إِن

10:35; 29:20; 30:12, 28.

10:32; 34:25; 35:4.

Commentary:

The words, "originates creation and then repeats it," signify creation and procreation.

10:49; 21:39; 34:30; 36:49.

Commentary:

The disbelievers tauntingly ask the Holy Prophet not to refer to what had happened to other peoples in the past but to "let us know when the punishment about which you hold out to us a threat will overtake us."

10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.

Important Words:

عبد (servant). For the root meaning of the word see note under 1:5. As explained there, the verb عبد means, he showed complete submissiveness and humility; or he received the imprint of a thing. So عبد would mean a person who, through complete submission and humility to God, has become, as it were, an image of God. The word has been used here about the Holy Prophet by way of endearment and is expressive of the exalted position he holds in the sight of God.

شھداء (helpers) is the plural of شھید which is derived from شھد i.e. he was present; or he gave witness, etc. Thus شھیدmeans, one who is present; one who sees or witnesses; one who gives testimony or evidence; one who possesses much knowledge; one from whose knowledge nothing is hidden (Aqrab & Lane); also a helper (Mufradat). Following the last mentioned signification the word may also refer here to the Jews who were friends of the disbelievers (5:81) and spoke of the idolaters as being better guided in religion than those who believe (4:52).

Commentary:

In the preceding two verses the Quran gave its first commandment to the people. Having been thus directly addressed by God, the polytheistic disbelievers felt a natural reaction to repudiate the monotheistic teaching of the Quran, because they felt that its acceptance meant that they should give up their long cherished beliefs.

In the present verse God says that if the Quran created doubts and disquietude in their minds and is not worthy of acceptance, the disbelievers should produce one like it. If they cannot, then this very fact would prove them to be wrong.

The subject of the incomparable excellence of the Quran, has been dealt with at five different places in the Quran, i.e. in 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89; & 52:34, 35, and disbelievers have been challenged, to produce its equal.

In two of these five verses (2:24 & 10:39) the challenge is identical, while in the remaining three verses three separate and different demands have been made from disbelievers. Thus, to begin with the largest demand in 17:89, disbelievers are challenged to produce the like of the whole Quran, and they have been told that even if all jinn and men should join together, they would not be able to produce it. In 11:14 the challenge is limited to the production of ten chapters. In 2:24 and 10:39, however, it has been confined to one Surah only; while in 52:34-35, the condition of even one Surahhas been omitted and disbelievers have been given the option of producing even a single narration similar to any one narration (i.e. announcement) of the Quran. On the face of it, this difference in the form of the challenge at different places seems to be incongruent and to spring from a lack of harmony in the Quran. Some commentators have endeavoured to explain away this seeming incongruity by saying that it was due to the challenge having been made at different times. At first disbelievers were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran. When they failed to do so, the challenge was whittled down to the production of the like of any ten chapters. When, however, they were unable to produce even ten chapters, the challenge was further reduced to the production of a single chapter; and, lastly, disbelievers were asked to produce even a single narration like any narration of the Quran. This explanation, however, does not seem to be satisfactory. The different Surahs containing these different challenges were revealed, in the following order: (1) 52:34, 35; (2) 17:89; (3) 11:14; (4) 10:39; (5) 2:24 (Rodwell). Now in Surah 52, the first to be revealed, the challenge is not qualified by any condition as regards size, disbelievers having been given the choice of producing even one single narration similar to any narration of the Quran. It is very strange that, whereas at first the challenge was unqualified and disbelievers were called upon to produce something comparable to any narration of the Quran, later it began to be hedged round by conditions and stipulations, first requiring disbelievers to produce the like of the whole book, then reducing the challenge to ten Surahs, and last of all reducing it to a single chapter. The order is most unnatural.

Moreover, some of the Surahs which contain this challenge were revealed on occasions so close to one another that some commentators have found it difficult to fix their order of priority with certainty. Hence it is unwise to settle this question on the basis of the chronological order of the Surahs containing this challenge.

Another point worth considering in this connection is that the verses in question do not mention any historical event but contain only a general challenge which stands for all time. Now the question is, in what form should the challenge be delivered to the world? Should disbelievers be called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran, or to produce ten Surahs like any ten Surahs of the Quran, or should they be called upon to bring forward the like of one Surah only or the like of any single piece of the Quran? If it is enough to make a demand for the like of a single piece of the Quran, why should a demand for the like of a Surah be made, and if it is enough to make a demand for the like of one Surah, the demand for the production of ten Surahs or, for that matter, for the whole of the Quran seems extravagant.

The fact is that these verses contain certain demands which stand for all time, and there is no need to enter into the question of their chronological order. The challenge can be made even today in all the different forms mentioned in the Quran as it was made at the time of the Holy Prophet.

Before explaining the various forms of these challenges it is worth noting that mention of them in the Quran is invariably accompanied by a reference to wealth and power, except in 2:24, which, as already stated, does not contain a new challenge but only repeats the challenge made in 10:39. From this it may be concluded that there exists a close connection between the question of wealth and power and the challenge for the production of the like of the Quran or a part thereof. This connection lies in the fact that the Quran has been held out to disbelievers as a priceless treasure. When disbelievers demanded material treasures from the Holy Prophet and asked, Wherefore has not a treasure been sent down to him (11:13), they were told in reply that he possessed a matchless treasure in the Quran. The same reply was repeated when disbelievers asked, Wherefore has not an angel come with him? (11:13). They were told in reply that angels did descend upon him; for their function was to bring the word of God, and the Divine Word had already been vouchsafed to him. Thus both the demand for a treasure and the demand for the descent of angels have been jointly met by offering the Quran as a matchless treasure brought down by angels, and the challenge to produce the like of the Quran has been put forward as a proof of its peerless quality.

Let us now take the different verses containing this challenge separately. The greatest demand is that made in 17:89, where disbelievers are required to bring a book like the whole of the Quran in all its manifold qualities. In this verse disbelievers are not required to represent their composition as the word of God. They may bring it forward as their own composition and declare it to be the equal of or, for that matter, better than the Quran. As, however, it was necessary to define in what respect the work to be produced was to resemble the Quran, the Quran says in the next verse, And of a truth We have (herein) set forth for mankind in various ways, all kinds of similitudes, but most of men would reject everything but disbelief (17:90), hinting thereby that if disbelievers reject the Divine origin of the Quran and believe it to be the work of the Prophet himself, then let them produce a book which, like the Quran, should possess the following excellences: (a) it should throw light on every essential subject pertaining to religion; (b) its discussion of these subjects should be exhaustive, offering detailed guidance on every question; (c) it should be free from all harm and contain nothing but good; and (d) it should aim not at the good of any particular people or community but at the well-being of all mankind, containing guidance for all temperaments and dispositions as well as for all circumstances and conditions. But as at the time when this challenge was made the whole of the Quran had not yet been revealed, disbelievers were not required to produce the like of the Quran there and then; and the challenge thus implied a prophecy that they would not be able to produce the like of it, neither in the form in which it then was nor when it became complete. Again, the challenge was not confined to the disbelievers of the Prophet’s time alone, but extended to doubters and critics of all times.

The second verse which contains a challenge is 11:14. In this verse the disbelievers’ objection that the Prophet had not come with a treasure, nor had an angel come to him, has been met by calling upon them to bring similar Surahswhich they should represent as the word of God. The latter demand, i.e. that pertaining to the representation of the required production as the word of God, has a reference to the objection of the disbelievers that no angel has come down to the Prophet. They are told that if no angel has really come to him and his claim to receive divine revelation through the medium of angels is false, then let them also produce ten Surahs, claiming, like him, that they have been brought down to them by angels, and then see what their end would be. If they had not the courage to forge a lie against God, how could they think that the Prophet could be guilty of such fabrication or, if he had dared to commit this forgery, why had he remained secure from God’s punishment?

The reason why the disbelievers in this verse have been called upon to produce ten Surahs and not the whole Quran is that the question here did not relate to the perfection of the Quran in all respects, but to that of only a portion of it. The disbelievers had objected to some parts of it being defective, as is evident from the words: They imagine that thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee (11:13). Hence, they have not been required here to bring a complete book like the whole Quran, but only ten Surahs in place of those parts of the Quran which they deem to be defective, in order that the truth of their assertion may be tested.

As for the selection of the specific number 10 for this purpose, it should be noted that in Arabic 10 represents a complete number. As the object was to refute the assertion of the disbelievers that certain portions of the Quran were defective, therefore the disbelievers were given the option of making as many as ten efforts to substantiate their claim. They were thus asked to produce ten Surahs not because they could produce less than that number but because the best way to refute their objection was to afford them several opportunities to substantiate the truth of their assertion. In short, since in 17:89 the whole Quran was claimed to be a perfect Book, its opponents were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran; but since in 11:14 the point was that certain portions of it were objected to, so they were asked to choose ten such portions as appeared to them to be most defective and then, produce a composition even like those portions.

The third verse where the Quran has been declared to be matchless is 10:39. Here disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of only one Surah of the Quran. This is so because, unlike the above-mentioned two verses, the challenge made in this verse is in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. In the verses preceding 10:39, it was claimed that God possessed full authority over all things (see 10:32-36), and as a proof of this, in 10:38 the Quran was put forward as possessing the following excellences: (a) it contains teachings which could not be devised by man; (b) it has come in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the previous Scriptures; (c) in it the imperfect teachings of the previous Scriptures have been perfected; (d) the word of God embodied in it has been made secure from being interpolated or tampered with by man; and (e) its teachings are meant for all men and all time. In support of this claim, verse 10:39 throws out a challenge to those who deny or doubt it to produce a single chapter containing these excellences in the same perfect form in which they are contained in this chapter, i.e. ch.10.

The verses 52:34, 35 contain the smallest of all demands. In these verses disbelievers are challenged to produce a single piece or a single announcement like any piece or announcement of the Quran. This demand also has been made in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. Hence the smallness of the demand. The claim in question is made in the opening verses of chapter 52, i.e. Surah At-Tur, to the effect that the Quranic revelation which was promised to mankind through Moses on Mount Sinai, will continue to be written, read and published throughout the world and that its followers will continue to multiply and will comprise not only common men but persons of great spiritual and temporal eminence, and that the fountain of the new faith will continue to provide the water of eternal life to all the countries of the world so that the fulfilment of these prophecies will constitute a proof of the fact that there is a Day of Judgement. Thereafter the Quran proceeds in 52:34, 35 to challenge disbelievers that, if they look upon the revelation of the Quran to be a fabrication, then they should come forward and make a prophecy like the one made above. This challenge is unconditional and without qualification. Disbelievers are not required to represent what they produce as the word of God, nor is it laid down as a condition that their prophecy should be of their own devising. They may as they like either make a prophecy of their own devising or borrow it from any other Scripture. Again, disbelievers are not asked to bring forward as many prophecies as there are in the Quran—and these are legion—but to bring forward only one single prophecy similar to any one of the prophecies made in the beginning of the Surah. They are told that they will not be able to fulfil this demand, for such a prophecy could be made only by the Being Who is the Creator and Owner of the heavens and the earth, along with their treasures, and Who not only knows, but possesses mastery of, the unseen. This challenge also stands for all time.

The fifth challenge to produce a like of the Quran is contained in the verse under comment (2:24) and here also, as in 10:39, disbelievers have been called upon to bring a Surah like that of the Quran, not in refutation of any of their objections, but in support of a claim made by the Quran itself. In the case of the verse under comment this claim is stated in the beginning of the Surah in 2:3 which says: This is a perfect Book; there is no doubt in it; it is a guidance for the righteous. Similarly, 10:39 is also preceded with the words: there is no doubt about it (10:38). This shows that the challenge to produce a chapter like one of the Quran has special reference to the peculiarity which is described by the words, there is no doubt about it. The challenge given in the present Surah is preceded by the claim that the Quran is a guidance for those who fear God (2:3), which means that it guides the righteous to the highest stages of spiritual progress. Hence in the above challenge it has been declared that if disbelievers are in doubt as to the Divine origin of the Quran, then they should bring forward a Surah that may be com­parable to the Quran in the spiritual influence it exercises over its followers.

One of the characteristics of the Quran is that, whatever chapter of it we may read, it casts a subtle and sublime spiritual influence over our minds. Thus, instead of creating doubts it dispels them and takes men to a stage where no doubt can possibly survive, which is the stage of communion with God. This stage can be attained only by the study of the Quran; no other Book can compare with it in this respect.

The above explanation will show that all these challenges calling upon disbelievers to produce the like of the Quran are quite distinct and separate one from another, and all of them stand for all time, none of them superseding or cancelling any other. The misconception that these challenges are one and the same seems to have arisen from the wrong notion that in all of them it is the elegance of the Quranic style and diction that has been held out as unique and incomparable and that it is such elegance of Arabic diction that disbelievers have been called upon to produce. But this is not the case. The challenges made in the five Surahs referred to above are not one or identical nor do they make the same demand; each has a distinct and separate demand of its own and it is in keeping with the nature of these demands that disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran or a part of it.

The question now remains whether these demands also include a challenge to produce a work comparable to the Quran in elegance of style and diction. The answer is that they certainly do so, but only in an indirect way and not as a direct and fundamental demand, for sublime ideas can only be expressed in sublime language. As the Quran comprises sublime and lofty ideas, it was inevitable that the most beautiful diction and the most chaste style should have been employed as the vehicle for the expression of those ideas; otherwise, the subject matter was liable to remain obscure and doubtful and the perfect beauty of the Quran would have become marred. Thus, in whatever form and in whatever respect disbelievers have been challenged to produce a composition like the Quran, the demand for beauty of style and elegance of diction comparable to those of the Quran also forms a part of the challenge.

Commentary:

The verse signifies that believers have been allowed to fight because if the power of disbelievers had not been broken, they would have created disorder in the land and would have severed all ties of kinship and trampled underfoot all rightful claims. The verse also signifies that if believers refused to fight the disbelievers now, Arabia would continue to suffer from disruption and disintegration and forces of evil would stalk the land.

7:181; 17:111; 20:9; 59:24, 25.

Important Words:

اسماء (names) is the plural of اسم for which see note on 1:1. اسم means, (1) the name of a thing, i.e. a word fixed for a thing or attribute for the purpose of distinction; (2) a mark or sign of a thing (Aqrab); (3) fame or reputation of a person or thing (Lane); (4) a word, its meanings and combinations (Mufradat).

صادقین (right) is the plural of صادق which is derived from صدق. They say صدق فی ظنه i.e. he was or is correct in his opinion (Lane). صدق فی الحدیث means, he spoke the truth. صدقه means, he was sincere to him or he was his well-wisher (Aqrab). صدقتmeans: (1) you are speaking the truth, not a lie (2) what you say is right, not wrong. It is in the latter sense that the word has been used in the present verse.

Commentary:

Commentators differ as to what is here meant by the word اسماء (names). Some think that God taught Adam the names of different things and objects, i.e. He taught him language. Others hold that God taught him the names of his offspring.

There is no doubt that man needed language in order to become civilized and God must have taught Adam a language, but the Quran indicates that there are اسماء (names or attributes) which man must learn for the perfection of his religion and morals. They are referred to in the verse: And to Allah alone belong all perfect attributes; so call on Him by these and leave alone those who deviate from the right way with respect to His attributes. They shall be requited with what they do (7:181). This verse shows that man cannot attain to divine knowledge without a correct conception of God’s اسماء or attributes and that this can be taught only by God. So it was necessary that God should have, in the very beginning, given Adam knowledge of His attributes so that man should know and recognize Him and attain His nearness, and should not drift away from Him.

The verse quoted above (7:181) shows that the word اسماء (names) is used to signify the attributes of God and that a Muslim must be familiar with those attributes, so that he may pray to Him, invoking attributes most suited to the nature of the prayer. For example, if one prays for forgiveness and mercy, one should invoke the attributes of forgiveness and mercy; and if the prayer be for the attainment of righteousness, God should be invoked by names which pertain to that quality. The above verse also indicates that man must not of himself devise the attributes of God, because it is only God who can describe His attributes; man, being himself the creation of God, cannot do so. In fact, those who try to devise God’s attributes have been threatened with divine punishment.

In short, we learn from this verse that a Muslim must know God’s اسماء (names) which can be taught by Him alone, and which man has no right to devise out of his own fancy. There is strong evidence that God gave Adam a knowledge of His attributes. The view gains further strength when we take into consideration the difference between man and angel. According to the Quran, man differs from angels in that, whereas the former can be an image or reflex of الاسماءالحسنی i.e. all the divine attributes, the latter represent only a few of them. The Quran says: They (the angels) do what they are bidden to do (66:7) which implies that the angels cannot act of their own free will. They have no will of their own, but passively perform the functions allotted to them by Providence. On the other hand, man, endowed with volition and free choice, differs from angels in that he has capabilities which make him a perfect manifestation of all divine attributes. A saying of the Holy Prophet—"the best morals in man are those which are in conformity with the great attributes of God" (‘Ummal, ii. 2)—also points to this. As God is Merciful, we should also show mercy to men; as He is Forgiving, so we must also be ready to forgive our fellow beings; as He connives at faults, so we must try to imitate Him in this particular; and as He protects the weak, so we must be ready to protect the weak, and so on. This injunction of the Holy Prophet justifies the inference that man has the capability to manifest in himself all the attributes of God. Thus, both the Quran and the Holy Prophet’s sayings are agreed that man and angel differ in the manifestation of divine attributes, and the "names" in the clause, He taught Adam all the names, refer to the attributes of God.

The verse means that God first implanted in Adam free will and the needful capacity for the comprehension of the various divine attributes, and then gave him the knowledge of those attributes, which was impossible without the power of assimilation. The verse that follows corroborates this meaning; for therein it is stated that the اسماء (attributes) were such as were not wholly known to the angels and it is evident that such اسماء are only the divine attributes. The word اسماء may also mean the qualities of different things in nature. As man was to make use of the forces of nature, God gave Adam the capacity of knowing their qualities and properties. The word كل (all) used here does not imply absolute totality. It simply means all that was necessary. The Quran uses this word in this sense elsewhere also (see 6:45; 27:7, 24; 28:58). The pronoun in the words عرضھم (He put the objects of these names) shows that the objects referred to here are not inanimate things; for in Arabic this form of pronoun is used only for rational beings. The meaning of the expression, therefore, would be that God showed Adam in a kashf (vision) certain human beings from among his progeny who were to be the mani­festations of divine attributes in the future. Such beings were the Prophets or other holy persons who were to enjoy such nearness to God as to become His image and through whom God was to reform mankind. The angels were then asked whether they could manifest the divine attributes like them. This is what is meant by the words, Tell Me the names of these, occurring in the present verse.

10:44; 30:54.

Important Words:

فارغا (free from anxiety) is derived from فرغ which means, it was or became empty, void, devoid; he died. فرغ له means, he made him or it the object to which he directed himself. فارغ means, vacant, devoid of or free from care or anxiety or disquietude (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The heart of Moses’ mother became free from care or anxiety because of the consolation and assurance given to her by Divine revelation referred to in v. 8 above. The pronoun ہ in به may refer either to Moses or to the matter concerned. In the first case the expression ان کادت لتبدی به would mean that Moses’ mother was so much pleased with Moses having been restored to her that out of joy she was on the point of declaring that the child belonged to her. In the second case the meaning would be that if God had not restrained her, she almost had told people about the whole affair—how she had received a Divine revelation and how in pursuance of it she had put the child into the river and so on.

Commentary:

The words "who was an enemy to both of them," show that the man referred to was an Egyptian. But if he was an Israelite as the Bible says then he must have been in league with the Egyptians and must have reported the previous day’s incident to the authorities and thus was an enemy both to Moses and the Israelite who called Moses for help.

Important Words:

البقر (cows) is the plural ofالبقرة (a cow). The word is used for both male and female (Aqrab).

Commentary:

See under 2:72.

2:171.

3:113, 182.

Commentary:

The verse means that whenever Islam is presented to Jews, they, far from reflecting over its claims, consider it enough to say that they will believe in what is sent to Israelite Prophets only, and not in the revelation of outsiders, although the revelation they reject on such flimsy grounds fulfils the prophecies contained in their own Scriptures about a new Book. Further, it is added that the statement that they would adhere to what was revealed to Israelite Prophets is absurd, seeing that they had opposed even their own Prophets in their time.

This verse also makes it clear what the word مصدقا means when followed by the preposition لام. The expression has been used as a proof of the truth of the Quran, and it is therefore clear that it conveys the sense of "fulfilling" and not that of "confirming". It is only the fulfilment of prophecies in the Bible that can serve as evidence of the truth of the Quran. In this connection, see also 2:42.

For the prophecies alluded to in this verse, i.e. the prophecies contained in the Bible about the Quran and the Holy Prophet, the reader is referred to Deut. 18:15-19; Acts 3:19-24; Deut. 33:2; Matt. 21:42-44; Isa. 21:13-17; 28:9-13; chap. 42; 62:2-4; Dan. 7; etc.

For a discussion of the words, why did you attempt to slay the Prophets, see under 2:62.

2:64; 4:155; 7:172.

Important Words:

اشربوا (were permeated with) is derived from شرب meaning, he drank. اشرب means, he was made to drink. The expression,اشرب فی قلبه حب فلان means, the love of such and such a person permeated his heart (Aqrab). The word is so used because love is like alcohol that intoxicates one who partakes of it. The clause, اشربوا فی قلوبھم العجل (lit. they were made to drink into their hearts the calf) must really be read as اشربوا فی قلوبھم حب العجل (lit. they were made to drink into their hearts the love of the calf), the word حب (love) being understood before the word عجل (calf).

Commentary:

For an explanation of the expression, raised high above you the Mount, see under 2:64.

The words, they said, We hear and we disobey, signify that they practically refused to obey God. They did not necessarily use these exact words; for the word, as pointed out under 2:31, sometimes conveys the sense not of actual speech but of practical conduct.

Reference to calf-worship in verse 93 is not a mere reiteration of what has been already said in verse 55; the incident has been mentioned here as an illustration of what has been said about the Jews in the previous verse. Their attention is drawn to their conduct in the days of Moses. When Moses was absent from them for a short time only, they took the image of a calf for their idol, although they had witnessed how God had helped Moses and had shown mighty Signs at his hands; and that at a time when they had given a solemn promise not to worship anything besides God. In spite of that promise, they showed active opposition to the commandments of God by their deeds.

In the concluding portion of the verse, it is pointed out that the Jews professed to believe in what was revealed to them by God, but their belief was of a strange character for in spite of it, they persisted in their opposition to the Prophets. If this was believing, then their faith was only leading them astray.

2:112; 62:7.

Commentary:

See under 2:96 below.

2:95; 62:7.

Important Words:

ھود (the Jews) has by some been looked upon as the plural of ھائد which is active participle from ھاد meaning, he repented and turned towards the truth or towards God. In this sense ھود would mean, a people who have turned to God with repentance. The word ھود is a proper name for the Jews. The original and commoner word, however, is الیھود or یھود from which, according to some, the letter یا has been dropped, leaving the word ھود (Aqrab). See also 2:63.

Commentary:

So far Christians were not separately addressed. But now the Quran mentions them along with the Jews, indicating that their case was no better than that of the latter, both being under the delusion that one could obtain salvation merely by becoming a Jew or a Christian. They forgot the fact that when God had established a fresh covenant, salvation could not be possible without conforming thereto. If, however, the Jews and the Christians were justified in their claims, they should advance some reasons or scriptural evidence to show that it was enough for the purposes of salvation to join their folds. And they could not do it, because in their very Scriptures was foretold the appearance of a Prophet whom they were enjoined to accept and whose rejection was stated to lead to estrangement from God.

Christianity, as well as Judaism, was meant for the guidance of the Israelites alone. The mission of Jesus was not meant for the whole world (Matt. 7:6; 10:6; 15:24; Mark 7:27). Though later on the followers of Jesus violated the limit imposed upon his mission and claimed universality for it, yet the hard fact remains that he was sent only for the Israelites, and his mission was to uplift that people alone. As other nations of the world are also the creation of God, it is therefore only right to believe that God must have made some arrangement for their guidance as well. Hence, it is quite unreasonable on the part of the Jews and Christians to hold that the door of salvation was closed against the followers of other faiths. Such a view would mean that God had confined salvation to certain tribes, to the exclusion of others, which is evidently absurd.

Islam, however, is not exposed to that objection. In the first place, it is not a tribal faith, but is universal in character. In the Quran, God enjoins the Holy Prophet to Say, O mankind! truly I am a Messenger to you all from Allah (7:159). Similarly, there is a saying of the Holy Prophet to the effect, "I have been sent for the whole mankind while the Prophets before me were sent to particular peoples only" (Musnad).

Secondly, unlike Judaism and Christianity, Islam does not hold Hell to be ever-lasting, but a place of reformation, where sinners will be purged of their sins to enable them to find their way ultimately to Heaven and enjoy the reward of whatever good deeds they had done in this world. On the other hand, Islam looks upon the bounties of Heaven to be everlasting. With Jews and Christians, it is only the wish that has been father to the thought and nothing else. Produce your proof, if you are truthful, says the Quran.

Commentary:

The verse alludes to the very high position which both the Quran and the Torah hold among heavenly Scriptures, the Quran being par excellence the best among the revealed Books and the Torah standing only second to it. It further says to disbelievers that if the revelations of the Quran and the Torah do not satisfy them, then let them produce a Book which is better suited to be humanity’s guide and which has brought about greater transformation in the lives of men than these Books have done.

2:127; 14:38.

Commentary:

The verse seeks to dispel the unfounded fears particularly of those Meccans who think that if they accepted the new message, more powerful people will swoop down upon them and deprive them of their possessions and freedom. It purports to say that from time immemorial Mecca (which is now going to be the centre of the new Faith) has remained a safe sanctuary and those whoever sought to interfere with its sacred character themselves met with ruin and destruction. When such is the case why should the Meccans be afraid that if they accepted the new Faith they will suffer economically or politically? The fact that Mecca has remained a safe sanctuary throughout the ages amidst all the great changes that have come over the face of the earth bears a standing testimony to the truth of the prophecy that God has made it a haven of safety.

Commentary:

While speaking of "the day" as in the present verse, the Quran uses the words "will you not then see" and when speaking of "the night" as in the preceding verse it uses the words, "will you not then hearken", the reason being that one cannot properly see at night.

5:6; 16:115; 23:52; 40:65.

Commentary:

The injunction contained in the words, "eat of طیبات i.e. good, pure and wholesome things", indicates that Muslims are not allowed to use things which may, in any way, injure their physical or moral or spiritual health, though they may be حلال i.e. allowed by Law. The injunction is thus very important and far-reaching in its effect. The words, We have provided for you, further imply that Muslims are also not allowed to make use of things acquired by unfair and unlawful means. Only the things bestowed by God, i.e. those lawfully earned, are to be used.

4:12, 13, 177; 5:107.

Important Words:

خیر (much wealth) means: (1) good as opposed to evil; (2) wealth acquired or collected by fair and praiseworthy means; (3) much wealth or abundance of wealth; (4) a thing that all desire; (5) welfare and good fortune (Mufradat); (6) the existence of a thing in abundance and perfection; (7) horses, etc. (Aqrab).

حقا (obligation) is derived from حق and has been used in the verse in the accusative case, having something understood before it, the complete expression being حق ذالك حقا (Kashshaf). الحق means: (1) equity or justice; (2) right mode of acting; (3) an obligation or a duty; (4) a debt or anything that is owed; (5) a thing suitable to the requirements of justice, truth, duty, etc. (Lane). See also 2:148.

Commentary:

As disputes about inheritance are a fruitful source of quarrels, murders, etc., the Quran here suitably turns from the subject of retaliation to that of inheritance.

The word used here for "wealth" is خیر and not مال which is the ordinary word used in this sense. خیر means, "wealth acquired by fair and praiseworthy means". Thus by substituting the word خیر for مال, the Quran has also emphasized the necessity of being very circumspect in the acquisition of wealth which should be acquired only by fair and lawful means. Incidentally, therefore, it has been hinted that it is not lawful for a Muslim to make a will with regard to property that has been acquired by unlawful means; for such wealth does not really belong to him.

In 4:12, 13 the Quran fixes the shares of all those persons who should succeed to a deceased person’s property, according to the Islamic law of inheritance, and these in the first instance include parents, children, and wife or husband. In the presence of this law, the injunction given in the verse under comment would, at first sight, appear to be uncalled-for and unnecessary. As a matter of fact, those who believe in the abrogation theory, have actually declared this verse to be abrogated by the ones referred to above. But they are clearly mistaken; for the verse under comment makes an additional and necessary provision in regard to inheritance. Not seldom there come forward claimants who allege that a deceased person had bequeathed such and such portion of his property to them, and even witnesses are not wanting to support their claims. The rightful heirs, not knowing anything about it, naturally suspect the claim. The result is quarrel and litigation. Every Muslim is, therefore, enjoined to make a proper bequest at the time of his death that his property be divided among his heirs, i.e. parents, children, wives, etc., according to the Law of Islam, stating therein also the portion of any other individual who is not legally entitled to inherit from him but to whom he may wish to bequeath some of his wealth. Such a declaration made with the knowledge of his heirs and relatives is calculated to put a stop to much litigation. Such a provision is all the more essential in cases when the property or wealth is considerable.

The verse also throws out a hint that a Muslim should, before his death, bequeath a part of his property, not exceeding one-third, to such of his relations as have been debarred by Law from inheriting from him, for instance, distant but deserving relations, non-Muslim parents, non-Muslim children and so on. In such a case the remaining two-thirds will go to his lawful heirs. As to the restriction relating to one-third, it may be noted that the Holy Prophet has made it clear that no testator can bequeath more than one-third of his wealth to others than the lawful heirs. At least two-thirds of the property must go to the heirs (Bukhari).

Islam excludes non-Muslim relatives from the category of heirs to avoid complications. For instance, the near relatives of a deceased person might belong to a people who are at war with the Muslims or in open hostility toward them. In that case, to put money into their hands would be to damage the cause of Islam and injure one’s own interests. Non-Muslim relatives have, therefore, been excluded from lawful heirs so that they may not claim their part of the inheritance as of right. The Quran, however, instructs Muslims to leave to them a part of their property by a special will, so that, in case such property is not likely to be used against the interests of Islam, the former may in this way discharge the obligations they owe to the latter as kinsmen. Another reason for excluding non-Muslim relatives from the category of heirs is that generally non-Muslims do not in practice allow their Muslim relatives to succeed them as heirs. There is no sense, therefore, in allowing Muslim wealth to flow to non-Muslims where no such flow takes place the other way.

The verse serves yet another purpose. According to the Law of Islam, as generally accepted, the grandchild of a deceased Muslim is debarred from inheritance in case the former’s father has predeceased the latter. The Quran, therefore, directs that a portion of the property may be left by a special will by a dying Muslim for such of his relatives as are otherwise rightful heirs but cannot inherit owing to some of their near kinsmen having predeceased them.

The verse must not be understood to lend itself to the interpretation that the heirs whose portions have been definitely fixed by the Law, can be given more than their prescribed share. This is expressly forbidden by the Holy Prophet (Tirmidhi, ch. on Wasaya).

2:204.

Important Words:

یطیقونه (are able to fast only with great difficulty) is derived from طاق. They say طاق الشیء or اطاق الشیء meaning, he was able or fit to do it; or he had the strength and power to do it (Aqrab). But the word طاقة is not used of strength generally but of such strength only as, so to speak, lies on the border, i.e. just the strength with which a thing may be done and no more—a strength required to do a thing only with difficulty and trouble (Mufradat & Lane). This is why the word طاقة is never used to express the power of God for which words like قدرة and قوة are used; for whereas the latter two words express the sense of vastness of power, the former expresses only that of its narrowness. The Quran uses the word طاقةonly twice and at both these places it uses it in a negative sentence, i.e. لاطاقة لنا viz. "we do not even possess the requisite strength to do that" (2:250 & 287). Thus the correct rendering of the clause علی الذین یطیقونه would be, "for those who are able to fast but can fast only with great difficulty." طوقه (Tawwaqahu) which is from the same root means, he put a collar or a neck-ring round his neck, i.e. he imposed on him a thing that was difficult, troublesome or inconvenient. طاقه also means, a single strand which after combining with others goes to make a rope (Lane), i.e. the weak part of a rope which cannot stand tension alone.

فدیة (an expiation) is derived from فدی. They say فدی الرجل meaning, the man secured his release from captivity, etc. by paying his ransom. Thus فدیة means, such payment as is made for obtaining release of a person; or such expenditure as is made in expiation of some sin or shortcoming, etc. (Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse again refrains from giving the actual commandment regarding fasting but prepares further ground by pointing out that the fasting about to be prescribed is not meant for all days but only for a limited number of days. Again, the commandment to come is not meant to be observed in all circumstances; for those suffering from disease or those on a journey will be exempt from it. In fact, Islam is a practical religion. It does not give any commandment which is impossible of compliance. Hence, while referring to its injunctions about fasting, the Quran makes it clear that whosoever is ill or is on a journey should not fast but should redeem the omission by fasting an equal number of days at some other time when the sickness is gone or the journey is over.

The pronoun الذین (those) in the clause, those who are able, refers to believers in general, the words الذین یطیقونه meaning, those who are able to fast but can fast only with great difficulty. This interpretation is supported by another reading of the verse in which the word یطوقونه (yutawwaqunahu) has been substituted for یطیقونه (yutiqunahu) (Jarir), the former word meaning, those to whom fasting is like a tight collar, i.e. those who are not actually sick but whose physical condition or general health is such that they are unable to fast without running the risk of injuring their health. Such people, who include old men and raw youths and weakly persons and pregnant women and mothers giving suck to their children, may not fast but should make amends for their non-observance of each day’s fast by feeding a poor man according to their standard of food. Another reading of the word یطیقونه is یطیقون (yutayyaqunahu) (Jarir) meaning, they can do it only with great difficulty, which also bears out the above meaning. Thus the verse mentions three classes of believers to whom concession is allowed with respect to fasting: (1) the sick; (2) those on a journey; and (3) those neither on a journey nor actually sick but otherwise too weak to fast except with real risk to their health.

Some commentators do not recognize the last-mentioned class as being separate from, and independent of, the first two, but take it as being an exception from them. In this case the verse would mean that such of the sick and of those on a journey as can afford to feed poor men should also do so, besides fasting the same number of days after the sickness or the state of journey is over.

2:235; 65:5.

4:35.

Important Words:

قروء (courses) is the plural of قرء which is derived from قرأ. They say قرأ الشیء i.e. he collected or put together the thing. قرأت الناقة means, the she-camel became pregnant. قرأت الحامل means, the pregnant woman gave birth to a child. قرات المرأة or اقرأت المرأة means, the woman became pure from menstrual discharge. اقرأت المرأة also means, she menstruated, thus giving contrary meanings. قرء (Qur’un or Qar’un), means: (1) a time, and this is the primary significance of the word, as we say ھبت الریح لقرئھا i.e. the wind blew at its fixed time; (2) menstruation; (3) period or state of purity preceding and following a menstrual discharge, i.e. the period between two menstruations; thus the word gives contrary meanings; (4) termination of a menstruation (Aqrab & Lane). The word قرء is also sometimes applied to the period of menstruation and that of purity taken together, i.e. the whole month (Muhit). According to Raghib قرء means the time or state when a woman leaves her state of purity and enters that of menstruation (Mufradat).

ارحام (wombs) is the plural of رحم (rihm or rahim) which is from the verb رحم. They say رحمه i.e. he showed him mercy, he was tender towards him. رحمت المرأة means, the woman had complaint of the womb after childbirth. رحم (rahim) or رحم(rihm) means, (1) womb; (2) relationship, particularly by the female side. The expression اولواالارحام or ذوالارحام means, relatives or kinsmen. In Muslim jurisprudence the expression signifies such relations as are not direct heirs (Lane).

بعولة (husbands), like بعول, is the plural of بعل. They say بعل الرجل i.e. the man became a husband. بعلت المرأة means, the woman married and had a husband. بعل is like زوج meaning, both a husband and a wife, i.e. a partner in life; but the significance of husband is more common. The word also means, lord, master or owner of a thing; or a person in authority. The Arabs sometimes gave the name بعل to their idols also (Lane & Mufradat).

المعروف (equity) is a common Arabic word which has been freely used in the Quran as well as the Hadith. The word is derived from عرف. They say عرفه i.e. he knew it either by means of the five senses or by mental perception, as by reflection, or by consideration of the effect of a thing on the mind; he recognized it. المعروف means, (1) a known or commonly known thing; (2) an action or thing the goodness of which is known by reason, i.e. equity; (3) an action or thing the goodness of which is known by the law of Shari‘ah; (4) goodness, kindness and beneficence; (5) liberality coupled with moderation; (6) good fellowship with one’s family and others; (7) sincere and honest word of advice, etc. (Lane). It may be noted here that while taking the oath of allegiance from would-be Muslims, the Holy Prophet always used the word المعروف asking them to solemnly affirm that they would obey him in all معروف things, i.e. not only in such things as formed part of the divine law of Shari‘ah but also in those which the Prophet held to be good by his own reason.

درجة (rank) means, (1) the various steps forming a set of stairs; (2) rank; (3) eminence (4) degree (Aqrab).

Commentary:

In view of the fact that divorce is the most hateful of all lawful things in the sight of God (Dawud), it has been hedged round by many checks and limitations. One of these checks is that a husband can divorce his wife only when she is clean i.e. in a state of purity, and he has had no sexual knowledge of her in her period of purity. After the pronouncement of divorce the wife must wait for three menstruations, i.e. about three months, which period is called عدة(‘iddah) or the period of waiting. This is another check, because this period of waiting gives to the husband sufficient time to consider the pros and cons of his action and to allow his love for her, if there is yet a dormant spark lying smouldering somewhere, to reassert itself. The third check laid down in this verse is that a divorced woman, if pregnant, must not conceal this fact from her husband, for the expected birth of a child is calculated to go a long way in bringing about reconciliation between the couple. The fourth check, as mentioned in the succeeding verses, is that for complete and irrevocable separation there should be three divorces. After the pronouncement of the first as well as the second divorce, and before the expiry of the period of waiting, the husband enjoys the privilege of taking his wife back, if he so desires. Even after the period of waiting is over, the couple can become reunited in the case of the first and second divorce by renewing the marriage tie.

The verse adds that as far as personal rights are concerned, the husband and the wife stand on a par, but in matters relating to discipline, the husband has superiority over the wife, i.e. in case of difference, the final authority is vested in him. The reasons for this are given in 4:35.

The divine attribute Mighty added at the end of the verse contains a reminder and a warning to the husband that he must not misuse the authority he has been given in household affairs, for there is the Almighty God over his head to Whom he is responsible for his actions. The attribute also provides a reason for vesting authority in the husband, who is the stronger of the parties. The attribute Wise brings home to the husband the fact that the vesting of the final authority in him is based on just and wise considerations, because wherever two or more persons live together, it is necessary that the wisest among them be appointed the Amir or the chief for the efficient running of their affairs and the uniformity of their actions.

A word here about the significance of قرء seems essential. As explained under Important Words, this word gives two distinct and contrary meanings, i.e. (1) menstruation; and (2) the period of purity between two menstruations. This has given rise to much difference of opinion among scholars of Muslim jurisprudence; Abu Bakr and ‘Umar among the Companions of the Holy Prophet and Abu Hanifah and Ahmad bin Hanbal the Imams of jurisprudence have held the view that by using the word قرء

the Quran means menstruation and not the period of purity. On the contrary, ‘A’ishah (wife of the Holy Prophet) and Ibn ‘Umar among the Companions, and Malik and Shafi‘i among the Imams of jurisprudence have held the opposite view (Muhit). Opinions being so balanced, it would be open to a Muslim to take either of the two views, but a collective survey of relevant arguments, which need not be stated here, leads one to the conclusion that the first-mentioned view is perhaps the more reasonable of the two. If, however, one should desire to be on the perfectly safe side, it is open to him to take the word قرء to signify the periods of menstruation and purity taken together, i.e. the whole month.

Important Words:

یتراجعا (return to each other) is derived from رجع i.e. he returned; the word is used to indicate the coming together of people after their dispersal or separation, as they say تراجع القوم i.e. the people returned to the place from where they separated or left (Aqrab).

یقیما (observe) is derived from اقام which means, he made a thing stand upright; he observed or duly performed a religious commandment or duty, etc. (Lane). See also under 2:4.

تنکح (she marries) is derived from نکح. They say نکح or نکحت meaning (1) he or she married a spouse; (2) he or she had sexual intercourse with his or her spouse. In the present verse the word is used in the latter sense. See also 2:222.

Commentary:

This verse refers to the third and final pronouncement of divorce after which the husband loses all right of reunion with his wife unless the divorced woman marries another man and establishes conjugal relations with him, and is then formally divorced by him or he dies, leaving her free to marry another man. By the inclusion of this provision in the law of divorce, Islam has, on the one hand, enhanced the sanctity of the marriage tie which must not be trifled with and has declared unlawful the evil practice of حلالة (halalah); and, on the other, it has afforded yet another opportunity to the couple who once had lived as husband and wife to become reunited if they so desired. The practice of halalah referred to above consists in a divorced woman marrying a man, other than her former husband, with the object of obtaining divorce from him and thereby making herself lawful for the former husband. Islam condemns this practice as a thing accursed (Tirmidhi ch. on Nikah) and enjoins that marriage with and divorce from another husband must both be genuine.

Important Words:

متعوھن (provide for them) is derived from متع (mata‘a). They say متع الشیء i.e. the thing became tall. متع الرجل means, the man became well off. متع الله فلانا (matta‘a) means, God granted him life and the necessaries thereof. متع المرأة المطلقة means, he provided his divorced wife with necessaries of life. تمتع به أو منه or استمتع means, he profited by it for some length of time; he was afforded an opportunity to enjoy it. المتاع means, things that are necessary for life without affording opulence; things useful and necessary such as food, clothing, household utensils, furniture, etc. (Aqrab & Lane).

المقتر (the poor man) is derived from قتر. They say قتر علی عیاله i.e. he was niggardly towards his family. اقتر الرجل means, the man became poor and straitened in circumstances. المقتر is, therefore, one who is poor, one who is in straitened circumstances (Aqrab).

Commentary:

Circumstances might arise when a husband may consider it necessary or desirable to divorce his wife before they have had conjugal relations, i.e. before the man has gone in unto his wife and even before any مھر (dowry) has been decided upon by the parties. The verse allows this procedure but makes it obligatory on the husband to see that in such a case his divorced wife receives suitable provision according to his means. Thus Islam seeks not only to provide for the divorced woman but to leave no trace of bitterness, which is very often the result of the dissolution of a marriage. The word المحسنین i.e. the virtuous or those who act benevolently, has been used to exhort the husband that the more generous he is in his treatment of his divorced wife, the more pleasing will his conduct be in the sight of God.

4:78.

Important Words:

الملاء (chiefs) is derived from ملاء. They say ملاء الاناء بالماء i.e. he filled the vessel with water. ملی رعبا means, he was filled with fright. الملاء means: (1) assembly of persons; (2) chiefs and nobles, for they fill the eyes and hearts of the commoners withawe and admiration; or because with them a meeting becomes full and appears to be properly attended. الملاء الاعلی means, the community of high placed angels (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The Quran now proceeds to give the story of how the different tribes of Israel were welded into one great nation, also noting incidentally the weaknesses displayed by them, so that their example may serve as a lesson to Muslims.

The incident mentioned in the verse under comment indicates an improvement in the condition of the Israelites in the time to which this verse relates over that of the time of Moses himself. In 5:25 the Quran relates that when Moses exhorted his followers to fight the enemy in the cause of Allah, they replied, Go thou and thy Lord and fight, and here we sit. On the contrary, in the present verse the Israelites are reported to have said, What reason have we to abstain from fighting in the cause of Allah when we have been driven forth from our homes and our sons? The improvement, however, was more verbal than real; for when the time of actual fighting came, many of these people wavered and refused to fight. The incident thus serves as a grim warning to Muslims to beware of treading the same path.

Important Words:

التابوت (heart) is derived from تاب i.e. he returned; he returned to God; he repented; he left off the way of sin and began to tread the path of rectitude. التابوت means: (1) a chest or box, as things are repeatedly taken out of, and returned to, it; (2) a coffin or a bier; (3) chest or breast or bosom or the ribs with what they contain, as the heart, etc. (Lane); (4) the heart which is the storehouse of knowledge, wisdom and peace (Mufradat).

سکینة (tranquillity) is derived from سکن i.e. it became calm and tranquil. سکینة means, peace, tranquillity, calmness, freedom from agitation and disturbance (Aqrab & Lane).

بقیة (legacy) is derived from بقی i.e. he or it remained behind; or he or it continued or lasted for long or forever. بقیة means, that which remains behind, i.e. legacy; remainder; remains; remnant; residue; relic; the best portion of a thing, as it is always the best part of a thing that survives. فلان بقیة القوم means, such a one is the best and the most excellent of the party (Lane).

Commentary:

Though commentators have differed about the significance of the word تابوت and the Bible mentions it as an "ark" or chest, the description of the Quran definitely shows that the word has been used here in the sense of "heart" or "bosom.'' The words of the Quran are: wherein there will be tranquillity from your Lord. Now this description cannot apply to an ark or a chest; for, far from granting peace and tranquillity to others, the ark spoken of by the Bible could neither protect the Israelites against defeat nor could it protect itself, and was carried away by the enemy. Even Saul who took with him the ark during his campaigns, suffered crushing defeats, so much so that even the enemy pitied him and he met with an ignominious end. Such an ark could not be a source of tranquillity to the Israelites. What God gave them was a heart full of tranquillity which was aided by angels who buoyed up the Israelites and filled their hearts with courage and perseverance so that, after the coming of the said tranquillity, they successfully resisted the attacks of the enemy and inflicted heavy defeats on them.

Another favour which God conferred on the Israelites has been referred to in the word بقیة or legacy. God imbued their hearts with the noble qualities which characterized their ancestors, the people or the descendants of Moses and Aaron. The legacy left by the descendants of Moses and Aaron did not consist of any material things but referred to the good qualities which they were given as the heritage of their great ancestors. This heritage was similar to the one to which reference has been made in the words, that (he) may be heir to me and to the House of Jacob (19: 7). Evidently, it is not a material heritage but a spiritual and moral heritage that is mentioned in this verse. Similarly, the followers of Gideon were imbued with a spiritual and moral بقیة i.e. such noble attributes of Moses and Aaron and their descendants as God had endowed them with. It was a sign that it was God Who had set up Gideon as king over the tribes of Israel so that he might protect them against the ravages of their enemy and breathe into them a martial spirit, a work which saw its consummation in the days of David.