden realities of their souls; in this way the unbeliever will become totally fit for the Fire, and the evil will become separated from the good in the believer. ([ )! And let not those grieve you... and they shall have a painful chastisement: The verse consoles the Prophet and removes sorrow by describing the reality of the whole affair. The unbelievers compete with each other in rushing towards disbelief; they help one another to extinguish the light of Allah and sometimes even succeed in overpowering the believers. It sometimes grieves the believers, as it seems as if they (the unbelievers) have scored against Allah by thwarting His plan to make the word of truth triumphant. But if the believer ponders on the system of general and all-encompassing test, he will become sure that it is Allah Who is victorious; and that all persons are relentlessly proceeding to their destination in order that their creative and legislative guidance to their goals may be completed. The unbeliever is driven to that goal by the health and strength, bounty and comfort that he is provided with - Allah in this way draws him nearer to his destruction in degrees and unfolds His plan against him - enabling him to go to the furthest possible limit of transgression and disobedience. The believer on the other hand is continuously scraped through test and trial until his belief and faith is cleansed from all rust and pollution, and he becomes absolutely pure for Allah; while the unbeliever's polytheistic tendencies are purged of every shade of belief and he falls down where other friends of false deities and leaders of infidelity have gone. The verse therefore means as follows: You should not grieve on account of those who proceed with increasing haste towards disbelief. Why should you grieve? Do you think as if they can do any harm to Allah? Certainly you cannot think so, because they cannot do any harm to Allah; they are under complete control of Allah, and He is driving them in their lives' journey to their goal where they will be left with no portion, no share, in the hereafter (and it is the final limit of their infidelity); and they shall have a painful chastisement. The prohibition, therefore,

in the clause, "And let not those grieve you", is of advisory nature; the clause, "surely they can do no harm to Allah", describes the reason of that prohibition; and the next words, "Allah intends that He should not give them ...", explains why they are unable to do any harm to Allah. Thereafter Allah makes it clear that no unbeliever - whether he hastens to fall into disbelief or not - can do any harm to Him. The next verse thus states the general principle after mentioning a particular case. This may serve as the reason for the preceding prohibition, "And let not those grieve you", or it may be treated as the reason of the preceding reason, "surely they can do no harm "²because it has a general import which may explain the reason of a particular reason. The meaning thus will be as follows: We have said that those who fall into disbelief hastily can do no harm to Allah, because no unbeliever can do any harm to Him. ([ )! And let not those who disbelieve think... a disgraceful chastisement: After putting the Prophet's mind at rest regarding the unbelievers' falling into unbelief hastily, and explaining that in all this they are in fact subsequent to Allah's plan, Who is driving them to a stage where they shall have no share in the hereafter, Allah now turns to the unbelievers themselves. He tells them that they should not be happy with the respite granted to them by Allah, because Allah through this respite is giving them a chance to pile up sins over sins, and behind it all there is a disgraceful chastisement waiting for them ² there is nothing for them except shame and ignominy in the hereafter. This all is based on the divinely established system of completion that every creature should bring his potentials to fruition, according to his own choice. ([ )! On no account will Allah leave the believers then you shall have a great reward: Now the Speaker turns to the believers. He explains to them that the system of test and trial covers them too, in order that they too should reach the stage of completion; and the purified believer may be distinguished from the impure, and evil and wicked ones may be separated from the good and virtuous ones. The next sentence aims at removing a possible misconception. It could be assumed that there was another way of distinguishing evil from good; that is, Allah could let the believers know who was wicked and evil so that they could avoid him. Thus, they could easily be saved all these troubles and turmoil which they had to suffer because of their commingling with hypocrites and those whose hearts were

diseased. Allah erases such erroneous impression by pointing out that He has exclusively reserved the knowledge of unseen to Himself, He does not reveal it to anyone except to some chosen messengers whom He might acquaint with it. This is the import of the sentence, "nor is Allah going to make you acquainted with the unseen, but, Allah chooses of His messengers whom He pleases". Thereafter, Allah says to them: As there is no escape from test and trial, nor from turning the potentials into accomplishments, it is in your interest that you should believe in Allah and His messengers, so that you should be counted among the good ones - and not among the evil ones. But mere belief is not sufficient to preserve the blessedness of the life, it is also necessary to support it with good deeds that would raise the belief up to Allah and preserve its blessings - it is then that the reward would be complete. It was with this connotation in view that the Qur'an first said, "therefore believe in Allah and His messengers", and then completed it with the next clause, "and if you believe and guard (against evil), then you shall have a great reward". It is evident from this verse that:  ! Every soul has to reach its perfection, has to be brought to its goal and destination ² be it felicity and happiness or infelicity and unhappiness. It is an issue, which cannot be avoided, a proposition from which there is no escape. %
 $! The good and the evil are attributed to the "self" or "soul" of the persons, but at the same time and in the same context they depend on the belief and the disbelief respectively - and these two are within man's power and emanate from his will and choice. This is among the finest Qur'anic realities which opens the door to many secrets of monotheism. It may be understood from the words of Allah: And every one has a direction to which he would turn; therefore hasten to (do) good works (2:148), when read in conjunction with the words: but that He might try you in what He gave you, therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds (5:48). We shall write on this topic in full detail under the verse: That Allah may separate the impure from the pure, and put the impure, some of it upon the other, and pile it up together, then cast it into hell (8:37).  $: The belief in Allah and His messengers is the essence of the goodness of life, i.e., goodness of "person" or "soul". So far as reward is concerned it depends upon piety and good deeds. That is why Allah has first mentioned the subject of separating the good from the evil; then basing on that, has given the order to believe in Allah and His messengers; thereafter when He wanted to mention the

reward, He added piety (guarding against evil) to the belief; and said: "and if you believe and guard (against evil), then you shall have a great reward ". From the above, you may easily understand the connotation of the verse 97 of chapter 16: Whoever does good whether male or female and he is a believer, We will most certainly make him live a happy life, and We will most certainly give them their reward for the best of what they did. Evidently his happy life is the result of his belief, and emanates from it; but the reward is the result of the good deeds. Therefore, belief is the soul of the good life. But its continuity - so that it may produce the desired effects - requires good deeds. It is like the natural life which depends on a soul for its coming into being but its continuity depends on the use of its powers and organs - if all become still, all will die and life will end. The name, Allah, has been repeated several (i.e. four) times in this verse. There was a possibility of using pronouns in place of the latter three, but the proper Divine Name was used so that it might clearly guide to the Source of all greatness and beauty, because the verses were related to those affairs which are exclusively reserved to Him in His divinity, that is, test of the creatures, knowledge of the unseen, selection of the messengers and man's ability to believe in Him. ([ ): And let not those deem, ...and Allah is aware of what you do: The preceding verse has described how Allah gives respite to the unbelievers. The case of niggardliness, of not spending the wealth in the way of Allah, is not different from that; a niggardly person rejoices in, and boasts of, the riches he has amassed. Therefore Allah now addresses them and shows that what they are proud of, is actually worse for them. The wealth is described as, "that which Allah has granted them out of His grace"; it shows how mean they are and how much they should be condemned. The description, that the wealth, which they are so niggardly about, shall become like iron collar around their necks, shows why their niggardliness is worse for them. The clause, "and Allah's is the heritage of the heavens and the earth", is apparently a circumstantial one related to "the Resurrection Day", that is, on the Resurrection Day when to Allah will belong the said heritage The same is the position of the last clause, "and Allah is aware of what you do". As a remote possibility, the words, "and Allah's is the heritage..., may be treated as the circumstantial clause of the verb, "are niggardly"; while the next clause, "and Allah is aware of what you do", may have the same position (i.e. circumstantial clause of, "are niggardly "), or may be treated as an independent sentence.

 $  al-Baqir (a.s.) was asked about the unbeliever whether death was better for him or life. He said: "Death is better for the believer and the unbeliever (both); because Allah says, and that which is with Allah is best for the righteous (3:198), and He (also) says: 'And let not those who disbelieve think that Our granting them respite is good for their souls..." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! The argument given in this tradition does not fully conform with the style of the Imams of the Ahlulbayt (a.s.), because the word, "righteous", refers to only a particular group of the believers, not to all of them. Although it may be said that the word covers all the believers because each of them has got some portion of righteousness in him. A tradition of the above meaning has been narrated in ad-Durru 'I-manthur, from Ibn Mas'ud. å
 
    

4 4' Ϭ˵ Ϡ˴˸Θϗ˴ ϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ Ύ˴ϣ ΐ ˵ Θ˵ ˸ϜϨ˴ γ ˴ ˯Ύ˴ϴϨ˶ ˸Ϗ΃˴ Ϧ ˵ ˸Τ˴ϧϭ˴ ˲ήϴ˶Ϙϓ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϝ ˴ ˸Ϯϗ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϊ˴ Ϥ˶ γ ˴ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϟ˴˷ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϗϭ˵Ϋ ϝ ˵ Ϯ˵Ϙϧ˴ ϭ˴ ϖ ˳˷ Σ ˴ ή˶ ˸ϴϐ˴ Α˶ ˯Ύ˴ϴΒ˶ ϧ˴Ϸ΍ Ϣ˵ ϖ ˶ ϳ˶ήΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ώ ˴ ΍˴άϋ ˴ {181} Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ΃˴ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϳ˶Ϊ˸ϳ΃˴ ˸Ζϣ˴ Ϊ˴˷ ϗ˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶Ϋ˴ Ϊ˶ ϴ˶Βό˴ ˸Ϡϟ˶˷ ϡ˳ ϼ ˴˷ ψ ˴ Α˶ β ˴ ˸ϴ˴ϟ{182} Ύ˴Ϩ˸ϴϟ˴·˶ Ϊ˴ Ϭ˶ ϋ ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ϥ ˴˷ ·˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϟΎ˴ϗ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ά˷ϟ˴΍ Β˴ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ϲ˶Ϡ˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ ˲Ϟγ ˵ έ˵ ˸Ϣϛ˵ ˯˴ Ύ˴Ο ˸Ϊϗ˴ ˸Ϟϗ˵ έ˵ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˵ϛ˵ ˸΄Η˴ ϥ ˳ Ύ˴Α˸ήϘ˵ Α˶ Ύ˴Ϩϴ˴ Η˶ ˸΄ϳ˴ ϰ ˴ Θ˴˷Σ ˴ ϝ ˳ Ϯ˵γή˴ ϟ˶ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ˸Άϧ˵ ϻ ˴˷ ΃˴Θ˵ ˸ϠΘ˴ ϗ˴ Ϣ˴ Ϡ˶ϓ˴ ˸ϢΘ˵ ˸Ϡϗ˵ ϱ˶ά˷ϟ˴Ύ˶Αϭ˴ Ε ˶ Ύ˴Ϩϴ˶˷ ˸Ϣϫ˵ Ϯ˵Ϥ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶ϗΩ˶ Ύ˴λ ˸ϢΘ˵ Ϩ˵ϛ ϥ˶·{183} ή˶ ϴ˶ϨϤ˵ ˸ϟ΍ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍˴ϭ ή˶ Α˵ ΰ˵˷ ϟ΍˴ϭ Ε ˶ Ύ˴Ϩϴ˶˷ Β˴ ˸ϟΎ˶Α ΍ϭ˵΅Ύ˴Ο Ϛ ˴ Ϡ˶˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˷ϣ˶ ˲Ϟγ ˵ έ˵ Ώ ˴ ά˶˷ ϛ˵ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϓ˴ ϙ ˴ Ϯ˵Αά˴˷ ϛ˴ ϥ˶Έϓ˴ {184} ΰ˶ ˸Σί˵ Ϧ˴Ϥϓ˴ Δ˶ ϣ˴ Ύ˴ϴϘ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ ˸Ϣϛ˵ έ˴ Ϯ˵Ο΃˵ ϥ ˴ ˸Ϯ˴˷ϓϮ˴ Η˵ Ύ˴Ϥϧ˴˷·˶ϭ˴ Ε ˶ ˸ϮϤ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Δ˵ Ϙ˴ ΋˶ ΍˴Ϋ β ˳ ˸ϔϧ˴ Ϟ ˵˷ ϛ˵ ˵ΓΎ˴ϴΤ ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ί˴ Ύ˴ϓ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϓ˴ Δ˴ Ϩ˴˷Π ˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˴Χ ˶ ˸Ω΃˵ϭ˴ έ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ ϟ΍ Ϧ ˶ϋ ˴ Ρ ˴ έ˶ ϭ˵ήϐ˵ ˸ϟ΍ ω ˵ Ύ˴Θϣ˴ ϻ ˴˷ ·˶ Ύ˴ϴ˸ϧΪ˵˷ ϟ΍{185} Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ Ϡ˶˸Βϗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ηϭ˵΃ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶ Ϧ ˴˷ ό˵ Ϥ˴ ˸δΘ˴ ϟ˴ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ δ ˶ ϔ˵ ϧ˴΃ϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ϟ˶΍˴Ϯ˸ϣ΃˴ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴˷ Ϯ˵ Ϡ˴˸ΒΘ˵ ϟ˴ ΃˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϛή˴ ˸η΃˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ έ˶ Ϯ˵ϣϷ ˵ ΍ ϡ˶ ˸ΰϋ ˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ϛ ˴ ϟ˶˴Ϋ ϥ ˴˷ Έ˶ϓ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΘ˴˷ Η˴ ϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήΒ˶ ˸μΗ˴ ϥ˶·ϭ˴ ΍˱ήϴ˶Μϛ˴ ϯ˱Ϋ{186} ˸΍Ϯ˵Ηϭ˵΃ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ ϕ ˴ Ύ˴Μϴ˶ϣ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ά˴ Χ ˴ ΃˴ ˸Ϋ·˶ϭ˴ Ϡ˶ϗ˴ Ύ˱ϨϤ˴ Λ˴ Ϫ˶ Α˶ ΍˸ϭή˴ Θ˴ ˸η΍˴ϭ ˸Ϣϫ˶ έ˶ Ϯ˵Ϭχ ˵ ˯΍˴έϭ˴ ˵ϩϭ˵άΒ˴ Ϩ˴ ϓ˴ Ϫ˵ ϧ˴ Ϯ˵ϤΘ˵ ˸ϜΗ˴ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ α ˶ Ύ˷Ϩ˴ Ϡ˶ϟ Ϫ˵ Ϩ˴˷Ϩ˵ ϴ˶˷˴ΒΘ˵ ϟ˴ Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήΘ˴ ˸θϳ˴ Ύ˴ϣ β ˴ ˸ΌΒ˶ ϓ˴ ϼ ˱ ϴ{187} ϻ ˴ Α˶ ˸ϢϬ˵ Ϩ˴˷Β˴ δ ˴ ˸ΤΗ˴ ϼ ˴ ϓ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϡό˴ ˸ϔϳ˴ ˸Ϣϟ˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ ˸΍ϭ˵ΪϤ˴ ˸Τϳ˵ ϥ˴΃ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˷Β˵ Τ ˶ ϳ˵ ϭ˴˷ ΍˸ϮΗ˴ ΃˴ Ύ˴ϤΑ˶ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵Σή˴ ˸ϔϳ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ϧ ˴˷ Β˴ δ ˴ ˸ΤΗ˴ ˲Ϣϴ˶ϟ΃˴ ˲Ώ΍˴άϋ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ϭ˴ Ώ ˶ ΍˴άό˴ ˸ϟ΍ Ϧ ˴ ϣ˶˷ Γ˳ ί˴ Ύ˴ϔϤ˴ {188} ϭ˴ Ε ˶ ΍˴ϭΎ˴Ϥδ ˴˷ ϟ΍ Ϛ ˵ ˸Ϡϣ˵ Ϫ˶ Ϡ˴˷ϟ˶ϭ˴ ˲ήϳ˶Ϊϗ˴ ˯˳ ˸ϲη ˴ Ϟ ˶˷ ϛ˵ ϰ ˴ Ϡ˴ϋ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍˴ϭ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍{189} {181} Allah has certainly heard the saying of those who said: Surely Allah is poor and we are rich. I will record what they say, and their killing the prophets unjustly, and I will say: Taste the chastisement of burning. {182} This is for what your own hands have sent before and because Allah is not in the least unjust to the servants. {183} (Those are they) who said: Surely Allah has enjoined us that we should not believe in any messenger until he brings us an offering which the fire consumes. Say: Indeed, there came to you messengers before me with clear arguments and with that which you demand; why then did you kill them if you are truthful? {184}

But if they reject you, so indeed were rejected before you messengers who came with clear arguments and scriptures and the illuminating book. {185} Every soul shall taste of death, and you shall only be paid fully your reward on the resurrection day; then whoever is removed far away from the fire and is made to enter the garden he indeed has attained the object; and the life of this world is nothing but a provision of vanities. {186} You shall certainly be tried respecting your wealth and your souls, and you shall certainly hear from those who have been given the Book before you and from those who are polytheists much annoying talk; and if you are patient and guard (against evil), surely this is one of the affairs (which should be) determined upon. {187} And when Allah made a covenant with those who were given the Book: You shall certainly make it known to men and you shall not hide it; but they cast it behind their backs and took a small price for it; so evil is that which they buy. {188} Do not think those who rejoice for what they have done and love that they should be praised for what they have not done-- so do by no means think them to be safe from the chastisement, and they shall have a painful chastisement. {189} And Allah's is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth, and Allah has power over all things. å
  The verses are connected with the preceding ones. The general import of the preceding verses was to invigorate the believers and inspire them to fight in the way of Allah with their properties and their lives, as well as to warn them against weak-heartedness, cowardice and niggardliness. This connects it to the Jews' talk that "Allah is poor and we are rich", together with their upsetting the Muslims' affairs, rejecting the evidence of messenger-ship and hiding what they had been enjoined to make known. These are the very topics, which these verses deal with. In addition, they strengthen the believers' hearts to remain firm and steadfast; urge them to be patient and courageous; and exhort them to spend in the way of Allah. ([ )! Allah has certainly heard the saying of those who said: "Surely Allah is poor and we are rich": The saying was of the Jews, as may be understood from the next clause which mentions their slaying of the prophets, apart from other indications. They said it after they had heard such divine words as, Who is it that will lend to Allah a goodly loan... (2:245). This view is somewhat strengthened when it is noted that this verse comes immediately after the one, which condemns niggardly

person: "And let not those deem, who are niggardly in giving away... ". Or may be they said it when they saw the poverty and starvation of most of the believers. They taunted them saying that had their Lord been rich, He would have taken care of them and made them rich; therefore He is but poor while we are rich. ([ )! We shall certainly write... the chastisement of burning: Writing here means preservation and recording; or it may refer to the writing in the scroll of their deeds - the net result is the same in both cases. Their killing the prophets unjustly means that they had killed them knowingly and intentionally not by mistake, ignorance or misunderstanding. Allah has joined this utterance of theirs to their slaying of the prophets because this was a very grievous word; "alhariq" (translated here as burning) refers to the Hell-fire; or flame; it has been said that it has a transitive sense, that is, that which burns something. ([ ): "This is for what your (own) hands... to the servants": This clause, "what your (own) hands have sent before", means 'whatever deeds you have sent before'; hands have been mentioned because usually they are instrumental in sending a thing somewhere. The clause, "and because Allah is not in the least unjust to the servants", is in conjunction with the words, "what your (own) hands have sent", and they explain the reason for writing and punishment. If Allah had not recorded their deeds and not rewarded or punished them accordingly, it would have been tantamount to neglecting the system of the deeds; and this in its turn would have been a gross and enormous injustice because huge number of deeds would be involved - in this way Allah would become most unjust to the servants; far above is He from such things. ([ )! (Those are they) who said: "Surely Allah has enjoined us... if you are truthful": It is related to the preceding, "those who said". "al-Ahd" (enjoining; order); alqurban (that which is offered, is sacrificed like sheep, etc.); "fire consumes" means the fire burns it. The clause, "indeed, there came to you messengers before me", refers to such prophets as Zakariyya and Yahya - those Israelite prophets who were slain by the Jews. ([ )! But if they reject you, so indeed were rejected before you messengers...: It aims at consoling the Prophet (s.a.w.) when they belied him. "az-Zubur" is plural

of az-zabur (a book of wisdom and sermons). The phrase, "scriptures and the illuminating book", refers to such revelations as the book of Nuh, scriptures of Ibrahim, the Torah and the Injil. ([ )! Every soul shall taste of death... a provision of vanities: The verse contains a good promise for the believer and a threat to the rejecter. It begins with a general rule that encompasses every living being. "at-Tawfiyah" (full payment). Someone has proved the existence of al-Barzakh from this verse, because it implies some partial recompense before the Resurrection Day, when the full payment will be made. It is a good argument. "az-Zahzahah" (to remove far), it in fact implies repeated pulling with haste; alfawz (to attain the desired object); al-ghurur is either infinitive of gharra (he deceived; he deluded), or plural of al-gharr (deceiver). ([ )! You shall certainly be tried respecting your wealth and your souls. . .: "al-lbla'" (to test; to try). Allah first described the tests and trials that had afflicted the believers; then He mentioned the utterances of the Jews, which could weaken the believers' will. Now He informs them that such divine tests and such annoying talks of the People of the Book and the polytheists will repeatedly affect the believers; that they will have to face such things and bear such talks. They should remain patient and pious, should guard themselves against evil, in order that Allah may protect them from mistakes and weak-heartedness; so that they should emerge as people of strong and firm determination. This prophecy gives them advance news of what they would have to suffer in future; it aims at preparing them mentally for it before hand, so that they may reconcile themselves to it. "Adhan kathiran" (much annoyance) has been used for "annoying talk"; it is a metaphorical use of effect in place of cause. ([ ): And when Allah made a covenant... evil is that which they buy: "an-Nabdh" (to cast away; to throw away); "they cast it behind their backs" is an idiom meaning 'they left it', 'they neglected it'. Its opposite idiom, 'he put it before his eyes', means 'he directed his attention to it'. ([ )! Do not think those who rejoice... Allah has power over all things:

The phrase, "for what they have brought about", means the wealth that Allah has bestowed upon them, which is accompanied by love of riches and niggardliness. "al-Mafazah" (deliverance; safety). These people were destroyed because their hearts were attached to the falsehood, and consequently they removed themselves from the protection of the truth. At the end Allah mentions His Kingdom of the heavens and the earth and His power over every thing. These two attributes may explain the reason of all things described in the preceding verses.  $  Ibn Jarir and Ibn al-Mundhir have narrated from Qatadah about the verse, Allah has certainly heard the saying of those .... that he said: "It has been reported to us that it was revealed about Huyayy ibn Akhtab; when the verse (2:245) was revealed that: Who is it that will lend to Allah, a goodly loan, so He will multiply it for him manifold, he said: 'Our Lord asks loan from us! Surely a poor (man) asks loan from a rich one.'" (ad-Durru 'I-manthur) as-Sadiq (a.s.) said regarding this verse: "By Allah, they had not seen Allah so that they could know He was poor. But they saw the friends of Allah (who were) poor. So they said: 'Had He (Allah) been rich He would have made His friends rich. Thus, they boasted against Allah of (their) riches." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) al-Baqir (a.s.) said: "They are those who think that the Imam is in need of what they bring to him." (al-Manaqib) 
 ! As described in the Commentary, the first two meanings correspond to the verse. The third tradition is based on the "flow" of the Qur'an. as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "There was, between those who uttered (this word) and those who killed (the prophets), a gap of five hundred years; but Allah attached to them the (crime of) murder because they were pleased with what they (i.e., their ancestors) had done." (al-Kafi) 
 : The gap mentioned in it does not agree with the current

Christian Era. See the historical discourse given earlier. It is reported in ad-Durru 'l-manthour under the verse: Every soul shall taste of death: "Bin Abu Haiti has narrated from 'Ali bins Abu Tali (as.) that he said: 'When the Prophet died and the condolence began, there came to them a comer they heard his voice but did not see his person - and he said: "Peace be upon you, O People of the House! and mercy of Allah and His blessings. Every soul is to taste of the death, and you shall only be paid fully your reward on the Resurrection Day. Indeed, there is in Allah consolation for every misfortune, and successor of everyone who dies, and overtaking everything that is lost. Therefore, in Allah put your trust, and to Him attach your hope; because afflicted is he who is deprived of reward." ' Then 'Ali (a.s.) said: 'He was al-Khidr.'" Ibn Marduway has narrated from Sahl ibn Sa'd that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Verily, a place in the Garden (just sufficient) to put a whip of one of you in, is better than the world and all that is in it.' Then he recited this verse: then whoever is removed far away from the fire and is made to enter the Garden, he indeed has attained the object." (ad-Durru 'I-manthur) 
 ! (as-Suyuti) has narrated this meaning in that book through other chains from other Companions. It should be noted here that there are numerous traditions purporting to give the reason of revelation of these verses; but we have left them out because evidently they are merely people's attempts to apply the verses to various events; they are not real reasons of revelation. å
 
    

'3 '' ϲ˶ϟϭ˵΄ϟ͋ Ε ˳ Ύ˴ϳ΂˴ϟ έ˶ Ύ˴ϬϨ͉ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϟ ˶ ˸ϴϠ͉ϟ΍ ϑ ˶ ϼ˶Θ˸Χ΍˴ϭ ˶ν˸έϷ ˴ ΍˴ϭ Ε ˶ ΍˴ϭΎ˴Ϥδ ͉ ϟ΍ ϖ ˶ ˸ϠΧ ˴ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ͉ ·˶ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴Β˸ϟϷ ˴ ΍{190} Ύ˱ϣΎ˴ϴϗ˶ Ϫ˴ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϛ˵ ˸άϳ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ͉΍ ˸Βγ ˵ ϼ ˱ σ ˶ Ύ˴Α ΍˴άϫ˴ Ζ ˴ ˸ϘϠ˴Χ ˴ Ύ˴ϣ Ύ˴ϨΑ͉έ˴ ν ˶ ˸έϷ ˴ ΍˴ϭ ˶Ε΍˴ϭΎ˴Ϥδ ͉ ϟ΍ ϖ ˶ ˸ϠΧ ˴ ϲ˶ϓ ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήϜ͉ ϔ˴ Θ˴ ϳ˴ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ Α˶ Ϯ˵ϨΟ ˵ ϰ ˴ Ϡ˴ϋ ˴ ϭ˴ ΍˱ΩϮ˵όϗ˵ ϭ˴ Ώ ˴ ΍˴άϋ ˴ Ύ˴ϨϘ˶ ϓ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϧ˴ Ύ˴Τ έ˶ Ύ͉Ϩϟ΍{191} Ϩ͉ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶Χ ˶ ˸ΪΗ˵ Ϧ˴ϣ Ϛ ˴ ϧ͉·˶ Ύ˴ϨΑ͉έ˴ έ˳ Ύ˴μϧ˴΃ ˸Ϧϣ˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶Ϥϟ˶Ύ͉ψϠ˶ϟ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˵ Θ˴ ˸ϳΰ˴ ˸Χ΃˴ ˸ΪϘ˴ ϓ˴ έ˴ Ύ{192} Ύ˱ϳΩ˶ Ύ˴Ϩϣ˵ Ύ˴Ϩ˸όϤ˶ γ ˴ Ύ˴Ϩϧ͉·˶ Ύ˴ϨΑ͉έ͉ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϨΗ˶ Ύ˴Όϴ͋γ ˴ Ύ͉Ϩϋ ˴ ˸ήϔ͋ ϛ˴ ϭ˴ Ύ˴ϨΑ˴ Ϯ˵ϧΫ˵ Ύ˴Ϩϟ˴ ˸ή˶ϔ˸ϏΎ˴ϓ Ύ˴ϨΑ͉έ˴ Ύ͉Ϩϣ˴ ΂˴ϓ ˸ϢϜ˵ Α͋ή˴ Α˶ ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˶ ΁ ˸ϥ΃˴ ϥ ˶ Ύ˴Ϥϳ˶Ϻϟ˶ ϱ˶ΩΎ˴Ϩϳ˵ ή˴ ˸ΑϷ ˴ ΍ ϊ˴ ϣ˴ Ύ˴Ϩϓ͉ Ϯ˴ Η˴ έ˶ ΍{193} Ύ˴Ϩ͉Αέ˴ Ω˴ Ύ˴όϴ˶Ϥ˸ϟ΍ ϒ ˵ Ϡ˶˸ΨΗ˵ ϻ ˴ Ϛ ˴ ϧ͉·˶ Δ˶ ϣ˴ Ύ˴ϴϘ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϡ˴ ˸Ϯϳ˴ Ύ˴ϧΰ˶ ˸ΨΗ˵ ϻ ˴ ϭ˴ Ϛ ˴ Ϡ˶γ ˵ έ˵ ϰ˴Ϡϋ ˴ Ύ˴ϨΗ͉Ϊ˴ϋϭ˴ Ύ˴ϣ Ύ˴ϨΗ˶ ΁˴ϭ{194} ϻ ˴ ϲ͋ϧ΃˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ Α͊έ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ Ώ ˴ Ύ˴ΠΘ˴ ˸γΎ˴ϓ ϟ͉Ύ˴ϓ ξ ˳ ˸όΑ˴ Ϧ͋ϣ Ϣ˵Ϝπ ˵ ˸όΑ˴ ϰ˴Μϧ˵΃ ˸ϭ΃˴ ή˳ ϛ˴ Ϋ˴ Ϧ͋ϣ Ϣ˵ϜϨ͋ϣ Ϟ ˳ ϣ˶ Ύ˴ϋ Ϟ ˴ Ϥ˴ ϋ ˴ ϊ˵ ϴ˶ο΃˵ ϲ˶ϓ ˸΍ϭ˵Ϋϭ˵΃ϭ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˶ έ˶ Ύ˴ϳΩ˶ Ϧ˶ϣ ˸΍Ϯ˵Οή˶ ˸Χ΃˵ϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήΟ ˴ Ύ˴ϫ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶ά Ϸ ˴ ΍ Ύ˴ϬΘ˶ ˸ΤΗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ϱ˶ή˸ΠΗ˴ Ε ˳ Ύ͉ϨΟ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ Ϩ͉Ϡ˴Χ ˶ ˸ΩϷ ˵ ϭ˴ ˸ϢϬ˶ Η˶ Ύ˴Όϴ͋γ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ˸Ϩϋ ˴ ϥ ͉ ή˴ ϔ͋ ϛ˴ Ϸ ˵ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϠΘ˶ ϗ˵ ϭ˴ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϠΗ˴ Ύ˴ϗϭ˴ ϲ˶Ϡϴ˶Βγ ˴ Ϫ˵ Ϡ͉ϟ΍˴ϭ Ϫ˶ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ Ϊ˶ Ϩ˶ϋ Ϧ͋ϣ Ύ˱Α΍˴ϮΛ˴ έ˵ Ύ˴Ϭ˸ϧ Μ͉ϟ΍ Ϧ ˵ ˸δΣ ˵ ϩ˵ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ Ώ ˶ ΍˴Ϯ{195} Ω˶ ϼ˶Β˸ϟ΍ ϲ˶ϓ ˸΍ϭ˵ήϔ˴ ϛ˴ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ͉΍ ΐ ˵ Ϡ͊Ϙ˴ Η˴ Ϛ ˴ ϧ͉ή͉ ϐ˵ ϳ˴ ϻ ˴ {196} β ˴ ˸ΌΑ˶ ϭ˴ Ϣ˵ Ϩ͉Ϭ˴ Ο ˴ ˸Ϣϫ˵ ΍˴ϭ˸΄ϣ˴ Ϣ͉ Λ˵ ˲Ϟϴ˶Ϡϗ˴ ˲ωΎ˴Θϣ˴

Ω˵ Ύ˴ϬϤ˶ ˸ϟ΍{197} ϧ˵ Ύ˴Ϭϴ˶ϓ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶Ϊϟ˶Ύ˴Χ έ˵ Ύ˴Ϭ˸ϧϷ ˴ ΍ Ύ˴ϬΘ˶ ˸ΤΗ˴ Ϧ˶ϣ ϱ˶ή˸ΠΗ˴ ˲ΕΎ͉ϨΟ ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ Α͉έ˴ ΍˸ϮϘ˴ Η͉΍ ˴Ϧϳ˶άϟ͉΍ Ϧ ˶ Ϝ˶ ϟ˴ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ Ϊ˶ Ϩ˶ϋ ˸Ϧϣ͋ ϻ ˱ ΰ˵ έ˶ ΍˴ή˸Αϸ ˴ ϟ͋ ˲ή˸ϴΧ ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ͉ϟ΍{198} Ϫ˶ Ϡ͉ϟ˶ Ϧ ˴ ϴ˶όη ˶ Ύ˴Χ ˸Ϣ˶Ϭ˸ϴϟ˴·˶ ϝ ˴ ΰ˶ ϧ˵΃ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ ˸ϢϜ˵ ˸ϴϟ˴·˶ ϝ ˴ ΰ˶ ϧ˵΃ Ύ˴ϣϭ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ͉ϟΎ˶Α Ϧ ˵ ϣ˶ ˸Άϳ˵ Ϧ˴Ϥϟ˴ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴ΘϜ˶ ˸ϟ΍ Ϟ ˶ ˸ϫ΃˴ ˸Ϧϣ˶ ϥ ͉ ·˶ϭ˴ ˴ϻ Ό˶ ϟ˴˸ϭ΃˵ ϼ ˱ ϴ˶Ϡϗ˴ Ύ˱ϨϤ˴ Λ˴ Ϫ˶ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ Ε ˶ Ύ˴ϳ΂˶Α ϥ ˴ ϭ˵ήΘ˴ ˸θ˴ϳ Ώ ˶ Ύ˴δΤ ˶ ˸ϟ΍ ϊ˵ ϳ˶ήγ ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ͉ϟ΍ ϥ ͉ ·˶ ˸ϢϬ˶ Α͋έ˴ Ϊ˴ Ϩ˶ϋ ˸Ϣ˵ϫή˵ ˸Ο΃˴ ˸ϢϬ˵ ϟ˴ Ϛ ˴ {199} {190} Most surely in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day there are signs for men who understand. {191} Those who remember Allah standing and sitting and lying on their sides and reflect on the creation of the heavens and the earth: Our Lord! Thou hast not created this in vain! Glory be to Thee; save us then from the chastisement of the fire: {192} Our Lord! surely whomsoever Thou makest enter the fire, him Thou hast indeed brought to disgrace, and there shall be no helpers for the unjust: {193} Our Lord! Surely we have heard a preacher calling to the faith, saying: Believe in your Lord, so we did believe; Our Lord! Forgive us therefore our faults, and cover our evil deeds and make us die with the righteous. {194} Our Lord! and grant us what Thou hast promised us by Thy messengers; and disgrace us not on the day of resurrection; surely Thou dost not fail to perform the promise. {195} So their Lord accepted their prayer: That I will not waste the work of a worker among you, whether male or female, the one of you being from the other; they, therefore, who fled and were turned out of their homes and persecuted in My way and who fought and were slain, I will most certainly cover their evil deeds, and I will most certainly make them enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; a reward from Allah, and with Allah is yet better reward. {196} Let it not deceive you that those who disbelieve go to and fro in the cities fearlessly. {197} A brief enjoyment! then their abode is hell, and evil is the resting-place. {198} But as to those who are careful of (their duty to) their Lord, they shall have gardens beneath which rivers flow, abiding in them; an entertainment from their Lord, and that which is with Allah is best for the righteous. {199} And most surely of the followers of the Book there are those who believe in Allah and (in) that which has been revealed to you and (in) that which has been revealed to them, being lowly before Allah; they do not take a small price for the communications of Allah; these it is that have their reward with their Lord; surely Allah is quick in reckoning. å
  The verses give the resume of the conditions of the believers; the polytheists and the People of the Book as represented in this chapter. They explain the characteristics of the righteous believers that they always remember Allah and reflect on His signs; they seek Allah's protection from His chastisement and beseech for His forgiveness and the Garden; and that Allah has accepted their prayers and will surely give them what they have asked for. This is the general

condition of the believers. As for the unbelievers, although they fearlessly roam the earth, but it is a brief enjoyment; and soon they will abide in the Hell-fire. One should not compare the believers with them. The only exception is of those People of the Book who have left their evil ways to follow the truth - they are with the believers. ([ )! Most surely in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day there are signs for men of understanding: Most probably, the word, "creation", here has a comprehensive connotation, denoting as to how these things came into being, what are their characteristics, properties and other concomitants like movement and stillness, changes and variations. In that case, the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day would encompass all the great phenomena of creation. Its explanation has been given in the chapter of The Cowl; so has also the meaning of the "men of understanding" ([ )! Those who remember Allah standing and sitting and lying on their sides and reflect on the creation of the. heavens and the earth: That is, they remember Allah in every condition - whether they are standing, sitting or lying down. We have earlier explained the meaning of "remembrance" and "reflection". The gist of the two verses is as follows: Observation of the signs of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day has made them remember Allah continuously and at all times; they never forget Him in any situation. Also that observation has led them to reflection and meditation on the creation of the heavens and the earth; through it they remember that Allah will surely raise them again for awarding the recompense; therefore, they ask from Allah His mercy and beseech Him to fulfill His promise. ([ )! "Our Lord! Thou hast not created this in vain! . .: The demonstrative pronoun used here is "hadha" (this) which is singular and masculine, although the things referred to are plural and feminine. It is because the speakers are not concerned with particular names or distinct identification of each and every item; they look at the whole as a single creation. It is the same style that has been used in 6:78, where Ibrahim (a.s.) is quoted as saying: Then when he saw the sun rising, he said: "This is my Lord; this is greater!" (In this verse, where Allah describes the rising and setting of the sun, the feminine words have been used - as is normally done. But Ibrahim is reported to use masculine pronouns and

words for it. Ibrahim did so) because at that time he was completely unaware of its name or its characteristics - except that it was a "thing", (and "thing" in Arabic is masculine). "al-Batil" (untrue, futile, vain) is that which has no purpose, no aim. Allah says: then as for the scum, it passes away as a worthless thing; and as for that which profits the people it remains in the earth (13:17). That is why when they realized that the creation was not in vain, they understood that Allah would surely gather the people for recompense; and that at that time Allah would mete out to the unjust people a disgraceful punishment, i.e., the Hell. They also knew that there was none who could ward off the underlying principle of chastisement; otherwise, the creation would be in vain. It is the connotation of their prayer: "save us then from the chastisement of the Fire: Our Lord! surely whosoever Thou makest to enter the Fire, him Thou hast indeed brought to disgrace; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust". ([ )! "Our Lord! surely we heard a crier calling to the faith, saying: 'Believe in your Lord '...": The crier or caller refers to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). The clause, "saying: Believe", describes the cry or call; "an" (translated here as, saying) is explicative. They affirm before Allah that they have believed in the crier, i.e., the Messenger. He has brought to them news of many things from Allah; some of which he has warned them against, e.g., sins, faults, death in infidelity and transgression; and some others he has exhorted them to do or seek, e.g., forgiveness, mercy, details of the Garden (which Allah has promised his believing and righteous servants). Therefore, they pray to their Lord to forgive them, to cover their faults, and to make them die with His righteous servants. Also, they ask Him to fulfill His promise to them - the Garden and the mercy -which the messengers have guaranteed to them by Allah's permission. Thus they said: "forgive us therefore our faults..."; 'ala rusulika (translated here as, by Thy messengers) literally means, 'on Thy messengers'; i.e., the promise which Thou didst give to Thy messengers, and they guaranteed it to us on Thy behalf; "and disgrace us not", i.e., by not fulfilling the promise; it is because of this implication that the verse ends on, "surely Thou cost not break the promise". These verses clearly show that those believers acquired the belief in Allah and the hereafter and believed that Allah had been sending His messengers - they got these beliefs by reflecting on the signs of Allah. As for the details of that which the Prophet had brought, they learned them by believing in the Prophet. They, thus, follow the nature in that which may be known by reflecting on the nature and

creation; and in other matters they accept and obey what they are told by the Prophet. ([ )! So their Lord accepted their prayer...: Using the word, 'Lord', and relating it to them ("their Lord") points to the quickening intensity of the divine mercy. Also the unrestricted sentence, "I will not waste the work of a worker among you", points to this reality. There is no discrimination between one work and the other, nor between one worker and another. The next sentence (that branches out from the above), i.e., "they, therefore, who emigrated, and were turned out of their homes, and were persecuted in My way, and fought, and were slain...". aims at describing some good deeds for the description of their reward. The conjunctive ("and") have been used for enumeration only, not for combination; otherwise the described reward would be reserved for only those Emigrants who were martyred and combined all these attributes. Even then, the verse mentions only those virtues and deeds which this chapter exhorts the believers to acquire and do, which it puts utmost emphasis on, i.e., giving preference to religion over one's home town or country, patiently bearing the troubles in the way of Allah and fighting in the cause of religion. Apparently, emigration encompasses all types of fleeing, be it from polytheism, or family, or home. This may be inferred from three factors: 1) The word used, "emigrated", is unrestricted and unqualified; 2) it is followed by the phrase, "and were turned out of their homes", which denotes a particular type of emigration and it shows that the former refers to all types of "going out"; and 3) it is followed later by the clause, "I will most certainly cover their evil deeds"; in the Qur'anic language the word, as-sayyi 'at (evils; evil deeds) is apparently used for small and minor sins; it means that they have already fled from major sins earlier through abstaining or repenting from them. All this shows that the emigration or fleeing mentioned here is more comprehensive. (Try to understand it.) ([ )! "Let it not deceive you... in the cities (fearlessly): It purports to remove a possible misunderstanding. The meaning: This is the condition and reward of the righteous believers. But as for the unbelievers, you should not be deceived by their affluence and opulence, their luxurious life and

abundant riches (the pronoun, being singular, addresses the Prophet, but the talk is actually meant for the ears of the other people); after all, it is but a brief enjoyment which has no permanence. ([ )! But as to those who fear (the wrath of) Allah... is best for the righteous: "an-Nuzul" (food, drink and other things served to a guest; here it has been translated as "entertainment"). The phrase, "those who fear (the wrath of) Allah", refers to the righteous, as may be understood from the last clause of the verse. It supports what we have written above that the verse, "Let it not deceive you... the resting place", aim at removing an unspoken but possible misunderstanding. ([ )! And most surely of the followers of the Book... quick in reckoning: It means that they, like other believers, will get the better reward. It purports to affirm that the next life's happiness is not reserved to any particular nation or tribe so that the People of the Book would be debarred from it even if they believed. Rather, it depends on believing in Allah and His messengers. Therefore if they accept true belief, they will become eligible to the hereafter's reward like other believers. This verse praises these People of the Book in a special manner. It removes from them all those evil traits for which the preceding verses had been condemning other Jews and Christians - differentiating between the messengers of Allah, hiding what they had made a covenant with Allah to make known, and selling Allah's signs and communications for a small price. å  .



   $
.
[
, $ ,

 0
 Observation and experience confirm that man and woman are two classes of the same species, i.e., human being. All the effects and characteristics that are found in man are also found in woman - without any difference. Undoubtedly when all the characteristics of a species are found in a being it must belong to that species. Of course, some shared traits or characteristics may appear more strongly - or more weakly - in one group than the other; but it does not make that group [for example, woman] less human [than man]. It is clear from the above that the specific potential perfections that are available to one group, are available to the other too. It includes spriritual perfection that is acquired through belief, obedience, and other deeds that bring a human being nearer to Allah. Now it should be clear to you that

the best and most comprehensive statement to convey this theme is found in these words of Allah: "I will not waste the work of a worker among you, whether male or female, the one of you being from the other." Compare it with what th Bible says on this subject, and you will clearly see the difference between the positions taken by the two Books. We find in the Ecclesiastes the following observations: I turned my mind to know and to search out and to seek wisdom and the sum of things, and to know the wickedness of folly and the foolishness which is madness. And I found more bitter than death the woman whose heart is snares and nets, and whose hands are fetters; ...One man among a thousand I found, but a woman among all these I have not found.* Most of the ancient peoples believed that woman's deeds were not acceptable to God. In Greece she was called an abomination from the Satan's handiwork. The Romans and some Greeks said that she did not have a soul - although man did have an abstract immaterial human soul. The Christians in the Council of 586 C.E held at France, decided after a lengthy debate that woman was a human being, but she was created to serve man. In England, just a hundred years ago, she was not considered a part of human society. For details refer to the books wirtten on ancient beliefs and opinions as well as on mythology and anthropology - you will find a lot of amazing beliefs.  $  Abu Nu'aym has narrated in Hilyatu'l-awliya' from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Meditate on the creation of Allah, and do not meditate on Allah (Himself).'" (ad-Durru'l-manthur) 
 ! This theme has also been narrated from the Prophet through other chains from a number of the Companions, like 'Abdullah ibn Salam and Ibn 'Umar. It is narrated through Shi'ah chains too. Meditation on Allah (or according to another version, on the person of Allah) which has been forbidden means meditating on Allah's "essence"; because Allah has said: ...they do not comprehend Him in knowledge [20:110]. So far as His attributes are concerned, the Qur'an is the best witness that it is through them that Allah may be known; numerous verses exhort the people to know Him by His

attributes. Abu'sh-Shaykh has narrated in al-'Azamah from Abu Hurayrah that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) has said: 'One hour's thought is better than sixty years' worship.'" (ibid.) 
 ! Some traditions say, "one night's worship"; others say, "one year's worship"; and it is also narrated through Shi'ah narrators. It has been reported through Sunni chains that the word of Allah: So their Lord accepted their prayer..., was revealed because of the Mother of the believers Umm Salamah. She had said to the Prophet: "O Messenger of Allah! I have not heard Allah mentioning anyhow the women regarding (their) emigration." Thereupon Allah revealed the verse, So their Lord accepted their prayer: That I will not waste the work of a worker among you, whether male or female... The Shi'ah traditions say that the words: they, therefore, who emigrated, and were turned out of their homes..., were revealed about 'Ali (a.s.) when he emigrated with the Fatimahs, i.e., Fatimah bin Asad, Fatimah bint Muhammad (s.a.w.) and Fatimah bint az-Zubayr. Then reached to them at Dajnan, Umm Ayman and a few of the weaker believers. So they travelled and they were remembering Allah in every condition, until they came to the Prophet and (by that tune) these verses had been revealed. The Sunni traditions say that it was revealed about the Emigrants. Also, it has been reported that the verse: Let it not deceive you that those who disbelieve..., was revealed when some believers expressed the desire for the good life enjoyed by the unbelievers. Also, it has been said that the verse: And most surely of the followers of the Book there are those who believe..., was revealed about Negus and some of his companions. When he died, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) prayed his funeral prayer at Medina. Some hypocrites blamed him that he was praying for someone who was not on his religion. Then Allah sent this verse: And most surely of the followers of the Book there are those who believe... surely Allah is quick in reckoning.

But all these traditions represent the narrators' endeavours to fit the verses on various events or stories; they do not give the actual reason of revelation. å
 
    

33 ˸΍Ϯ˵Ϩϣ˴ ΁ Ϧ ˴ ϳ˶άϟ˴˷΍ Ύ˴Ϭϳ˵˷΃˴ Ύ˴ϳ ϥ ˴ Ϯ˵ΤϠ˶˸ϔΗ˵ ˸ϢϜ˵ ˴˷Ϡό˴ ϟ˴ Ϫ˴ Ϡ˴˷ϟ΍ ˸΍Ϯ˵ϘΗ˴˷΍˴ϭ ˸΍Ϯ˵τΑ˶ ΍˴έϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήΑ˶ Ύ˴λϭ˴ ˸΍ϭ˵ήΒ˶ ˸λ΍{200} {200} O you who believe! be patient and excel in patience and remain steadfast, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, that you may be successful. å
  This final verse is like the sum total, giving a gist of all that has been said in this chapter. It ends the chapter with a summary of its main theme. ([ )! 0 you who believe! be patient and help each other in patience: The order is unrestricted. The clause, "be patient", covers every type of patience: Patience in hardships, patience in the obedience of Allah, and patience against the disobedience of Allah. However, it refers to individual's patience, as the next clause shows. "al-Musabarah" translated here as helping each other in patience, literally means vying with one another in being patient. It implies collective patience - when individuals bear a common hardship together and each one's patience is augmented by others' steadfastness. In this way, their strength is enhanced, their patience redoubled and its effect multiplied. This phenomenon may easily be experienced, if we first look at an individual as a single person, and then look at his behavior in a group when he becomes a part of a collective whole, each one acting on and reacting towards the others. We shall describe this topic in detail, God willing, in its place. ([ )! and remain lined up; and fear (the wrath of) Allah, that you may be successful: "al-muraba'tah" is more comprehensive than al-Musabarah (vying with one another in patience; helping each other to be patient), because al-muraba'tah* implies people's linking up with one another in their powers, faculties, and

activities in all affairs of their religious life - in time of ease as well as in difficulties. As the main aim of these orders is to let the believers attain the reality of happiness of this world and the next - otherwise only partial worldly happiness can be achieved which obviously is not the real happiness - these orders have been followed by the words, "and fear (the wrath of) Allah, that you may be successful", i.e., you may achieve total and real happiness and success. * 
 .

+
  å


  %
 "   $%
 There is no need to bring a lot of arguments to prove that mankind is a social species. Every member of this species is created with this instinct. Man has always lived in society, as the history says and the archaeological finds show (the finds that are related to the earliest eras when this species lived in and dominated this globe.) The Qur'an has described this reality in the best possible way in many verses. For example: O you people! surely We have created you of a male and a female and made you nations and tribes that you may recognized each other... [49:13]; We have distributed among them their livelihood in the life of this world, and We have exalted some of them above others in degrees, that some of them may take others in subjection... [43:32]; ...the one of you being from the other... [3:195]; And He it is Who has created man from the water, then He has made for him blood-relationship and marriages-relationship... [25:54]. There are many other such verses. "   $
-  %
 Human society, like man's any spiritual characteristics or its related factors, was not born - when it was born - in its complete and perfect shape; there was a lot of room for development and improvement. Like all other concomitants of humanity, the society too kept growing and improving with man's progress in his material and spiritual journey. It would be unrealistic to expect this human characteristic to be different from other factors - to think that it would appear from the very beginning in its perfect shape. Rather it, like man's other characteristics related to his knowledge and will, has gradually progressed from the primitive to the advanced

stage, and the process continues. It appears from history that the first social group that appeared was the domestic circle based on marriage, because its natural agent (the procreative organs) was the most powerful factor in bringing people together. It was not, for example, like food gathering and eating which could be done alone. Satisfaction of sexual urge required union of two persons [and it laid the foundation of society]. From it gradually emanated the instinct which we have earlier called the instinct of exploitation. It takes shape when a man, dominating over and forcing another person, uses him to fulfil his [dominating one's] needs and plans. Then it took the shape of headship or leadership, e.g., head of the family, patriarch of the clan, chief of the tribe, and president of the nation'. Naturally, in the beginning the leadership went to the strongest and bravest; after sometime it was given to him who was bravest and richest, and also had many children. Thus, the views kept changing until now it goes to him who is thought to be the most efficient in administration and the most expert in diplomacy and politics. This was the primary reason why and how idol-worship raised its head and why it looks strong even today; we shall write about it in detail, God willing, somewhere else. Social institution with all its manifestations (family as well as other groupings) has always existed with mankind since the dawn of humanity. But man was not consciously aware of it in the beginning. It was there growing with man's other natural instincts and characteristics like exploitation, self-defence and things like that. The Qur'an informs us that it was the institution of prophet-hood which made the man aware of society and social bonds in detail and exhorted him to preserve and protect it as a distinct factor of humanity. Allah says: And mankind was naught but a single people, then they differed [10:19]. Also He says: Mankind was but one people; so Allah sent the prophets as bearers of good news and as warners, and He sent down with them the book with truth, so that it might judge between the people in that in which they had differed [2:213]. It shows that mankind in its earliest days was one nation, simple and uncomplicated; there was no difference among them. Then differences occurred and disputes appeared; so Allah sent the prophets and revealed the books to them in order that it might remove the said disputes and differences, and bring them back to social accord and unity which in its turn would be protected through ordained laws. Again Allah says: He has prescribed for you of the religion what He enjoined upon Nuh and that which We have revealed to you, and that which We enjoined upon

Ibrahim and Musa and 'Isd, that establish the religion and be. not divided therein [42:13]. This verse too informs us that it was the call to establish the religion without being divided therein which removed the discord among the people and united them on one word. Thus, it was religion that had guaranteed the safety of their good social order. As you see, the verse attributes this call (of society's good and unity) to Nuh who was the first prophet to be given a law and a book; then it ascribes it to Ibrahim, then to Musa, then to 'Isa (peace be on them all). The shari'ah of Nuh and Ibrahim contained very small amount of rules and regulations. Of the four prophets, the most elaborate was the shari'ah of Musa, which was followed by 'Isa - as the Qur'an says and the Gospels show but the shari'ah of Musa contains only about six hundred rules, as has been reported. In any case, the call to live in a society - a distinct and clear call - was not given except by the prophets in the mould of religion, as the Qur'an clearly says and - as will be seen -the history confirms. " $

 ,+
%
 Undoubtedly, Islam is the only religion which has purposely laid its foundation on human society, on community life. It has never neglected the social aspects in any of its affairs. If you want to know more, then look at the mass and volume of human actions and activities (which imagination cannot fully grasp) and their branching into various categories, classes and orders and you will be really astonished to see how this divine shari'ah covers all those actions and activities, and gives direction for every conceivable situation. Then see how it has moulded all those rules and regulations in the mould of social life. Then you will realize how it has filled it with the spirit of communal life to the maximum limit. Then compare your findings with every divine shari'ah to which the Qur'an has given any importance, that is, the shari'ah of Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa and Tsa; and you will realize that those laws cannot bear comparison with Islam, they cannot stand at its side. As for those systems which the Qur'an does not think worthy of consideration like idolatry, Sabi'ism, Manichaeism, dualism, etc. - the difference is too clear to need description. As for the groups and nations - be they civilized or otherwise - the history only

says that they used to follow what they had inherited from ancient times - that social life gave rise to exploitation and people were united under autocratic or monarchic rules; tribal, national and regional societies lived under the domain of a king or chief, whose selection was governed by factors of heredity, place of origin and things like that. No nation was paid any particular attention in its affairs; no discussion was held or views exchanged to better their condition. Even the great nations which dominated the known world at the time when the divine religion illuminated the earth i.e., the Roman and Persian empires - were nothing more than autocratic and despotic rules of Caesar and Khusraw; subject nation were "united" under the banner of the king or emperor; and the society progressed if the empire developed; otherwise it regressed. Of course, they had inherited some treatises on sociology, among the writings of their philosophers like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and others. But they were just papers which were never acted upon, merely mental images which never took shape outside imagination. The history that has come to us is the most reliable witness of what we have said. Therefore, the first call that reached the human ear and invited this species to pay attention to the society's affairs - by making it an independent subject, taking it out from oblivion and insignificance - was the voice of the Prophet of Islam (on whom be the best blessings and peace). He invited the people, through the divine messages revealed to him, towards happy life and good living - all together. Allah says: And hold fast by the cord of Allah all together, and be not divided,... And from among you there should be a party who invite to good and enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong. [Here Allah draws men's attention to protect the society from division and disunity.] and these it is that shall be successful. And be not like those who became divided and disagreed after clear evidences had come to them [3:103105]; And (know) that this is My path, the straight one, therefore follow it; and follow not (other) ways, for they will scatter you away from His way [6:153]; Surely they who divided their religion into parts and became sects, you have no concern with them [6:159]. There are many other unrestricted verses which call the people to live together in society. Also, Allah says:

The believers are but brethren, therefore make peace between your brethren [49:10]; ...and do not quarrel, for then you will be weak in hearts and your power will depart [8:46]; ...and help one another in goodness and piety... [5:2]; And from among you there should be a party who invite to good and enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong [3:104]. There are many such verses that exhort the Muslims to build the Islamic society on the foundation of unity and harmony acquiring and protecting its spiritual and material benefits and distinction - as we shall later describe in short. *"[
  $+$ $%
 
Ô
 While manufacturing or inventing something, one first makes its elementary parts, each part has its own properties and effects. Then one joins them together - in spite of their separate identities - and obtains from the whole new benefits in addition to the sum total of the various parts' benefits. Man, for example, has parts, limbs, organs and powers, each of which has distinct material and spiritual benefits. Sometimes they are compounded, and are thus strengthened and enhanced, like the weight of each part and that of the whole, or its power and turning from one direction to the other, etc. At other times the parts do not combine but continue as separate entities like the powers of hearing, seeing, tasting, will and movement; yet all these different parts are jointly placed under the control of one being, i.e., man. Then the benefit of the whole collection far exceeds the sum total of those found separately in various parts; they are immense benefits, like action and reaction, as well as the spiritual and physical uses. One of the benefits is the presence of this astonishing plurality within the framework of unity itself. When the human matter, i.e., the sperm and ovum completes its growth, it gets the power to separate a part from itself and bring it up as another perfect man, able to do all the spiritual and material activities the former man used to do. All human beings in spite of their vast number are human being, i.e., one; and their activities although plentiful in number are one in species; they are capable of uniting and joining. It is not unlike water - when put in various pots it is called many waters, but it is in fact one species; it has many properties but under one species; and the more water you gather in one place the more powerful are its characteristics and the far greater its impact. Islam, in bringing up the individuals of this species and guiding them to their real

happiness, looks at this real import of humanity; it could not do otherwise. Allah says: And He it is Who has created man from the water, then He has made for him blood-relationship and marriage-relationship [25:54]; O you people! surely We have created you of a male and a female [49:13]; the one of you being from the other [3:195]. This real relationship between individual and society inevitably leads to another actuality in the society inasmuch as people individually feed it with their existence and powers, especialities and characteristics; thus the society itself - like its members - acquires a sort of independent entity and characteristics, and it is a fact known to and seen by every one. That is why the Qur'an considers a nation as having an existence with an appointed term of its own; accordingly every nation has got a book; it has a perception and an understanding; it acts and obeys or disobeys Allah. Allah says: And for every nation there is an (appointed) term, so when their term is come they shall not remain behind (even) an hour, nor shall they go before [7:34];... every nation shall be called to its book... [45:28]; Thus have We made fair-seeming to every people their deeds...[6:108];... there is a group of them keeping to the moderate course... [5:66];... there is an upright party; they recite Allah's communications... [3:113]; ...and every nation purposes against their apostle to destroy him, and they disputed by means of the falsehood that they might thereby render null the truth, therefore I destroyed them; how was then My retribution! [40:5]; And every nation had a messenger; so when their messenger came, the matter was decided between them with justice and they shall not be dealt with unjustly [10:47]. That is why you see that the Qur'an pays attention to histories of nations as much as it does to individuals' stories - or even more. It did so at a time when the history was only a record of achievements or failures of kings and nobles. It was long after the revelation of the Qur'an that the historians deigned to concern themselves with the histories of nations and societies. A few of them like al-Mas'udi and Ibn Khaldun wrote on this line to a certain extent, until the changes were lately affected in narrative history and individuals gave way to the nations. Reportedly, the first [Westerner] to lay the foundation of the new history was Frenchman, August Kent (d. 1857 C.E.).

However, as we have said above, society's power and characteristics are necessarily stronger than those of an individual. In case of conflict or discord between the two, the former must overwhelm the latter. Perception and experience are best witnesses for this phenomenon - in active as well as passive powers and traits all together. A group's will in any matter, e.g., in crowds and mobs, cannot be restrained by any individual's contrary will or opposite intention. A part cannot escape from following the whole - it must proceed as the whole does. So much so that the whole suspends the individual member's perception and thinking. The same is the effect of general terror and common fright as, for example, at times of retreat, during riots and disorder, in aftermath of earthquake, in periods of famine or epidemic. Even some less frightening things have the same effect; for example, traditional rites or national attires and things like that, which an individual feels himself obliged to follow - they deprive him of his thinking power or perception. It is for this reason that Islam has paid so much attention to the affairs of society. We do not find - and cannot find - such care and attention given to it in any other religion, nor in any civilized nation. (Probably you will find it difficult to accept!) The fact is that although individual is the foundation of society, giving only an individual a good upbringing and training him to be of virtuous character can hardly produce desired effect if the society is permeated with opposite atmosphere and environment. Only a negligible number can withstand such pressure and preserve their good character. Thus Islam has built its most important rules and laws - like hajj, prayer, jihad, spending in the way of Allah, and in short, the religious piety - on the foundation of social life. And how did it arrange to preserve it? Apart from the authority of Islamic government (which is responsible to protect the general religious ceremonies and their boundaries), and in addition to the obligation of inviting to good, enjoining virtue and forbidding evil (which is a common obligation for the whole ummah), it has prescribed an important goal for the Islamic society - and no society can survive without a common goal - and that is the true happiness and nearness to Allah and honour in His presence. This goal is an unseen but vigilant supervisor, from which even secret thought of man cannot remain hidden - let alone the manifest action - although the preachers and those engaged in enjoining good and forbidding evil may fail to see it. It is this reality which led us to declare that the care and concern shown by Islam to the affairs of its society excels all systems and cultures. G"%



  $å   1

Someone may say: "You claim that Islamic ideology for creating good society is the strongest in foundation and loftiest in structure, and even the societies evolved by the advanced and civilized nations cannot reach its standard. Well, if it is so, then how is it that it could not be implemented except for a very short period, and then it changed into blatant despotic rule? Did it not turn into an imperialism more atrocious and horrid than all that had preceded it? Compare it with the Western civilization that is so enduring. "This in itself is a proof that their civilization is more advanced and their culture and tradition more vital and sound. They "have laid the foundation of their social order and legal system on the people's will and their natural inclination. They give credence to the will and resolve of the majority, because usually it is impossible for the whole community to achieve unanimity on any matter; and dominance of majority is a perpetual natural phenomemon. We find that every - natural cause and physical source succeeds in bringing about the effect in majority of the cases not always. The same thing happens when diverse and conflicting causes act on one thing - only the majority succeeds in affecting the object, neither all causes nor the minority has any effect. Therefore, it is proper that the structure of social order be built on the majority's will, and it should apply to the goal of the society as well as to the systems and laws enforced therein. As for the hypothesis of religion, in the present world it is nothing but a wishful thinking that does not pass the stage of theory, an intellectual ideal that cannot be put into practice. "The modern civilization, in the countries where it has taken root, guarantees the power and felicity of the society, purifies its members and cleanses them from evil traits and bad characteristics, i.e., the things which the society does not approve, like falsehood, fraud, unjustice, oppression, rudeness and things like that." The above contains a gist of what preoccupies the minds of a group of our oriental scholars, and especially some of our eminent sociologists and psychologists. Unfortunately they have taken a wrong way to approach the subject, and it has caused confusion in their minds, as will be seen from the following explanation: They have said: The Islamic social order - unlike the modern civilization - cannot be implemented in the world in its present environment; it means that the situation prevalent in today's world is not propitious for the laws legislated by Islam.

å2

Ô)! Agreed. But it proves nothing. Every system now prevalent in various human societies came into being after it was not there; it appeared when the then prevalent conditions and surroundings were against it; then it stood up and struggled against the previously deep-rooted system. Often it was repulsed and defeated in the first attempt; then it rose again and again until finally it gained upper-hand, triumphed and got dominance over the society. Sometime it perished and became extinct if the conditions and factors were not favourable. History testifies to it regarding every religious and temporal system, not excepting democracy and communism. It is such instances that the divine words point to: Indeed there have been example [lit., systems] before you; therefore travel in the earth and see what was the end of the rejecters [3:137]. The verse implies that the systems accompanied by rejection of divine commands do not have a happy ending, do not take one to a desirable goal. Therefore, merely the fact that a system is not agreeable to, or goes against the current social environment does not prove that it is wrong or erroneous. In fact, this is a well-established natural phenomenon through which every new idea and event reaches its final goal, after various actions and reactions, as a result of interaction of diverse causes and factors. Islam is not exception to this principle; it like all other systems is governed by the same physical and social factors in its progress or retrogress, and is influenced by the same agencies and conditions. Islam's position today - when it has captured the hearts of more than four hundred million people - is not weaker than it was in the days of Nuh. Ibrahim or Muhammad (s.a.w.a.). Each of them began his call alone, while the world in their times knew nothing except disorder and depravity. Then their message spread, took roots and became a living phenemenon that continues upto these days of ours. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) began his mission while there was none to support him except a man and a woman; later people joined them one after another; the days were full of privation - and what a privation it was! Then came to them the help from Allah and they established a good social order; a society whose members were - for a major part - governed by goodness and piety; until after the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) the strife and intrigues did to the Islamic society what they did. It did not take long for even such a small model of Islamic social order, in spite of its short life and narrow range, to spread itself, in less than fifty years, from one corner of the Earth to the other; it turned the history of mankind to a new direction,

and brought a fundamental and substantial change in it, whose overwhelming effects are seen even today - and will continue to do so for ever. Sociological and psychological discourses within the framework of ideological history cannot escape from admitting that the immediate and sufficient cause of the world's contemporary advancement is none other than the Islamic civilization and the light it spread over the Earth. Of course, most of the European scholars have neglected to give Islam its due credit, for which we may thank either religious prejudice or political expediency. How can a knowledgeable research scholar, looking at modern civic and social progress, say with justice that it was a contribution of Christianity? How can Christ (a.s.) be counted as its leader and standard-bearer, when he himself clearly says! that he was concerned only with spiritual affairs and had nothing to do with body or its affairs, and did not care about governmental and political affairs? While Islam clearly invites towards social life and mutual cooperation, and guides about and manages all aspects of human society and its members without exception. Why do the Westerners shut their eyes from this manifest reality? To what should we ascribe this silence of theirs, if not to their desire to extinguish the light of Islam (while Allah refuses but to perfect His light) and to put out its flame from the hearts by their envy and enmity - so that they could present Islam as a nation which has left no imprint on modem civilization? However, Islam has proved its ability to guide the mankind to their happiness and their good lives. Such a phenomenon cannot be dismissed as a hypothesis inapplicable to human life. Nor can it lose hope of one day dominating the world (inasmuch as its objective is the mankind's true happiness). We have already mentioned in the Commentary of the verse, Mankind was but one people... [2:213], that deep research in the conditions of creation leads us to the conclusion that the human species will surely reach its destination and achieve its goal - and it means the total domination of true Islam over the world, its complete authority over the social order. Allah has promised, according to this very principle, in His Mighty Book: ...then Allah will bring a people that He shall love Him, humble before the believers, mighty against the unbelivers, they shall strive hard in Allah's way and shall not fear the censure of any censurer... [5: 54]; Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good that He will most certainly make them successors in the earth as He made successors those before them, and that He will most certainly establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them, and that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them security in exchange; they shall worship Me, not associating aught with Me [24:55]; that the earth, shall inherit it My righteous servants [21:105].

There is another dimension to this question which these people are totally oblivious of. The motto of Islamic social system is to follow the truth in theory and practice: while the ideal of today's civilization is to follow the views and desires of the majority. This basic difference in outlook has resulted in difference in the aims and goals of the respective societies. The goal of Islamic society is the real and rational happiness and felicity. It means that man should practise moderation in giving his various powers their demands; he gives to his body what it desires but to the extent that it does not hinder him from knowing Allah through the path of servitude: rather it becomes a means of reaching that destination. In this way, man attains happiness through the happiness of all his powers and faculties. It is the greatest Comfort (although today we do not fully perceive it because we lack the proper Islamic training). That is why Islam has laid the foundation of its commandments on wisdom and intellect which by its nature follows the truth and reality; and it has very strongly prohibited all that disturbs the healthy intellect. It has laid the responsibility of enforcing all activities, moral and basic gnosis on the shoulders of the society. It is in addition to what the Islamic government is expected to do, like enforcing the penal code, etc. This aspect in any case would not be palatable to the general public. Such ideal would be intolerable to those who are astonishingly immersed in their desires and lusts - as we see today in all classes of society, be they affluent or hard pressed. Islamic system based on wisdom and intellect curbs people's freedom of enjoying whatever pleasure they like, whatever entertainment they desire, of attacking or devouring whom they are angry with. Naturally people would not like such restrictions, such limitations, except after intense efforts and tireless endeavors for spreading the message, and after intensive and extensive training given to the people; it is not different from other development affairs in which man needs firm determination, sufficient training and never ending vigilance. On the other hand, the goal of the modern civilization is material enjoyment. Obviously it encourages a sensual life that follows heart's desire - no matter whether it conforms with rational truth or not. It follows intellect only when it does not go against its desires or ambitions. That is why today's law follows, in its legislation and implementation, the pleasure of the majority of society and the desire of their hearts. Apart from that, only those laws may be guaranteed to be implemented that are concerned with overt actions. But as far as ethics and fundamental gnosis are concerned, there is no way of enforcing them; people are at liberty to adopt or reject them - except when these factors go against the law of the land, as then they are expressly forbidden.

Consequently, such a society would be wont to do what falls in line with its desire like base lust and inordinate rage. Such people would prefer most of the things condemned by religion; they would take good morals and high spiritual knowledge as mockery, shielding themselves behind "constitutional freedom". As a result of this phenomenon the ideology is bound to change its course from rational to sensual. What the wisdom treats as immorality and depravity, is glorified by sensual outlook as chivalry, manhood and good manners. Look at what is happening in Europe between the youths, between men and married or unmarried women, between women and dogs, and between men and their own daughters or other women within prohibited degrees; look at what is done in festivities and dance parties, etc. - the things which a person brought up in religious atmosphere feels ashamed even to bring on his tongue. Sometimes religious rites appear in these people's eyes as odd curiosities and laughing matters - and vice versa. This is because the thinking and perceptions are completely different in their essence as well as in modality. These social orders based on sensuality take no benefit from intellect - as you have seen -except for paving the way for sensual enjoyment. This enjoyment is their only goal; nothing is allowed to oppose it, nothing can stand in its way - except when one has to choose between two enjoyments of equal degree. After all there were - and still are - among the legislated laws things like suicide and duel, etc. One gets what he wants and desires except when it is in conflict with the will and desire of the society. Ponder on this difference; then you will understand why the western social order unlike the religious one - seems more agreeable to the human society. Nevertheless, it should not be forgotten that it is not only the present day's western social order that has proved consistent with people's nature (so that it may be given preference over other civilizations for this reason); all the social systems which were or are found in any society, from the early dawn of humanity to this day of ours, right from roaming nomands to the flourishing settlements, had and have one thing in common: People give preference to them over the religion that invites them to reality and truth; it is their first reaction when they are called to the true religion - because they are enthralled by material idolatory. If you ponder deeply you will find that the modern civilization is nothing more than a collection of various customs of early idolatory; but it has "progressed" from individual to collective level, from the stage of simple rites to that of technical

finesse. What we have said - that the Islamic social order is based on following the truth and reality, not on conformity with hearts' desires - is amongst the clearest declarations of the Qur'an. Allah says: He it is Who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth... [9:33]; And Allah judges with the truth [40:20]; (Also He says commending the believers) ...and enjoin on each other truth... [103:3]; Certainly We have brought you the truth, but most of you are averse to the truth [43:78]. Here it is clearly stated that truth is not agreeable to the majority and their desires. Then Allah totally rejects the idea that the majority's will should be followed. Why this rejection? Because it results in depravity and destruction. Allah says: Nay! he has brought them the truth, and most of them are averse from the truth. And should the truth follow their desires, surely the heavens and the earth and all those -who are therein would have perished. Nay! We have brought to them their reminder, but from their reminder they turn aside [23:70-71]. Have a bird's-eye view of the world history; see the man-made calamities taking shape one after another; chaos and disaster, depravity and iniquity piling up one over another. Then you will appreciate how true the divine words have proved. Allah again says: ...and what is there after the truth but error, how are you then turned back? [10:32]. There are many many verses of this or similar theme. If you want to gain more insight then study Chapter 10, Yunus. where "the truth" [and its derivatives] have been mentioned more than twenty times. They have said: To follow the majority is a regular trait of the nature. å2

Ô)! No doubt that the nature follows its major effects; but it never nullifies or contradicts the obligation of following the truth and reality. Nature itself is a truth. How can it negate its own self? For proper understanding of this statement, a few premises should be explained here: First: The external things and affairs, which are found outside man's imagination, are the basis of his cognitive beliefs and practical ideas; in their genesis and development, they depend on the system of causality - a permanent and allencompassing system that allows no exception. All knowledgeable thinkers are

unanimously agreed on this fact, and the Qur'an too testifies to its truth as we have described earlier. Such external happenings appear and continue without fail [following their sufficient cause]. Even the effects appearing in majority of cases are - from the point of reason - permanent in their majorityness. For example, fire that - looking at all its uses - brings heat most of the times, its "heat-giving in majority of cases" is its permanent property. Likewise there are other exmaples; and this is the truth. Second: Man by nature follows what he finds in any way a real external thing or affair. He follows the truth by dictate of nature. Even those [agnostics] who deny definite knowledge, if you tell one of them something which he has no doubt about, he will surely accept it. Third: Truth, as you have seen, is an external thing which man accepts in belief and follows in deeds. Man's own views or perceptions are just a means to reach that external truth - as mirror is a means to see the image. Now that you have understood these premises, it should be clear to you that truth or reality, i.e., something's happening in nature in all or majority of the cases, is an attribute of an external thing that exists outside imagination and happens always or in most of the cases; but it is not knowledge or perception. In other words, truth is attribute of a thing that is known, not of the knowledge itself. A thing that occurs always or in majority of cases is in a way the truth. But the view of the majority of the people, or their aspiration or belief, vis-a-vis, that of the minority, is not always truth. It may be truth - when it conforms with reality; or it may be falsehood if it does not. In the latter case, man should not submit to it; nor would he do so if he became aware of its falsity. When you were sure of a thing and then all the people said you were wrong, you would not accept their view; and even if you made a show of submitting to them, you would do so only out of fear, embarrassment or some other factor - but not because you believed their view to be correct. The following verse is one of the best statements to show that the majority's views and opinions were not necessarily truth that must be followed: Nay! he has brought them the truth, and most of them are averse from the truth [23:70]. If every opinion of the majority were truth, they would not have been averse or opposed to it. The above discourse shows clearly the untenability of the argument that to follow the majority is the dictate of the nature. This natural system applies to external happenings and things -which are subject of knowledge - not to the knowledge or thought itself. According to this principle, man should follow in his intention and action that which happens - externally - most of the times; not that he should

follow what a majority of the people believes. In other words, his activities and actions should be based on the good of the majority; and it is the principle upon which the Qur'an has based its legislations and ordinations. Allah says: Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you and that He may complete His favor on you, so that you may be grateful [5:6];... fasting has been prescribed for you, as it was prescribed for those before you, so that you may guard (against evil) [2:183]. There are many other verses that describe the underlying reasons of given orders which are found in most of the cases. They have said: The modern civilization has provided the developed countries with society's happiness, has refined its members and purified them from evil characteristics which are disapproved by the community. å2

Ô)! This talk is not free of confusion and medley. Probably when they say "society's happiness", they mean its superiority in technology and power, its exploitation - to the maximum - of natural resources. But you have repeatedly seen that Islam does not count it as happiness and felicity. Rational arguments too support this principle. Mankind's happiness is in fact a combination of the felicity of the spirit and that of the body. This bestows on man the material bounties, and at the same time adorns him with excellent character and true divine gnosis. It is the felicity that guarantees to him his happiness in this life and in the hereafter. If one submerges oneself in material enjoyments and ignores spiritual felicity, then it is nothing but infelicity, unhappiness. As for their marveling at the good characteristics - like truth, sincerity, trustworthiness and fine manners, etc. - which they find in the people of advanced countries, again they are confused. The trouble is that most of our oriental scholars are unable to think in a collective framework, to look at a society as a social unit; they look at an individual as an individual, and that is that. They see a man and think that he is a being who is independent of all things and has no such connection with anything as to affect his independent existence. (But the reality is otherwise.) Also, when such a scholar thinks about his life, his only aim is to gain benefits for himself and ward off harms from himself. He is always involved in his own affairs - and it is individualistic thinking. Then he weighs others with the same measure and decides that they too are individualistically independent. Such judgment can be true, if at all, about that man only whose thinking is individualistic. But it cannot be applied to a person who is conditioned to think in the framework of society: he considers himself an inseparable part of his society, who has no existence separate from it; his benefits are a part of his society's

benefits; the society's good is his good: and its harm, is his harm; every attribute and condition of the society is his own attribute and condition. Such a man thinks in an entirely different way. When it comes to establishing relations with other persons, he only concerns himself with relations outside his society; as for relations with other parts of the same society, he does not care in the least. Let us give you an example. Man is a compound, made of numerous limbs and faculties, all of which are combined together to give them a real oneness which we call "humanity". This makes them merge their separate identities and actions in the man's independent existence. Eyes, ears, hands and feet, see, hear, attack and walk for the man; each of these organs enjoys its activity when the man enjoys it. Each of them aspires to establish contact with some separate identity whom the man wants to link with - either with good intention or bad. Eyes, ears, hands or feet want to do good or bad to him whom the man wants to do good or bad. But as for the organs' own mutual relation and contact - when all of them are under the banner of one human being - seldom does one of them any harm to any other, nor is any of them discomforted by any other. This is then the condition of the parts of a man, and theirs is one unified collective progress. The same is the position of individual members of a human society when their thinking is moulded in collective mould. Their good or evil, piety or depravity, benevolence or malevolence are one with those of the society when looked at as one single identity. The Qur'an has done the same when it has judged various nations and groups whose thinking, because of their religious or national prejudice, was moulded in collective mould, like the Jews, the Arabs, and a number of ancient nations. Thus, you will find it censuring the present generations for the sins of their progenitors, blaming the contemporary groups for the misdeeds of their predecessors. All this because it is a fair and true judgment regarding those who think in a collective way. The honoured Qur'an has so many verses of this theme that it is not even necessary to quote them. Of course, justice demands that if there be some good people in that same society, their due rights should not be suppressed. Although they live in that corrupted social order and mingle with their compatriots, their hearts are not pulluted by their society's evil thinking and widespread inner sickness. They are in it but - like extra limbs - are not a part of it. The Qur'an has taken the same view when, in middle of general censure, it excepts good and righteous persons.

It is clear from the above description that while deciding about the goodness or badness of the members of advanced civilized societies - in contrast to those of other nations - one should not see as to how they live with one another, how they deal with their compatriots, how in short is their internal life. Rather, one should look at their collective personality as it shows itself when they deal with other weaker nations, as they behave with other collective societies of the world. It is this criterion that should be kept in mind when one wants to judge the worth of a society - its goodness or badness, its felicity or infelicity. It is from this angle that our scholars should approach the subject. After that they are at liberty either to admire that social order or to be scandalized by it. By my life, if a thoughtful observer looks at the history of their collective life since the European renaissance, and ponders on what they have done to other poor helpless nations and tribes, he will at once realize that these people (who supposedly are full of mercy and sincerity for mankind; who serve the humanity with their lives and properties; who have bestowed freedom and given helping hand to oppressed and suppressed nations; and who have abolished slavery and bondage) have no other goal except subjugating weak and poor nations as long as they can, by any method at hand. One day it is done through military campaign, another day by colonial intrigues; some day it is by outright annexation, on other occasions in the guise of suzerainty; one day they establish themselves in the name of guarding the joint interests, another day on the pretext of helping to preserve the independence; sometimes they establish foothold in the name of peace-keeping or repulsing a danger, at other times to defend the rights of deprived and disloged groups; and so on and so forth. Healthy human nature does not agree to treat such societies as good ones, nor to praise them as happy ones - even if we shut our eyes from the meaning given to happiness by religion, revelation and prophethood. How can human nature agree to this paradox? It equips all its members equally with all faculties; then how can it contradict its own decision and give some men a charter to own the others? An ownership that gives the "owners" authority on lives, honour and properties of the "subjects", and paves the way for them to play with their (the subjects') lives and existence, to control their perception and will? And all this savagery to a degree not seen or experienced even by primitive men? For reference you should study the history of these nations and have a look at what present generation is suffering on their hands. If such a situation is called happiness and goodness, it could only be in an ironical and sarcastic sense.

"0
.%
17 +
 1 Society - of any type - comes into being when a common goal and ambition unites its individual members. That goal is a single spirit spread throughout the society that makes it one entity. In non-religious societies that goal is man's worldly life seen collectively - not individualistically - i.e. collective enjoyment of the advantages of physical life. What is the difference - in characteristics - between collective and individualistic enjoyments? If man is able to live alone, he will be unhindered, unrestricted, in all his enjoyments; there will be nothing to oppose or prevent him. The only restriction will come from the limitations put by his own limbs. For example, he cannot breath in all the air in atmosphere - even if he wants to - because his lungs are not so big; he cannot take the food except to a certain amount, because his digestive system would not tolerate it. The same applies to other faculties and limbs that restrict each other's activities. But, as we have supposed that there was no other human being to demand share in exploitation of natural resources and benefits, there would be nothing to put restriction on his activities or to hinder him in his desires and actions. But the position is different for a man living in a society. If he were to act without any restraint, with a will of his own, it would create friction and collision, life would become intolerable and the mankind would perish. (We have fully described it under the discourse of Prophethood.) That is the only reason that leads people to the rule of law in society. But uncivilized societies do not consciously realize its need; they just follow their customs and traditions which in their turn give rise to discord and quarrel among the members; thus all of them feel obliged to observe some rules that could give some protection to the society. As those laws are not based on a solid foundation, they are liable to imperfection and nullification, alteration and invalidation. On the other hand, civilized societies base their laws on solid foundation - according to their degree of progress and advancement. Through those laws they remove the discord and difference appearing in the society's intentions and activities, inasmuch as they put some restrictions and limits on them. Then they concentrate the power and authority in a centre which is given responsibility to enforce the law and implement its provisions. It appears from the abvoe that: First: Law, in fact, is the factor that moderates people's desires and actions, by

putting limitations on them and thus removing the sources of discord and difference. Second: The society governed by law allows its members complete freedom in matters not covered by the law; and it is as it should be, because man has been equipped with perception and will, and once these factors are moderated further restriction is uncalled for. That is why modern laws do not care about divine knowledge or ethics. Consequently, these two important things appear to the people in the shape given to them by the nature of law. They have to compromise and conform with the law - as its dependent. Thus sooner or later they turn into external rituals devoid of inner purity. Also, it is for this reason that we see the politics playing with the religion: one day it (politics) decides against religion and makes it illegal; another day it relies on it and goes to the extreme to keep its banner aloft; a third day leaves it alone in benign neglect. Third: This system is not free from defect. Although the society has given an individual or some individuals responsibility to enforce the law, yet ultimately there is no guarantee that it would be enforced. If the person who has final power and authority deviates from truth, and changes the collective power into personal hold; and ignores or nullifies the law to establish his own rule over mankind, then there will be nothing to subdue this despot or to bring him back to the path of justice. There are countless examples of this phenomenon even in this time of ours, this age of culture and civilization - let alone the historical proofs of earlier days. Add to this defect another shortcoming: Many is a time when the executive authority remains completely unaware that law had been broken. Or, the criminal manages to go out of its jurisdiction. Now, we come back to our original topic: A society is held together by a single shared goal, i.e., enjoyment of this worldly life's advantages. It is what general public calls happines. But from Islam's point of view, human life has a much wider circle than this worldly life - it encompasses also the life hereafter which is the real life. Islam knows that nothing will be of any use in that next life except divine gnosis - all of which is concentrated in monotheism. Also it realizes that this knowledge cannot be preserved or protected except through noble moral values and by purifying the self from all base traits. It recognizes that these meritorious characteristics cannot be completed and perfected unless man lives in a healthy society which relies on divine worship, which submits to the demands of Allah's Lordship, and wherein each member deals with all others according to social justice. In short, from Islamic point of view the unifying goal on which human

society is based is the religion of montheism; it has the same principle of montheism. It has not stopped - in this legislation - at merely moderating the intentions and actions; rather it has completed it with the acts of worship and added to it true divine knowledge and noble moral traits. Thereafter, it gave the responsibility of its enforcement first to the Islamic government and then to the whole society. The latter would do it through good training in knowledge and practice and by enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. One of the most important aspects of this religion is the fact that all its parts, all its components, are so well-knit together that the whole constitutes one perfect unit: The spirit of monotheism permeats all the virtuous characteristics and ethics which this religion invites to; and the spirit of good character is spread throughout the deeds which the society members are obligated to perform. Thus all the components of Islamic religion, in final analysis, return to monotheism; and monotheism on exoteric level become noble ethics and good deeds. When monotheism comes down, it becomes ethics and deeds; and when they ascend, they become monotheism. To Him do ascend the good words; and the good deed lifts them up [35:10]. 
 ! The objection laid down against civil laws (when, for example, the executive authority refuses to implement them or fails to detect the law-breakings) may also be brought against Islam with equal force. Its clearest proof may be seen in the present condition of Islam, when it has become so enervated that it has lost all its grip over the society. The reason here too is the same: There is no one who could enforce its tenets among the people - even for a day. [
! What is the reality of law in general, be they divine or man-made? They are only imaginative forms in people's minds, some cognition retained in hearts. It is by appropriate human will that they are implemented and thus perceived and observed. Obviously, if the will is lacking, nothing can be found to apply the laws to. The same is the case of those factors which maintain the relation of this will with law's enforcement - in order to preserve and strengthen the law. However, secular laws are concerned with no more than connecting the actions with intentions of the majority; but they do not care to arrange for preservation of that intention. As long as the intention is alive, perceptive and active, the law is implemented. But if that will die (because of deterioration in the people's spirit, or decrepitude eating away the society's structure); or if it was alive but was bereft of perception and cognition (because the society was submerged in vain distractions,

or inordinately involved in luxuries and material enjoyments); or even if it was alive and perceptive but became ineffective (because some other stronger power imposed its own will over that of the majority): in all these situations the nation would not attain its ambition of enforcing the law and protecting the society from destruction and annihilation. The same would be the case in the events like secret crimes which the executive could not detect; or which it cannot deal with - like the events occurring outside its jurisdiction. The discords and splits appearing within European nations after the World Wars I and II give a clear picture of this syndrome. This breakdown of laws and destruction of society occurs only because society does not care to establish the real factor that preserves the nation's will and keeps it strong and dominant -and it is the high morality, the noble character. The nations will, in its survival and continuation of existence gets support from relevant characteristics only - as is explained in psychology. If the nation's traditions and applied laws are not based on sound foundation of high morality, they would be like an evil tree pulled up from the earth's surface that has no stability. Ponder, for example, on the appearance of communism. It is but a natural child of democracy; it came into being because some classes of the society were extremely opulent while the others were totally deprived. There was a huge distance between the two extremes; on one side was cruelty and oppression, on the other was growing impatience and accumulated hatred and rage. The same happened in the World Wars, coming one after the other, and the third is waiting on the side to pounce on humanity any moment. It has undermined the earth and destroyed the tilt and the stock; and it did not, and does not, have any reason except the "civilized and advanced" nations' arrogance mischief and greed. On the other hand, Islam has laid the foundation of its traditions and laws on morality and has put utmost efforts in training the people in noble character, in order that it may ensure that the laws shall be enforced practically. This noble moral character is with the man in secret and in open, in private and in public; it does its duty and discharges its responsibility - far better than any guarding police, more effectively than any other authority that engages itself in maintaining the law and order. Of course, the educational institutions in these countries try to train the people in meritorious characteristics, and vigorously exhort the people to it. But it proves of no use.

First: The only fountainhead of evil traits is extravagance and inordinate material enjoyment on one side and extreme deprivation on the other. The civil laws have given the people unrestricted freedom in this respect; it has provided one class with all privileges and left the others destitute. In this background, is not the call to sublime morality a call to two mutually contradictory things? An attempt to join two opposites? Moreover, as you have seen, these nations have adopted a collective thinking. Their societies even today endeavor their utmost to oppress weaker societies and trample on their rights; they exploit these poor nations' resources, subjugate their people, and dictate their own decisions to them to the utmost possible extent. What is this call to goodness and piety - with these characteristics? Is it not a selfcontradicting call that could bring no result? %
 $!Even sublime morality needs - for its continuation and preservation -- a guarantor to protect it and keep it alive; and there can be no guarantee for it other than monotheism, i.e., the belief that there is one God for the universe. Who has beautiful names; He has created the creatures in order that they should attain to their perfection and happiness: He loves good and virtue, and dislike evil and mischief; He will surely gather all for deciding between them and awarding them their recompense; thus He will reward the good-doer for his good deeds and punish the evil-doer for his evil. Obviously, if you remove the belief in the Day of Judgment, there would be no genuine reason why one should not follow one's desires, why should one desist from material enjoyments and physical lust. The human nature wants and demands what a man himself desires, not what would benefit someone else - except when the other person's desire somehow becomes this man's. (Think over it properly.) Suppose a man desires something that he cannot obtain without trampling on someone else's rights. There is nothing to restrain him, no judge to punish him, no censurer to censure him and no reprover to reprove him. Now, what hindrance is there to stop him from committing the crime and perpetrating the injustice, no matter how serious and heinous it might be? As for some imaginary restraints (and often scholars are misled in this matter!), like patriotism, love of humanity, exalted commendations or things like that, they are merely heart's inclinations and inner feelings; there is nothing to sustain them except education and training - and that too is not based on any solid reason. Thus these things are just conventional attributes and common occurrrences; there is no guarantor to prevent their obliteration. Why should a man sacrifice his life in order that someone else might

live after him, when he believes that death is complete annihilation and total extinction? As for the exaltation and praise, it depends on others' tongues; and how can he enjoy it after he has sacrificed himself and become "nothing"? In short, no thinking person can deny that man would never opt for a deprivation whose recompense would not reach him, whose benefit would go to someone else. As for the promise in such situations that his good memory would remain alive for ever and he would "enjoy" eternal wonderful praise, it is just a deceit and delusion in which he allows himself to be entrapped. It is self-delusion that lets him think that even after death and extinction his condition would be the same as before death; that he would know about and enjoy the good things told about him after his death. But surely it is nothing except self-deception, a fantasy of imagination. His condition is not unlike a drunk man driven by his emotions; he pardons his enemies, offers his life and honour, wealth and prestige, for causes which he would never approve of, if he were in his senses; but he is drunk and unable to understand, and therefore thinks that it is heroism - while in fact it is nothing but foolishness, madness. Man cannot safeguard against this or other such misjudgments and blunders except through belief in monotheism mentioned above. That is why Islam has built the noble character (which is an integral part of its ordained laws) on the foundation of monotheism - a concomitant of which is the belief in the Day of Judgment. If a man believed in these realities, he would feel bound to do good and abstain from evil, wherever and in whatever situation he might be, whether anybody knew of his action or not, whether anyone praised him or not, whether or not there were someone to exhort him to do it or not to do it. He would know that Allah was with him, the Knower, the Preserver, Who watched what every soul was doing; he would also know that later on a day was coming when every soul should find present what it had done of good and what it had done of evil, and in which every soul would be given recompense of what it had earned. &" 8,!8,( $
 $ , $8,%

 The logic of sensuousness calls to worldly benefits and drives one to it. If an action is profitable and man is aware of its profitability, then his senses intensely yearn to do it. If, on the other hand, he does not see any benefit in it then he remains inactive and inert. The logic of understanding, on the other hand, motivates one to follow the truth, and believes that it is the best thing which may benefit the man, no matter it is

accompanied by worldly benefit or not; because that which is with Allah, is better and more enduring. To see the difference between the two logics, compare two lines of a poem of 'Antarah (which is based on the logic of sensuousness) with a Qur'anic verse [on the same subject] based on the logic of understanding. Antarah says: And my saying (to my soul) whenever it belched or was agitated: '(Stay) at your place; you shall either be praised or shall get rest.' He wants to say: I keep my soul steadfast (whenever it is shaken in dangerous and fearsome war situations) by saying to it: Be calm and remain steadfast; if you are killed, people will praise you for your steadfastness and remaining firm in the midst of the danger: and if you kill the enemy you will be rid of him and thus get peace of mind. Therefore, remaining steadfast is good in either case. Check it with the divine words (based on the logic of wisdom): Say: "Nothing will afflict us save what Allah has ordained for us; He is our Patron; and on Allah should the believers rely. " Say: "Do you await for us but one of the two most excellent things? And we await for you that Allah will afflict you with punishment from Himself or by our hands. So wait; we too will wait with you." [9:51-52]. The believers believe that it is only Allah Who is their Guardian and Patron; and it is entirely-in the hand of Allah to support and help them. They do not care about whatever good or evil comes to them; they long only for the reward which He. has promised them for being submissive to Him and holding fast to His religion. As He says: ...this is because there afflicts them not thirst or fatigue or hunger in Allah's way, nor do they tread a path which enrages the unbelievers, nor do they attain from the enemy what they attain, but a good work is written down to them on account of it; surely Allah does not waste the reward of the doers of good. Nor do they spend anything that may be spent; small or great, nor do they traverse a valley, but it is written down to their credit, that Allah may reward them with the best of what they have done [9:120-121]. Accordingly they say to their enemies: If you kill us or do us any harm, we shall get great reward and good result from our Lord; and if we killed you or afflicted you with some misfortune, we shall again get great reward and good result from our Lord in addition to the victory we shall get over you in this world. In either case, we shall be happy and our position is enviable; whatever you await for us is one of the two good things, we shall be successful and happy in either case. But

according to your belief, you will attain your goal and will get happiness only in one case, i.e., if you were to vanquish us. We therefore await for you what would displease you, while you await for us only that which would please us, would make us happy. These, therefore, are the two logics. One tries to build courage and steadfastness on foundation of sensuousness; it teaches that he who would stand firm in battle would get one of the two benefits: either people's admiration and praise or deliverance from enemy; and that too on the condition that there was some benefit in it for the figher who was exposing himself to danger; if there was no benefit coming to him (e.g., people were not expected to applaud and acclaim him because they did not appreciate war: or did not distinguish faithful service from betrayal; or the service was of a type that they could not know about; or faithfulness and faithlessness were equal in their eyes; or his heart was not at rest by destruction of enemy) then this logic becomes totally ineffective, inoperative and useless. The above examples cover most of the usual reasons involving injustice and wrong, fraud and crime. An embezzler, when going against the law, says: 'My services are not properly appreciated by the people; a faithful servant and a faithless one are all equal in their eyes; the faithless one enjoys rather a more pleasant life, his condition is far better than mine.' A criminal thinks that he would surely wriggle out of the clutches of law; that the supervising authorities could not catch him out; his affairs would remain a secret and people would not be able to detect his misdeeds. One who is apathetic and sluggish in establishing the truth and rising against its enemies, and fraternizes with the forces of untruth, offers the plea that standing for truth would humiliate him in people's eyes, the modern world would laugh at him and would look down at him as a relic of the middle ages or the pre-historic times. If you talked to him about spiritual purity and moral decency, he would reply: Of what use to me shall the spiritual purity be if it leads to misery, hardship and shortened life? On the other hand, the other logic, the Islamic one, has built its structure on following the truth and seeking the reward and recompense from Allah. As for the worldly aims and goals, they occupy secondary position in its scheme. It is clear that no situation in life can remain out of the above-mentioned basic and primary goal- it is all-encompassing general aim which covers all human activities. According to this logic, every action - be it an act of commission or omission- is done for the pleasure of Allah, in submission to His will, for following the truth which He has ordained; and He is the Guard, the Knowing that neither slumber overtakes Him nor sleep; none can protect from Him, nor anything in the earth or

in the heavens is hidden from Him; and Allah is Aware of what you do. Thus there is for every soul, in whatever it does or fails to do, an Observer, a Witness Who preserves what is done by man. It makes no difference whether the people witness ir it not, admire it or not, appreciate it or not. Islamic training had been so effective that people used to come to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) and confess to him the sins and crimes they had done in secret, and accepted the penalty and punishment given to them (from death sentence downwards); their only motive being to seek the pleasure of Allah, and to cleanse their souls from the filth of sins and rust of evil. If a scholar ponders on those events, he would understand how wonderful the effect of religious training was on the people's souls, and how it had trained them to gladly offer to Allah the most desired and most important things they had- that is, the life and all that it covers. If this discussion were not Qur'anic, we would have given some relevant examples from Islamic history. 4"0

  ,

/ ,[
 $  $  ,   
1%

,/! To make the reward of the hereafter as the common and primary goal of human social life would entail discarding this life's aims which the human nature invites to; it would destroy the social system and drive people to monasticism. After all, how could it be possible to attach oneself exclusively to one goal and at the same time preserve other important goals too? Is it not a contradictory statement? [
!It is an erroneous impression emanating from ignorance of divine wisdom and secrets which the Qur'an has so clearly described. Islam has based its legislation on the foundation of creation, as we have repeatedly shown in many discourses in this book. Allah says: Then set your face uprightly for the (right) religion in natural devotion (to the truth), the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no alteration (by anyone else) in the creation of Allah; that is the right religion [30:30]. In short, the series of actual creative causes by linking together have brought the human species into being, and are driving it to its life's goal that is presecribed for it. It is therefore essential for man to develop his life in the framework of free will and struggle, according to the laid down causes to attain his goal, in order that his life does not turn into a battle between cause and goals- otherwise it would lead to

destruction and annihilation. This then is the religion of Islam- if the questioner would understand it. Of course, there is one Single Cause above all the causes Who has created all causes and manages all its big and small affairs; and He is Allah, Who is the Complete Cause above all the causes (in the correct meaning of this word). Man is obliged to surrender to His will and submit to His command. This is what we mean when we say that monotheism is the only foundation of Islamic religion. It is clear from the above that preserving the belief of monotheism, surrendering to Allah's will and seeking His pleasure throughout one's life follows entirely the system of causality by giving everyone his due right- without polytheism or heedlessness. A Muslim has some worldly goals and some of the hereafter, some material objectives and some spiritual. But he does not involve himself with material or worldly goals more than what is rationally required of him. That is why we find Islam calling to the belief of monotheism, to attach oneself exclusively to Allah, to have pure belief in Him turning away from every other cause, every other goal; and yet it orders the people to follow the laws of life, to proceed on the path of nature. Again, it is obvious that it is only the members of Islamic society who are truly happy - both in this world and the next; that their objective - to seek the pleasure of Allah in all activities - does not conflict with life's other objectives, provided it has the upper hand. The above discourse removes one more misunderstanding, which has been shown by some sociologists. They think that the reality of religion and its fundamental objective is to establish social justice, and the matters related to divine worship have secondary position - they are mere shoots branching from that root. Whoever therefore establishes social justice is on religion, even if he had no belief nor did he perform any worship. But if a scholar meditates on the Qur'an and the sunnah, and especially on the life history of the Prophet, he would at once see through the falsity of this "argument", without any trouble or effort. Moreover, this talk that intends to discard the belief of monotheism and noble virtues from religious tenets, actually is an attempt to change the religious objective (i.e., belief of monotheism) into secular objective (i.e., material enjoyment); and you have seen that these are two opposite objectives, none of them can be changed into the other - neither in roots, nor in shoots, nor in its fruits.

'"0

  ,

$ $ ,1 The word, 'Freedom', in the sense it is used nowadays, is not older than a few centuries. Probably, its genesis dates from the Europeans renaissance a few hundred years ago. Yet, its idea was present in minds - a choicest desire of hearts since ancient times. The creative natural basis, which this idea emanates from, is the will the man is equipped with in his existence and which gives rise to his actions; it is a psychological condition nullification of which would nullify perception and sensation, that in its turn would lead to the nullification of humanity. But man is a social being; his nature drives him to living in society, cooperating with others, co-ordinating his will and aligning his activity with the will and activities of others. This leads him to submit to a law that would regulate people's wills and actions by demarcating proper boundaries for each. The same nature that has given the man freedom of will and action, puts also limitations on that will and action and restricts that initial freedom. As the modern civil laws have built their regulations on the foundation of material enjoyment - as you have seen - it has resulted in freedom from religion: man is free in matters of basic religious knowledge to adhere to it or not; in moral issues (and in all things beyond the sphere of civil laws) to choose, and act on, whatever he desires. This is what the freedom means in modern times. But as for the Islam, as you know, it has based its laws on monotheism, and secondarily on noble moral values. Then it has given guidance for all types of personal and social activities, be they big or small; there is nothing related to man but the Islamic But if a scholar meditates on the Qur'an and the sunnah, and especially on the life history of the Prophet, he would at once see through the falsity of this "argument", without any trouble or effort. Moreover, this talk that intends to discard the belief of shari'ah has a law prescribed for it. Therefore, there is no room here for the freedom (in the above sense). Of course, it has freed man from the fetters of serving other than Allah. It is a short sentence; but has a vast meaning. Its significance may be appreciated when you ponder deeply on Islamic system and the practical way of life which it guides to and which it establishes among the society's members and its various classes. Then

compare it with what you see of the systems of domination, control and power found in the civilized societies, as between its own members and classes and also between a strong and a week nation. As for the Islamic commandments, it has given choice and freedom in all those things which Islam has made lawful of good sustenance and advantages of moderate life without inclining to either extreme. Allah says: Say: "Who has prohibited the embellishment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants and the good provisions?" [7:32]; He it is Who created for you all that is in the earth [2:29]; And He has made subservient to you whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth, all, from Himself [45:13]. It is really astonishing to see an exegete labouring to "prove" freedom of belief in Islam on the evidence of the verses like: There is no compulsion in religion [2:256]. We have explained its true significance in its Commentary in the chapter of The Cow. Here it should be added that, as you know, monotheism is the foundation of all Islamic tenets and beliefs. How is it possible, then, to allow freedom of belief? Is it not just a clear contradiction? The idea of freedom of belief has the same position in Islam as the idea of freedom from the rule of law would have in the civil laws. Look at it from another angle. Belief (i.e., attainment of affirmative knowledge firmly-rooted in mind) is not a voluntary action of man, so that it could be a subject of permission or prohibition, compulsion or freedom. What can be prohibited or permitted is the action resulting from that belief. For example, propagation of that belief, canvassing for it, writing and publishing it, undermining the opposite belief and activity of the people - these are the things which may be allowed or forbidden. Obviously if such activities are against the laws of the land, or go against the constitution or principles on which the laws are based, then there is no alternative to prohibiting them by law. The basis of Islamic legislation is the religion of monotheism (the belief in the Oneness of God, the prophethood and the Day of Judgment); it is what is unanimously believed by all the Muslims as well as the People of the Book (i.e., the Jews, the Christians and the Zoroastrians). The Islamic freedom is confined within this limit. To claim freedom beyond this limit is tantamount to destroy the foundation of religion. Of course, there is one more freedom, i.e., freedom of describing one's belief for debate or discussion, as we shall explain below in item 14. 3"0
0å ,
 $î

  %
1

It might be said: Agreed that the Islamic system encompasses all that is necessary for a happy life, and that the Islamic society is enviably happy and pleasant. But this system, because of its all-pervasiveness and lack of freedom of belief, leads to stagnation of society, retards its evolutionary progress, and blocks the way to change and perfection - and, as they say, it is a serious defect for a society which claims to be perfect. Evolutionary process demands presence of opposite forces in a thing: those forces, through mutual action and reaction [through conflict between an original direction and its direct opposite], would bring about a new position free from the defects of the original forces. If we admit that Islam removes the opposite tenets and especially the beliefs opposed to its fundamentals, then such a society would be brought to a standstill in its evolutionary progress. å2

Ô)! It is one of the objections of the dialectical materialism; but it is based on an astonishing confusion. Human knowledge and belief is of two kinds: One, that which accepts change and evolution: these are technical subjects that serve to raise the standard of material life and to subdue the natural forces, e.g., the mathematics, the physics, etc. Whenever these subjects and technologies would progress from lower to higher level, from defectiveness to perfection, the society would accordingly change and progress. The other type of knowledge is that which does not accept change - although it accepts perfection in another sense. This is the metaphysical divine knowledge and cognition, that unveils the genesis and resurrection, happiness and unhappiness, etc. It explains these affairs definitely and finally; there is no change or evolution in it - although it accepts development and perfection in the sense of depth and detail. This knowledge and this cognition do not effect societies and ways of life except in a general manner. If this knowledge and these beliefs remain standstill in one condition, it would not cause the society to stop in its developmental progress. We know that we have a lot of general ideas which are unchangeable and static, but they have not hindered the society's progress. For example, we say and believe that man should work to protect his life; that the work should aim at a benefit returning to the man; that man should live within a society; that the universe exists in reality, it is not a delusion; that man is a part of the universe, a part of the planet called the Earth; and that he has got some limbs and organs, some powers and faculties. There are a lot of other such confirmed and unchangeable informations and beliefs, and their unchangeability does not affect the progress of the society, nor does it make the society stagnant. In this category comes the belief that the universe needs, and is created by, One God, Who has ordained for the people a comprehensive law that combines all the ways of happiness, and which was sent to

us through the prophets, and He will gather all people on a day when He will award them the recompense of their deeds. It is the only foundation on which Islam has built its social order, and which it jealously guards. As is known, it is such a proposition that, if made subject to dialectical conflict between thesis and antithesis producing a synthesis, it would cause decline and retrogress of the society - as we have explained several times. This is also the case with all real facts and truths related to metaphysics; their rejection cannot do any good to the society, it can bring only its decline and fall. In short, human society in its evolutionary progress needs day to day change and perfection only in the ways of exploiting natural resources. It takes place through continuing technical research and application of knowledge to practical needs; and Islam does not hinder this process in the least. As for the changes in the principles of sociology, in the theoretical aspects of social order - like autocratic monarchy, democracy, communism and theories like that they become necessary only when the prevalent system fails to bring the society nearer to social perfection. It is not an evolution from defectiveness to perfection. If there is any relation between one theory and the other, it is that of wrong and right, not that of defective and perfect, nor of undeveloped and developed. Now suppose that a social order is firmly established exactly as man's nature desires, i.e., on social justice; people under its beneficial training are equipped with useful knowledge and good deeds; then enhancing the level of the knowledge and activities, they are proceeding joyfully and energetically towards their happiness; in this way they are continuously perfecting themselves and increasing the sphere of their happiness and felicity. What is the need, in this case, to change such a social order? What do they want more than that? No thinking person will say that man must change every thing around himself even if there is no need for any change. 25
 ! You cannot avoid change even in those things which you claim to be above the change, like beliefs, noble ethics, etc. All these things do change with the passage of time when social conventions change and new environment replaces the old. No one can deny that the thinkings of modem man are so different from those of the ancient ones. Likewise, his ideas are affected by variation in his habitat, i.e., whether he lives in equatorial, polar or moderate zone. Also, his way of life affects his thinking, depending on whether he is a boss or a servant, a Bedouin or a townsman, prosperous or unprosperous, rich or poor and so on. No doubt, ideas and opinions differ with difference in influencing factors, and change when the times change.

[
!This objection is based on the theory of relativity of human knowledge and ideas. According to this theory, truth and falsehood, good and evil, are relative affairs. General theoretical knowledge concerned with genesis and resurrection, as well as general practical opinions (e.g., the proposition that society is good for man, or that justice is a virtue - a general proposition, not as applied to practical conditions) have only relative values which always change with the change of time, environment and conditions. But we have described in another place falsity of this theory in its generality. The sum total of our discourse there was that this theory does not cover general theoretical propositions and a part of general practical ideas. It is enough to show invalidity of generality of this theory that: If we agree that this theory is in fact general, unrestricted and unchangeable, then it entails acceptance of [at least] one unrestricted general proposition that is not relative - and that is this theory, this proposition, itself. Alternatively, if we say that it is not an unrestricted generality, but only a partially correct proposition, then it proves - as a concomitant - existence of unrestricted general propositons. Thus, the theory is not general, in any case. In other words, if it is correct that 'Every opinion and belief must change at some time', then this theory itself must change one day, i.e., there should be some beliefs and opinions that will never change. (Think it over.) "  
 

  ,7
 
$

1 Someone might ask: Let us say that Islam had provided comprehensive guidance for all situations of life as it was in those days when the Qur'an was revealed; and was thus able to lead that society to its true happiness and to all its ambitions. But times have changed; and so have the ways of human life. The culture and mechanical life of modem civilization is totally confined to primitive natural resources. Now man, as a result of his long and arduous struggles, has reached a level of development and civilization which, if compared to his condition of a few centuries earlier, would look like a comparison between two different species. How can the laws made to regulate the life of that time solve the problems of modern times' complicated and ingenious life? How can either of the societies take the burden of the other on itself? [
! Obviously, there is difference between the two eras - in the forms of life. But it does not mean difference in general principles and substance of life. What has changed is not the principle, but its application. Man even today needs food to eat, clothes to wear, house to live in, means of transportation to carry him and his

goods from one place to another, and a society to belong to, as well as associations and connections of various types - sexual, commercial, technical, professional, etc. This need is general and universal; it will not change as long as man is man with this nature and physique, as long as his is a human life. There is no difference in this matter between a primitive man and a modern one. The difference is only in the means and equipments which he uses to satisfy his material needs. The primitive man used to eat fruits, vegetables and game meat, which he obtained in simple ways. Today he has got thousands of preparations for food and drink, of various qualities beneficial to his nature, different colours pleasing to his eyes, various flavours delicious to his taste, attractive shapes and forms pleasant to his touch, with a lot of other variations in its specifications. But all this variation does not change the basic reality that both categories are food, which man eats to satiate his hunger and satisfy his desire. These general conditions and ideas of man have not changed with the change of times; it is only their applications that have taken other shapes. In the same way, the general laws of Islam - that have been laid down according to the demand of nature for attainment of happiness - are not nullified just because a new means has replaced the old one, if the conformity with basic nature is not affected, if the new means has not deviated from nature. But if there is any conflict with the nature, then Islamic system never agrees with it, neither in old days nor in modern times. As for rules concerned with day to day affairs and happenings, which by their nature are subject to rapid change, like monetary and administrative matters related to defence, means of communications, transport, municipal affairs and things like that - they are left to the discretion of the ruler. A ruler has the same position within his domain as a head of the family has within his family. The ruler may take decisions about these matters as the family head may do for his family. The ruler may decide about the internal and external affairs of his country - regarding war or peace, financial or other matters - keeping in view the interest of the society, after holding consultations with the Muslims. As Allah says: and take counsel with them in the affairs; but when you have decided, then place your trust in Allah [3:159]. All this concerns the public affairs. However, these rules and decisions are of specific nature, not general. They may change according to the situation and condition; policies may change because of new factors coming up and old ones going away. But divine rules are not so, they do not come and go; they are based on the Book and the sunnah, and they are not subject to abrogation. (Its detail will be given somewhere else.)

"0

$ 
+

%
10å 

 $+
1 The authority to rule over the Islamic society belonged to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.); and the Qur'an clearly says that the people were obliged to obey him and follow his commands. Allah says: And obey Allah and obey the Messenger [64:12]; ...that you may judge between people by means of that which Allah has taught you [4:105]; The Prophet has a greater claim on the believers than they have on themselves [33:6]; Say: "If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you" [3:31]. There are many such verses that describe one or the other aspects of his allencompassing general authority over the Islamic society. The best way to understand this reality is to study deeply the life of the Prophet and then to ponder collectively on the verses revealed about ethics and laws covering the divine worship, mutual dealings, politics, and other common and social affairs. The picture that will appear on his mind from the sum total of this divine revelation will speak more eloquently than that which may be seen from one or two sentences. There is another point that a research scholar must keep in mind. Generally the verses dealing with the subjects of the rites of worship, fighting in the way of Allah, enforcement of the penal code and other such subjects are addressed to the believers collectively, not especially to the Prophet. For example: ...and establish prayers...[4:77]; ...and strive hard in His way ...[5:35]; ...and give upright testimony for Allah... [65:2]; ...fasting has been prescribed for you... [2:183]; And spend in the way of Allah... [2:195]; And from among you there should be a party who invite to good and enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong [3:104]; And strive hard in (the way of) Allah a striving as is due to Him...[22:78]; (As for) the fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them, (giving) a hundred stripes... [24:2]; And (as for) the man who steals and the woman who steals, cut off their hands... [5:38]; And there is life for you in (the law of) retaliation...[2:179]; And hold fast by the cord of Allah all together and be not divided...[3:103];

...that establish the religion and be not divided therein ...[42:13]; And Muhammad is no more than a messenger, the messengers have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels? And whoever turns back upon his heels, he will by no means do harm to Allah in the least;and Allah will reward the grateful [3:144]. There are many verses of this nature, and all taken together make it clear that the religion is a collective matter which Allah has made people responsible for; He is not pleased with disbelief for His servants; and He intends only that all of them together should establish the religion. The society of which they are members should be managed by themselves - none of them should be less responsible than the others. Enforcement of law is not an especial prerogative of some to the exclusion of the others - be he the Prophet or the others. Allah says: That I will not waste the work of a worker among you, whether male or female, the one of you being from the other [3:195]. The verse is unrestricted; and it shows that Allah has kept in consideration the natural effect the members of the Islamic society have on their social order - He cares for it in legislation as He has done in creation. He will not let it waste. He says: Surely the land is Allah's; He causes such of His servants to inherit it as He pleases, and the end is for those who fear (Allah) [7:128]. Of course, to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) belongs the mission, the guidance and the training. Allah says: ...who recites to them His communications and purifies them, and teaches them the Book and the Wisdom... [62:2]. He was appointed by Allah to look after the ummah, and manage its affairs in this world as in the hereafter, and he continued to lead them as long as he was alive. But one should not forget that this system was totally different from a monarchic rule - the rule which treats Allah's wealth as personal booty of the monarch, and the servants of Allah as his slaves; giving him full authority to do with them whatever he wants and rule over them in any way he pleases. Nor was it like the social orders based on the principle of material enjoyment, like democracy, etc.; because there are so many distinguishing factors that separate Islam from these systems, and which have left no room for any mix-up. One of the greatest differences is found in the fact that these societies, being based on material enjoyment, are motivated by the spirit of exploitation and utilization. It is another name of man's arrogance, that wants everything - even other human beings - subjugated to his will and actions. It permits him to take any route to reach that end; to use any means to get what he desires, to acquire what he wants. In olden days it was known as despotic monarchy; now it appears before our eyes

wearing the mask of development and civilization. We are daily witnessing the oppressions, injustices and arrogance meted out by strong nations to the weaker ones; is there any need to remind ourselves of their tyrannies and high-handedness recorded in the histories? A Pharaoh, a Caesar or a Kisra behaved despotically towards weaker sections of his reign, and played with their lives, properties and dignity in any way he liked. His excuse - if any excuse was ever offered - was that it was a necessary ingredient of rulership which contributed to the efficiency of government and strengthened the Kingdom. He believed that it was a tribute due to his outstanding qualities, to his sovereign status - and his sword spoke for him. Exactly the same thing is happening even now. Look at political relationships of today's strong nations with the weak ones; you will find the history repeating itself. Of course, the sceptre previously held by an individual is now carried collectively by the society, but the spirit is the same and the ambition unchanged. On the other hand, Islamic system is free of such ambitions and desires; and its proof may be found in the life of the Prophet as evidenced by his conquests and treaties. Another difference: No human society, that ever appeared on the stage of history, was free from various types of disparity among its members, a factor that always led to discord and chaos. If there are various strata, different classes, in society, it is ultimately bound to destroy the social order: when a few persons hoard treasures of wealth while the common people do not get necessities of life; when elites or nobles get all the privileges which public is deprived of; when so-called "public servants" become overlords of the country, then the nation is bound to fall into perdition. Islamic society presents a pleasant contrast. It is a social order whose parts are all alike; no one has precedence over the others; there is no prvileged class, no dignified lords, no distinguished group. If there is any distinction it is the one loudly demanded by human nature; it is the superiority accorded to piety - and it is a factor which is in Allah's hand to decide, men have nothing to do with it. Allah says: O you people! surely We have created you of a male and a female, and made you nations and tribes that you may recognize each other; surely the most honourable of you with Allah is the one among you who is most pious [49:13]; therefore hasten to (do) good works [2:148]. The ruler and the ruled, the leader and the follower, the superior and the subordinate, the free man and the slave, the man and the woman, the rich and the poor, the big and the small, all of them have equal

status in Islam. The legal code is equally applied to all; there is no class at all in social affairs and civil aspects - as may be seen in the life of the Prophet. A third distinction: The executive power in Islam is not confined within a separate class; implementation of Islamic laws is the responsibility of all members of the society. Each and every individual is obligated to call to the good, to enjoin what is good and forbid the evil. There are many other distinguishing features which a research scholar may easily find out. This was the condition during the lifetime of the Prophet. As for the subsequent period, the majority of the Muslims believe that it is the Muslims who have the right to choose a caliph to rule over the society; but the Shi'i Muslims believe that the caliph must be appointed by Allah and His Messenger, and that they are the twelve Imams (as explained in detail in theological books). In any case, there is no doubt that in these days, when the Prophet has died and the twelfth Imam is in occultation, the authority of the Islamic government lies in the hands of the Muslims themselves. It may be inferred from the Divine Book that they are required to appoint a ruler for the Islamic society according to the tradition established by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) - and that is the tradition of imamah, not of monarchy or imperialism. That ruler has the responsibility of enforcing the Islamic laws without any change. As for other matters - apart from the laid down laws - he has to manage the affairs with consultations according to the time and situation. The proof of the above may be inferred from the verses describing the overall authority of the Prophet when read in conjunction with the verse, Certainly there is for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent example... [33:21 ]. "
. $ %
$
, $.

  8 $ /    $
. $
 Islam has totally refused the theory of national separateness to have any effect or influence on the society. What is the basic factor of nationalism? It has emanated from nomadism and tribal and clannish way of life; another influencing factor was the physical differences in regions or habitat where various groups lived. These two - nomadic wanderings and natural differences in various geographical regions, like hot or cold climate, barrenness or fertility of land, and other features like that led to the division of mankind into various clans and tribes, as well as to the differences in their languages and colours, as has been explained in its place.

Later these two factors led every group to take possession of the piece of land or region where they lived - it depended on their endeavour and strength. They reserved it for themselves, called it their "home country"; gradually they came to love it and repulse the intruders from it with all their powers. Although this phenomenon came into being for satisfying a natural need, yet it contained a characteristic which was diametrically opposed to the demand of basic human nature, that is, the demand that mankind should live as one single society. It is self-evident that nature wants various scattered powers to join hands and unite, in order that they may get strengthened by that consolidation and union; it will help it to attain its desired good purpose in the best and most perfect way. We may observe this phenomenon in the upward progress of primary matter - it appears first as an element, then passing through different stages it becomes a vegetable, then an animal, then a human being. When mankind is divided according to the countries people live in, then inhabitants of a country join hands together and unite as citizens of that country; as a result they are separated from other nationalities. They together constitute a "nation", a unit that is totally separate - in body and spirit - from other nations, other units. In this manner, humanity is deprived of its unity and wholeness; and is afflicted by discord, difference and disunity - the very trap which it wanted to avoid. Now this "new" unit starts treating other "new" units (i.e. other nations) in the same way as it treats other natural things; i.e., it wants to exploit and subjugate other nations. The experience - from the early dawn of humanity to this day testifies to this truth; and the same theme may be inferred from many verses quoted in earlier discourses. That is why Islam has discarded these differences, divisions, and separations altogether; and has based the society on the foundation of faith and belief, instead of race, origin, domicile or other such considerations. Even in such matters as matrimony and consanguinity, the criterion for the conjugal rights and inheritance is not the the home or country, but identity of monotheistic belief. The best proof for this reality may be seen in various facets of this religion's laws, as it has not neglected any aspect of human life without giving a clear direction for it. If the Islamic society is dominating over the world, then the Muslims are obligated to establish the religion and not be disunited. If it is oppressed and overpowered, then again they must try to revive and revitalize the Islam, and to raise its prestige as much as they can. Even if there is only one Muslim in a place,

it is his duty to hold fast to the religion, to act according to its laws and to implement it as much as he can - even if it is only by having belief in the heart and praying just by gestures. It is clear from the above that the Islamic society has been framed in such a way that it can be lived in all conditions, and in every situation - no matter whether Muslims are rulers or ruled, victorious or vanquished, advanced or backward, conspicuous or hidden, powerful or powerless. Particularly, the Qur'anic verses dealing with the subject of at-taqiyyah (= dissimulation of one's religion under duress or in face of threatening harm or damage) make this reality abundantly clear. Allah says: He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed, not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith... [16:106];... except when you guard yourselves against them for fear of them... [3:28]; Therefore fear Allah as much as you can [64:16]; O you who believe! fear Allah with the fear which is due to Him, and do not die unless you are Muslims [3:102]. *"
 2 $
 
 The verse under discussion, O you who believe! be patient, and help each other in patience and remain lined up, and fear Allah, that you may be successful, proves this fact (as explained earlier) apart from many other verses. Islam makes it a point to establish collectivity in every law and rule which can be observed jointly or performed collectively in relevant manner, ordering and exhorting the Muslims in a way that would lead to the desired goal. A research scholar should look at it from two angles:  !One should keep in view the difference in degrees of emphasis on collectivity. The Law-Giver has ordained joint efforts directly in jihad to the extent that is necessary for the defense. This is the highest category. Then fasting and hajj have been made obligatory for everyone who is able to do so (and has no genuine excuse for exemption); and as a concomitant people are bound to gather together for these two rites of worship; then they have been sealed by the two 'ids and their prayers. Then come the daily five-time prayers which are obligatory for every adult and sane Muslim, but congregation is not compulsory in them. Even then, one congregational prayer has been made obligatory once a week on Fridays within a radius of one farsakh (a distant of 6000 yards). So it is another category. %
 $!As we have seen, Islam has prescribed congregation for some things directly. Further we find that in some other things it has put emphasis on gathering and collectivity without making it directly obligatory, e.g., obligatory prayers

performed in congregation; it is sunnah and highly recommended, as it is a tradition established by the Prophet, and people are exhorted to establish the Prophet's traditions. The Messenger of Allah (s.a. w.a.) once said about a group of the Muslims who avoided coming to the congregational prayer: "We are on the verge of ordering - about a group that ha's left praying in the mosque - that firewood be brought and put on their doors; then fire be kindled over them and their houses be burnt down on them." That is the way to be followed in all the traditions established by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.); the Muslims are obligated to preserve his traditions by all possible means and at all costs. These are the subjects related to ijtihad based on the Book [of Allah] - and the sunnah; and their explanations and details may be seen in the Islamic Jurisprudence. Now that we know that Islam emphasizes collectivity in all laws (rites of worship, mutual dealings, and political affairs) which it has laid down for the people, as well as in noble manners and basic beliefs, the time has come to turn our eyes to another direction, that is, the collectivity of Islam in its basic knowledge and fundamental gnosis. We find that Islam invites the people to the natural religion on the ground that it is the manifest truth in which there is no dotlOt. There are numerous Qur'anic verses of this theme, which need not be quoted here. This in itself is the first step in joining and uniting different minds: because people - in spite of their differences, and their attachments to various customs and characteristics - are united in the belief that: "Truth must be followed". Then we see that Islam accepts the excuse of a person for whom the proof has not been furnished, and the path not made clear, even though he might have heard some arguments. Allah says: ...that he who would perish might perish by clear proof, and he who would live might live by clear proof... [8:42]; Except the weak from among the men and the children, who have not in their power the means nor can they find a way (to escape); so these, it may be, Allah will pardon them, and Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving [4:99]. Look at the unrestrictedness of the verse and the position of the clause, "who have not in their power the means nor can they find a way". These words give complete freedom to every thinker (who is able to think, examine and research) to meditate on matters connected with religious cognition and to ponder on them deeply. Moreover, the Qur'anic verses are full of exhortation to meditate, contemplate and ruminate.

It is not a secret that various internal and external factors affect people's thinking in different ways - in its imagination and confirmation as well as in its achievements and decisions. Consequently, it leads to difference in those fundamental principles upon which the Islamic society is based (as we have earlier explained). However, the difference in understanding of two persons (as explained in psychology, ethics and sociology) emanates from one of the following factors: 1. It may issue from the difference in psychological traits and intrinsic characteristics - be they good or bad. Such factors have great effect on human knowledge and cognition, because they affect intellectual capacity and ability. The perception and intellectual performance of an upright and just man cannot be compared to that of a headstrong tyrant; a moderate and dignified person will receive knowledge in a way that cannot be imitated by a rash, prejudiced and narrow-minded man; nor by a barbarian who follows every Tom, Dick and Harry; nor by a misguided person who does not know where he is rushing to or what is going to happen to him. This difference can easily be overcome through religious training. This training agrees with religious principles and cognitions, and creates such characteristics that coform with those principles, i.e., noble virtues. Allah says: ...a Book revealed after Musa verifying that which is before it, guiding to the truth and to a right path [46:30]; With it Allah guides him who follows His pleasure into the ways of safety and brings them out of utter darkness into light by His permission and guides them to the straight path [5:16]; And (as for) those who strive hard for Us, We will most certainly guide them onto Our ways; and Allah is most surely with the doers of good [29:69]. The relevance of these verses with the subject matter is obvious. 2. Or it may be a result of the difference in actions. Anti-truth activities like sins and various kinds of lust, temptations and wicked thoughts, teach a man especially if he is simple-minded - wrong ideas; and prepare his mind for infiltration of doubts and penetration of erroneous thoughts. In this way is created difference in thinking and resistance against the truth. Islam has laid down some rules to overcome this difficulty: Firstly, it has obligated the society to call the people to the religion - continuously; Secondly, it has ordered the society to enjoin the good and forbid the evil; Thirdly and lastly, it has made it compulsory to dissociate from deviating persons

and doubting groups. Allah says: And from among you there should be a party who invite to good and enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong... [3:104]. Inviting to good would confirm the true belief and let its roots grow deep in the hearts - through constant teachings and reminders. Then enjoining what is right and forbidding the evil would erase adverse traits that could prevent the true belief from taking root. Also Allah says: And when you see those who engage in vain discourses about Our signs, withdraw from them until they enter into some other discourse; and if the Satan causes you to forget, then do not sit after recollection with the unjust people. And nothing of the reckoning of their (deeds) shall be upon those who guard (against evil), but (theirs) is only to remind, haply they may guard. And leave those who have taken their religion for a play and an idle sport, and whom this world's life has deceived, and remind (them) thereby lest a soul should be fettered with what it has earned... [6:68-70]. Here Allah admonishes the Muslims not to join in a discourse that aims at creating doubt, directing objections or casting aspersions upon religious facts, and divine realities - even if by allusion or implication. He reminds us that it can happen only if man does not take his religion seriously, treats it only as a vain sport or on idle game; it happens when man is beguiled by this transient life; and it may be remedied only through good training and constant reminder of Allah's majesty. 3. Or this difference may be a result of some extraneous factors; for example, if the man lives in a remote corner where the message of true faith has not reached; or has reached only superfluously or in a distorted form. Or if the man does not have enough understanding to properly grasp the realities of religion, as in the case of idiots or simpletons. Islam has prescribed for it two remedies: the propagation of religion should cover each and every corner of the world, and the people should be invited to Islam patiently with politeness and good manners. These two factors are the especialities of Islam's missionary activities. Allah says: Say: "This is my way: I invite (you) to Allah; with clear sight (are) I and he who follows me..." [12:108]. It is known that a proficient and discerning speaker gauges how much his words would influence a man, what would be their effect on different people of different types; therefore, he speaks only what would be listened to. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) has said and it has been narrated by both sects: "We, the group of prophets, talk with people according to the measure of their understanding." Allah says: ...why should not then a company from every party from among them go forth that they may acquire (proper) understanding in religion, and that they may warn their people when they

come back to them, so that they may be cautious? [9:122]. These in short, are various ways for avoiding difference in belief, and of removing the difference if it appears. Islam has also laid down a further sociological rule to prevent the difference creeping into the society (which could lead to disorder and weakness of the social order). Allah says: And (know) that this is My path, the straight one, therefore follow it; and follow not (other) ways, for they will scatter you away from His way; this He has enjoined you with that you may guard (against evil) [6:153]. This verse makes it clear that if they remained united in following the straight path, and cautious against following the other ways, they would be saved from disunity; and their unity and identity would be preserved. Again He says: 0 you who believe! fear Allah with the fear which is due to Him, and do not die unless you are Muslims. And holdfast by the cord of Allah all together and be not divided... [3:102-103]. It has already been explained that "the cord of Allah" refers to the Qur'an which explains the realities of religion, or to the Qur'an and the Messenger (s.a.w.a.) together, as may be inferred from the verses preceding these: O you who believe! if you obey a party from among those who were given the Book, they will turn you back as unbelievers after you have believed. But how can you disbelieve while it is you to whom the communications of Allah are recited, and among you is His Messenger. And whoever holds fast to Allah, he indeed is guided to the straight path [3:100-101]. These verses emphasize the importance of unity in religious beliefs, identity of ideas and ideals and cooperation in seeking and imparting knowledge. Whenever the people are confronted with a new ideology or assailed with a doubt, they should resort to the Qur'an that is recited to them, and meditate on it, so that the roots of difference are pulled out. Allah says: Do they not then meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy [4:82]; And these examples, We set them forth for the people and none understand them but the learned [29-43]; so ask the followers of the Reminder if you do not know [16:43]. The verses show that differences may be removed by meditating on the Qur'an or by referring the matter to those who do meditate. Also, they prove that referring to the Messenger - and he has the overall responsibility of religion - would remove the discord and disunity from the society and explain the truth which they were obligated to follow. Allah says: ...and We have revealed to you the Reminder that you may make clear to men what has been

revealed to them, and that haply they may reflect [16:44]. Nearly the same is the import of the verse: ...and if they had referred it to the Messenger and to those in authority among them, those among them who(can) draw out(the truth)in it, would have known it... [4:83]; O you who believe! obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those vested with authority from among you; then if you quarrel about any thing, refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the last day; this is better and very good in the end [4:59]. This then is the picture of collective thinking in Islam. The above discourse also shows that this religion allows the people complete freedom of thought in the same way as it safeguards the especial divine cognition. The way shown by it is as follows: It is obligatory for the Muslims to meditate on the realities of religion and to try their utmost to think and research for its cognition - collectively and in cooperation with each other. They should not be worried if in this process they are assailed with a doubt or conflicting pointers. What is required in this case is to review his doubt or thought with the help of the Qur'an - through collective meditation. If that does not remove the trouble, then he should refer it to the Messenger or his successor so that his doubt is removed, and (if it was not valid then) its invalidity is explained to him. Allah says: Those who listen to the word, then follow the best of it; these are they whom Allah has guided, and those it is who are the men of understanding [39:18]. Freedom of belief and thought (as we have described above) is something different from the freedom to propagate that idea or belief before referring it to the Qur'an and the Messenger or his successors. Such propaganda would lead to disunity and discord which in its turn would damage the foundation of the healthy society. What has been mentioned above is the best possible system for running the society's affairs, inasmuch as it opens the door to intellectual development, and at the same time preserves man's personal freedom. On the other hand, imposition of belief on the people, putting seals on their hearts, crushing the thinking power of men by suppression and oppression, and keeping them in line through whip or sword, anathema or excommunication, boycott or banishment - far be it from Islam to allow or agree to such tactics. In fact, such tactics were and are the trademark of the Christianity. The history of the Church is replete with .its misdeeds, misconducts and high-handedness - particularly between the fifth and the sixteenth centuries of the Christian era. You would look in vain for any parellel in history to the tyrannies, oppressions and cruelties perpetrated by the Christian Church.

Regrettably, we Muslims are now deprived of this bounty and its concomitants (i.e., collective thinking and freedom of belief), just as we have been deprived of many other great bounties which Allah had bestowed on us. It is because we have fallen short of our duties towards Allah; and Allah does not change the condition of a people unless they change their own condition. Now, the churchly behaviour has taken root in our society, with the result that there is disharmony among the hearts and discord in the society; and various sects and groups have raised their heads. May Allah forgive us, and help us to do what He is pleased with, and guide us to His straight path. G"
 
[
,  

++

  $ The good end belongs to piety, to fear of Allah. Human species, by its nature that is ingrained in it, is seeking its true happiness looking for its real felicity. In other words, it is striving to sit firmly on the throne of its spiritual-cum-physical life - a social life that would give the soul its full share in this world as well as in the hereafter. We have already told you that it is what is known as Islam, the religion of monotheism. There have appeared there deviations in humanity's march towards its destination, in its ascension to the pinnacle of perfection. But it happens not because the nature has lost its hold, but simply because of some error of judgment, some mistake in applying a principle to a particular situation. The goal decided by creative nature has to be reached sooner or later, it cannot be avoided. Allah says: Then set your face uprightly for the (right) religion in natural devotion (to the truth), the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no alteration in the creation of Allah; that is the right religion, but most people do not know. (That is, they do not have its detailed knowledge, although their nature is aware of it in a general way.) ...So as to be ungrateful for what We have given them; but enjoy yourselves(for a while), for you shall soon come to know... Mischief has appeared in the land and the sea on account of what the hands of men have wrought, that He may make them taste a part of that which they have done, so that they may return [30:30-41], Again He says: ...then soon Allah will bring a people that He shall love them and they shall love Him, humble before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers, they shall strive hard in Allah's way and shall not fear the censure of any censurer [5:54]; And certainly We did write in the Zabitr after the reminder that the earth shall inherit it My righteous servants [21:105]; and the (good) end is for guarding (against evil) [20-132]. These and similar other verses tell us clearly that Islam is bound to prevail, appearing one day in its most perfect and complete form; and

then it will rule over the world. 
 ! Islam appeared on the world's stage at a certain time; it was a link in the chain of history, and it left its effects on the succeeding links. The modern civilization is, wittingly or unwittingly, much indebted to Islam. In spite of that, it is just a wishful thinking that Islam would prevail over the world, that this religion - with all its elements, in its complete form - would ever rule over the earth and attain its goals. It is a proposition which human nature does not accept and would never agree with. Moreover, it.has never been tested in this role, so that we may say that it could really happen and that Islam could ever dominate over the humanity. [
!This objection is untenable. We have explained earlier that Islam - in the meaning we have been using it for - is the final destination of mankind, the perfection of humanity to which it is driven by nature; it makes no difference whether man recognizes that goal in its full details or not. Definite experiences, obtained from other species, prove that every species is proceeding towards the goal which is relevant to its being; it is driven to its final destination by the system of creation - and man is not an exception to this universal rule. Moreover, no system, no "ism", that had ever prevailed, or now prevails, in any human society, was ever proved by any previous experiment before it was enforced. Look at the shari'ahs brought by Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa and 'Isa - they just appeared on the scene and were implemented. The same was the case with the laws brought by Brahma, Buddha, Mani and others. In the same way, the secular systems, like democracy and communism, etc., were established in various societies in different manners - all without any previous experimentation. What is required for a social system to be established and to take its roots, is a group of persons with courage of their convictions, endowed with firm determination and high ideals, who would not rest until they have reached their goal; who would not tire, would not be weakened; who would not be assailed by doubts and misgivings about their ultimate success; they would never entertain the idea that perchance they could fail, that perhaps their endeavours would not succeed. They would go on trying determinedly until they have succeeded. This principle applies everywhere, and it makes no difference whether the goal itself is divine or Satanic.  $ 

as-Sadiq (a.s.) said about the words of Allah, O you who believe! be patient and help each other in patience and remain lined up: "Have patience in misfortunes, and help each other to be patient in trial (and temptation) and be lined up with him whom you follow." (Ma'ani'l-akhbaar) The same Imam said: "Be patient about your religion, and have patience against your enemy and be linked up to your Imam" (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi) 
 ! Nearly the same theme has been narrated from the Prophet through the Sunni chains. The same Imam said: "Be patient about the obligatory commandments, and help each other to be patient in misfortunes, and be linked up to the Imams." (al-Kafi) 'Ali (a.s.) said: "Be lined up for the prayers." He said: "That is, remain waiting for them, because (the system of) garrisoning did not exist at that time." (Majma'u'lbayan). 
 : The difference in the tradition springs from the generality of the orders, as we had mentioned earlier. Ibn Jarir and Ibn Hayyan have narrated from Jabir ibn 'Abdullah al-Ansari that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: 'Should not I guide you to that by which Allah erases the mistakes and covers the sins?' We said: 'Yes, indeed, O Messenger of Allah!' He said: 'To perform al-wudu' properly in spite of inconveniences, and to walk many times to the mosques, and to wait for the (next) prayer after the prayer; so that is the lining up.'" (ad-Durru'l-manthur) 
 : (as-Suyuti) has narrated it from the Prophet, also through other chains. There are innumerable traditions about excellence of being lined up or linked up. * al-Murdba' tah, in post-Qur'anic era is used for troops being garrisoned, posted, stationed. Many translators have rendered it as, "be ever-garrisoned"; but the

author has taken it in its literal and original sense, i e., to be linked with each other. I have used a word "remain lined up" which may be interpreted both ways. (tr.)

c