أَخَافُ

20:41; 26:15.

Commentary:

In this verse Moses alludes only to the mere fact of a man having been accidentally killed by him and not that he pleads guilty to the charge of deliberately killing him.

20:30-33; 26:14.

Important Words:

ردأ (helper) is infinitive noun from ردأ (rada’). They say ردأ الحائط i.e. he supported or propped the wall by means of a piece of timber or wood or buttress to prevent it from falling. ردأ means, he helped, aided or assisted him. ردء means, a buttress or the like by means of which a wall is strengthened and supported; a thing by means of which one is helped, aided or assisted; a helper or aider. They say فلان ردء فلان i.e. such a one is an aider to such a one (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The expression, I am not going to stretch out my hand against thee to kill thee, does not mean that Abel did not even desire to defend himself. These words only mean that if he were forced to stretch forth his hand towards his brother, it would not be with the intention of slaying him, but only in self-defence. The declaration was necessary, for there are cases in which both the slayer and the slain become equally guilty. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said that not unoften "both the slayer and the slain go to Hell." This hadith obviously refers to such slain persons as engage in a fight with the intention of killing their opponents, but it so happens that the latter get the better of them and kill them. In such cases, the intention of both parties being equally criminal, both are guilty and both deserve to be cast into Hell. But Abel, who desired to live righteously and die righteously, would not stain his conduct even in a moment of extreme danger and wanted to take good care that he did not overstep the limits of the right of self-defence.

10:16; 39:14.

Commentary:

This verse is an expression of the supreme independence of God. The Holy Prophet is made to say, "O men, it is indeed strange that you should not fear the punishment of God while I, who am a Prophet of God, fear His punishment if I disobey Him." This is an emphatic way of exhorting men to avoid disobedience of God. The expression does not imply that the Holy Prophet is likely to disobey God or even that it is possible for him to do so. It is simply meant to convince disbelievers that God is above all and none can dare disobey Him with impunity.

7:90.

Commentary:

This and the following two verses definitely show that the incident related in vv. 77-80 above was purposely used by Abraham by way of argument; otherwise he himself was a staunch monotheist and had dived deep into the depths of Divine love and knowledge.

7:34; 22:72.

11:26-27; 23:24.

Important Words:

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

Commentary:

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

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

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

6:44; 16:64; 27:25; 29:49.

14:23; 59:17.

Important Words:

جار (protector) is derived from جار which means, he declined or deviated. جاورہ means, he became his neighbour, or he lived in his neighbourhood. جاورہ also means, he bound himself to him by a covenant to protect him. جار means, a neighbour; a person whom one protects; one who seeks protection; also a protector (Lane).

نکص (he turned). نکص عن الامر means, he receded or retired or drew back from the thing or the affair; or he recoiled or shrank from it in fear. نکص علی عقبیه means, he turned back from a thing to which he had applied himself (Lane).

Commentary:

For the meaning of the word "Satan", see 2:15. The word here means, one who misleads or gives evil advice. The person referred to in the verse is reported to be Suraqah bin Malik bin Ju‘sham who incited the Meccans against the Muslims but who afterwards embraced Islam.

The Meccan army was still at Mecca when some of the Quraishite leaders gave expression to the fear that Banu Bakr, a branch of Banu Kananah, who were hostile to the Quraish, might surprise Mecca during their absence or attack the Meccan army from the rear. Their fears were allayed by Suraqah, a chief of Banu Kananah, who assured them that his tribesmen would do them no harm (Jarir, x. 13).

The words, I see what you see not, signify that when Suraqah saw the grim determination of the Muslims, fear took hold of him; for on seeing them he was convinced that the Muslims would win or die. This was exactly what ‘Utbah and ‘Umair also saw and felt when they told the Meccans that the Muslims looked like so many "seekers of death" (Tabari). Suraqah uttered the words, I fear Allah, not because he really feared God at that time but because he wished to find an excuse to flee from the battlefield.

See 10:8.

17:74.

6:51; 7:204; 46:10.

Important Words:

تلقاء (accord) is derived from لقی. They say لقیه i.e. he came face to face with him; he found or met him. توجه تلقاء النار means, he went in the direction of the fire, or towards the fire. جلس تلقاء فلان means, he sat facing him or opposite to him. فعله من تلقاء نفسه means, he did it himself; he did it of his own accord, i.e. without being led to it by someone else or without being forced to do it (Aqrab).

Commentary:

Signs (آیات) are of two kinds: (1) simple signs, and (2) clear or manifest signs. To the first class belong all things, even the smallest atom of the universe, because every one of these things points to the existence of a Creator, though it is our own faculty of reasoning that draws the inference that every created thing must have a Creator. But the signs shown at the hands of Prophets speak for themselves. They are shown to establish the truth of things hidden from our eyes, viz. the existence of God, the Day of Resurrection, the truth of the Prophets, and the nature of Divine attributes. As these signs serve as evidence for matters that concern belief, they have been spoken of as آیات بینات (clear signs), while the Signs from nature are spoken of simply as آیات (signs). All pestilences, for example, are آیات while a pestilence predicted by a Prophet of God to prove the truth of his claim is آیة بینة i.e. a clear and manifest sign, for such a pestilence serves its purpose much more clearly and definitely than a general one.

The words, those who look not for the meeting with Us say, Bring a Quran other than this or change it, show that when the leaders of disbelief saw that the hearts of their followers were becoming gradually inclined towards the truth and they were beginning to accept the new faith, they became anxious and, in order to incite their followers against the Prophet, assumed the garb of peacemakers. As men naturally love peace, the leaders of disbelief exploit this natural human desire and suggest a compromise, viz. that the Prophet should introduce no new teaching but should only assume the leadership of the people which would maintain the homogeneity of the community and save it from discord or dissension. If, however, this proposal should not meet with the Prophet’s acceptance, he should at least omit from his teachings such portions as offend against the cherished ideas of the people. When making these proposals, the ringleaders know full well that the Prophet would never accede to these unreasonable demands, which cut at the very root of his divine mission, and that in this way the people would come to think that he was too narrow-minded to give up even some of his ideas for the sake of national unity and concord. Thus they think they would succeed in making the people ignore the important fact that truth and the acceptance of a Divine Call were much more precious than mere patched-up unity and that the decline of nations was always due to the denial of divine truth. In reply to these demands of his opponents the Holy Prophet is commanded to say in this verse that he could not change a teaching which was revealed by God and which was the only means of their regeneration, for such change, instead of proving useful, was sure to prove ruinous.

The expression "of my own accord" occurring in the words, It is not for me to change it of my own accord. I only follow what is revealed to me, contains a subtle hint that Divine teachings are always in accordance with the condition of the people for whom they are sent, and hence nobody can change them of his own accord. If the Holy Prophet should himself change the teachings revealed to him, it would lead to the ruin of the people because Divine teachings, being in fitness of prevailing circumstances, can alone bring about a real spiritual and moral reformation among people and any change in these teachings would certainly be not to their good. The words, Bring a Quran other than this or change it, may also refer to the prophecies of punishment and destruction contained in the Quran. Disbelievers naturally did not like these prophecies and wanted them to be changed. The verse tells them that they could have these warnings changed only if they changed their own condition, because if a change takes place in them, the nature of the warnings would automatically change.

The words, I only follow what is revealed to me, may also mean, "In respect of the Quran I follow nothing but what is revealed to me" i.e. not only are all the words of the Quran divine but its divisions into verses and Surahs as well as the arrangement thereof are also divine. Incidentally this also does away with the objection raised by certain critics of Islam that the opening verse of each Surah, viz. بسم الله was not of Divine origin but was placed there by the Prophet himself.

Some Christian writers pretend to see this verse as an effort by the Holy Prophet to justify the alleged abrogation of certain verses of the Quran. By the words, It is not for me to change it of my own accord. I only follow what is revealed to me, the Holy Prophet is supposed by these writers to have disclaimed all responsibility for abrogation in the Quran. But this assumption is absurd. Far from justifying abrogation, the verse shows that not a single verse of the Quran has ever been abrogated. When disbelievers demanded that the Holy Prophet should make some alteration in the Quran, they did not mean that they would accept it after the demanded changes had been made. Their object in making such a demand was that, if the Holy Prophet agreed to make any change in the Quran, in compliance with their demand, they would at once say that it was not the word of God but his own composition which he altered at will to meet their wishes. But if he refused to accede to their demand, they would get a ready tool to incite the masses against him, condemning him as one who had no regard for national peace and harmony. Christian writers seem to forget the fact that if, as alleged by them, certain verses of the Quran had already been replaced by others, disbelievers had no need to resort to the above device, but could justify their objection on the basis of the abrogation that had already taken place in the Quran and could seize on it as evidence of the Quran not being the word of God. Thus the verse under comment incidentally furnishes evidence that there has been no abrogation in the Quran.

The words, the punishment of an awful day, signify a national disaster. The words mean that the teachings which are revealed by God are for the good of the people themselves and it is on acting upon them that all progress depends. So, if any change is made in these teachings, it is sure to prove detrimental to the best interests of the entire people.

7:60; 71:4.

Commentary:

"A grievous punishment" is different from "the punishment of a grievous day." The latter expression implies greater intensity. Certain punishments are very grievous, but there are certain "days" the remembrance of which continues to cause great pain even after the lapse of hundreds of years. The actual "punishment" causes pain only to those on whom it falls, but remembrance of the "days" of a terrible punishment frightens even those who come after. Thus, by using the expression, the punishment of a grievous day, the Quran points to the fact that the threatened punishment was to be such as would be long remembered and would strike terror into the hearts of coming generations. This expression aptly describes the grievous nature of the punishment which overtook the people of Noah, for the great Deluge is remembered even to the present day as a terrible catastrophe the very thought of which inspires fear.