إِنَّمَا

2:28, 221.

Important Words:

تفسدوا (create disorder) is derived from افسد which is derived from فسد (fasuda) or فسد (fasada), i.e. he or it became corrupt or evil or vitiated or spoiled or tainted or in an altered state or in a disordered or disturbed condition, etc. The word is the opposite of صلح. The transitive form افسد means, he or it made (it or him) bad or corrupt or vitiated or spoiled, or put (it or him) in a disordered or disturbed condition, or simply he created disorder, etc. The word is the opposite of اصلح for which see below (Lane).

الارض (the earth) means: (1) the earth or the globe; (2) part of the earth, i.e. a land or country; (3) ground or surface of the earth; (4) floor; (5) anything that is spread on the floor; (6) anything that is low; (7) shivering or tremor (Lane).

مصلحون (promoters of peace) is derived from اصلح which is derived from صلح i.e. he or it became good or proper or righteous or in a state of order, etc. They say ھذاالشیء یصلح لك i.e. this thing is suitable or fit or meet for you. اصلح means, he or it made him or it good or proper or righteous, or put him or it in a state of order, etc. اصلح also means, he corrected or reformed or improved; or he promoted or brought about peace, harmony or reconciliation. It also means, he performed a good and right act (Lane).

Commentary:

The hypocrites tried to create disturbance in various ways: (1) they tried to sow discord among the Muslims by instigating the انصار i.e. Medinite helpers against the مھاجرین i.e. Meccan refugees (63:8, 9); (2) sometimes they imputed motives to the Holy Prophet in the distribution of alms (9:58), or his system of gathering information (9:61); (3) sometimes they tried to undermine the spirit of the Muslims (9:50), or to demoralize them by spreading rumours (4:84); (4) sometimes they encouraged non-Muslims to fight against Muslims (59:12).

In the present verse reference is made to the double-dealing of the hypocrites. Confronted with this, the hypocrites invariably pleaded that they were prompted by nothing but sincerity of purpose and that their intention was not to create ill-will but to establish mutual cordiality and peace. This is the typical defence of all mischief-makers.

The presence of hypocrites and malcontents is inevitable in every organised society. In a society, not properly organised, it is easy for disaffected members to leave. But in a well organised community, the malcontents find it difficult to leave. So they remain within and carry on their nefarious activities secretly. The presence of hypocrites is not a sign of weakness but rather of strength in a community. But this should not make a community neglectful about them. On the contrary, it is imperative that malcontents and hypocrites should be closely watched and properly dealt with, as and when circumstances require. The Holy Prophet was ever watchful of this class.

2:77; 3:120; 5:62.

9:64, 65.

Important Words:

خلوا (they are alone) is derived from خلا i.e. he was alone. They say خلا الرجل i.e. the man was alone in a place. خلا المكانmeans, the house became empty and untenanted. خلا الشیء means, the thing passed away. خلا الیه or خلا به or خلا معه means, he was alone with him; he met him in private (Aqrab). خلا فلان means, he died (Lisan).

شیاطین (ringleaders) is the plural of شیطان (satan) which is either derived from (1) شطن or (2) شاط (Mufradat). شطن عنه means, he was or became distant or remote from him or it. شطن صاحبه means, he opposed his comrade and turned him from his intention or course (Aqrab). Derived from this root the word شیطان would mean, the being who is not only himself far from truth but also turns others away from it.

The other derivation is from شاط which means, he burnt: he perished. Derived from this root the word شیطان would mean, the being who burns with hate and anger and is lost.

In common usage the word شیطان means: (1) the wicked or Evil Spirit, i.e. Satan; (2) anybody who greatly transgresses the proper limits and is excessively proud and rebellious; (3) serpent (Aqrab); (4) any blamable power or faculty or propensity like anger, etc. (Mufradat); (5) any painful condition like excessive thirst, etc. (Lane). In its wider sense, the word has also come to be used about anything which is harmful and injurious and is likely to cause suffering.

مستهزءُون (mocking) is derived from استهزاء which again is derived from ھزأ, both having the same meaning. ھزء به and استهزأ به mean, he laughed at, or mocked or scoffed at, or derided him; he made light of him. ھزأ also means, he died suddenly; he put it (camel, etc.) in motion. ھزأ and ھزوا are infinitive nouns from ھزأ and mean: (1) mocking or scoffing or jesting, etc.; (2) object of mocking, etc. (Aqrab & Kashshaf).

Commentary:

The context of the verse makes it clear that by شیاطین here is meant not evil spirits but rebellious ringleaders among the disbelievers and the hypocrites who were proud and haughty and ready to transgress all limits. Reference to such leaders has been made in 33:68 where God says, And they (the people of Hell) will say, 'Our Lord, we obeyed our chiefs and our great ones and they led us astray from the way.' These were the men who egged on the hypocrites to mischief and who were ever burning with jealousy and hate at seeing the Muslims prosper and who had gone far astray from truth.

Some Christian writers have rendered the word شیاطین in this verse as "satans" or "devils", and then charged the Quran with reviling idolaters, Jews and Christians. The charge is groundless; for, as already explained, the word شیاطین does not here mean "satans" but simply proud and mischievous ringleaders. In fact, as shown above, the word شیطان has a very wide significance in Arabic. The Holy Prophet once said to his Companions, "A single rider is a shaitan, a pair of riders also is a pair of shaitans, but three riders are a body of riders" (Dawud). The meaning here is that one rider is exposed to mischief and danger and so are two riders, but three riders travelling together form a safe company. Christian critics, ever keen on finding fault with the Quran, forget the New Testament passages (Mark 8: 33; 8: 38 & Matt. 3:7; 23: 33) where Jesus calls a disciple satan and his opponents serpents and a generation of vipers, etc.

This meaning of the word شیاطین i.e. ringleaders from among disbelievers and hypocrites, is supported by eminent Muslim scholars like Ibn ‘Abbas, Qatadah, Mujahid, and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud (Jarir).

Important Words:

تتلوا (followed). See 2:114

شیاطین (rebellious men). See 2:15.

علی (during) gives the sense of فی i.e. "in" or "during" (Aqrab & Mughni). It is also used to denote a hostile sense meaning "against", as one says خرج علیه i.e. he rebelled against him, or he went out against him with an army intending to fight (Wright). In this sense the phrase علی ملك سلیمان would mean, against the government of Solomon, or conspiring against his government.

سحر (falsehood and deception). In verbal senses سحرہ means, he deceived him; he coaxed him and involved him in trouble and deprived him of his understanding; he enchanted him. سحرالفضة means, he coated a piece of silver so as to make it look like gold. The noun سحر means, anything the source of which is not quite visible; showing off falsehood in the form of truth; a crafty device; craftiness; mischief; enchantment (Aqrab). It also means, producing what is false in the form of truth; any event of which the cause is hidden and which is imagined to be different from what it really is; embellishment by falsification and deceit (Lane). Thus every falsehood, deceit or crafty device which is meant to hide the real object from public view is included in the meaning of سحر.

ملكین (two angels) is the dual number from ملك (angel) for which see 2:31. Figuratively ملك is sometimes used to denote a handsome or holy person, as the Quran says, He (Joseph) is but a gracious angel, i.e. a handsome and pious youth (12:32). As in the verse under comment, the two angels are described as teaching something to the people, therefore the word cannot be taken in its literal significance, because angels do not live among men and do not generally have free intercourse with them (17:95, 96; 21:8). Thus in the present verse ملکین would not mean "two angels" in the literal sense of the word but "two holy men".

ھاروت (Harut) and ماروت (Marut) are both descriptive names. ھاروت is derived from ھرت which means, he tore up (Aqrab); hence ھاروت means, one who tears; the tearer. ماروت is derived from مرت which means, he broke (Aqrab & Lane). Thus ماروت means, one who breaks; the breaker. These names signify that the object of the appearance of these holy men was to 'tear' asunder and 'break' the glory and power of certain people.

فتنة (trial) means, the trial or means whereby the condition of a man may be demonstrated in respect of good or evil (Lane). They say فتن الصائغ الذھب i.e. the goldsmith melted the gold in the crucible so that its purity or impurity might be ascertained (Aqrab).

Commentary:

Many a legend unwarranted by the Quran and the Hadith—and even running contrary to them—clusters round this verse. It would be quite unreasonable to interpret it on the basis of those myths. For their true interpretation no external evidence is needed, the words being self-explanatory. It is clear from the verse itself that Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet were bent upon the same mischief which characterized them in the days of Solomon and during the days of their captivity in Babylon. The verse further indicates that the mischief-mongers of Solomon’s time were those "rebellious men" who called him an unbeliever. God says that those wicked men themselves, and not Solomon, lacked belief. Again, the verse tells us that these men taught their associates such signs as conveyed to them meanings quite different from those generally accepted, for the purpose of deceiving other people and concealing their own activities. All this leads to the conclusion that this verse alludes to those secret plots which the enemies of Solomon made against him, and by which they wished to break his empire. It is pointed out that now, in the time of the Holy Prophet, these people are resorting to the selfsame tactics, but that they will fail.

As the verse refers to a number of historical events, it is advisable to relate them here at some length.

When Jews saw that the power of Islam was steadily expanding and that no opposition from the Arabs had been able to arrest the progress of Muslims, they began to excite outsiders against them. At that time there were two large empires in the neighbourhood of Arabia: (1) The Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire; and (2) The Persian Empire. As Jews were already at enmity with the Roman Government, because they were in constant trouble under it, so it was only the Persian Government to which they could look for support. Harassed by the oppression of Christian rulers, they had taken refuge in Persia, where they enjoyed a good deal of religious freedom, and their religious centre shifted from Judah and Jerusalem to Babylonia (Hutchinson’s History of the Nations, p.550). In the seventh century of the Christian era, i.e., during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet, Jews suffered exceptionally cruel persecution at the hands of the Christian Emperors of the Eastern Roman Empire. "Both Phocas and Heraclius", says the Historians’ History of the World (vol. 7, p. 175), "attempted to exterminate the Jewish religion, and if possible to put an end to their national existence. Heraclius not only practised every species of cruelty himself to effect this object within the bounds of his own dominions, but he even made the forced conversion or banishment of the Jews a prominent feature in his diplomacy." So, in the time of the Holy Prophet the only government to which the Jews could look for help was that of Persia, where their co-religionists enjoyed much influence, especially in the reign of Chosroes II (Jew. Enc., ix. 648).

Consequently, when the Jews saw that their efforts to check the progress of Islam had totally failed, they took to exciting the Persian Court against the Holy Prophet by various means; and as a result, Chosroes II issued orders to the Governor of Yemen to send to him the Arabian claimant as a captive. But when the envoys of the Governor came to the Holy Prophet, he asked them to see him the next day, when he told them that God had informed him that He had their king murdered. Thereupon they returned and related this incident to the Governor. A few days later, the Governor received a letter from Siroes, the son of Chosroes II, to the effect that he had killed his father on account of the latter’s tyranny and that the Governor should, on his behalf, renew the oath of allegiance from all the Chiefs of Yemen; and that the order of his father regarding an Arab should be considered as cancelled (Tabari, iii. 1573-1574).

Some historians, including Tabari himself, hold that it was the letter of the Holy Prophet to the king of Persia inviting him to Islam that was the occasion of his orders for the apprehension of the Holy Prophet. But on comparison of the dates of the above-mentioned events, this turns out to be a mistaken view. For, as we read in Zurqani (ii. 211-212), the letter in question was despatched from Medina on the first of Muharram, 7 A.H.–a date corresponding to 12th April, 628 A.D. (Lane under ھجرة); whereas Chosroes II, who sent orders for the arrest of the Holy Prophet, had been assassinated on the 29th of February, 628 A.D. (Historians’ History of the World, viii. 95). Thus the view that the letter of the Holy Prophet was the cause of Chosroes’ orders is quite untenable; and the only possible cause of Chosroes’ ignominious orders was that his ears had been poisoned by malicious reports, a fact admitted by Sir William Muir (The Life of Mahomet, p. 370). It is to these efforts of the Jews that the Quran alludes in the verse under comment.

The verse also points out that it was foolish on the part of the Jews to suppose that they would succeed in that way. Their attention is invited to the fact that they had already been responsible for two secret plots. The first was against Solomon, when some members of their community turned rebels, hatched plots and stirred up bitter feeling against him by calling him an infidel; whereas the infidels were those who opposed him, hurled imputations at him, and set up against him secret societies in which secret signs and symbols were taught. The Jews, however, themselves reaped the ill-reward of their sinister schemes: their power, as a consequence, fell into decay, and at last they became so powerless that they were driven into exile towards Babylon. This account of Jewish secret societies and conspiracies and treacherous signs and symbols, as alluded to in this verse, finds corroboration in the Bible (1 Kings 11:1-6), where we read that the charge of idol-worship was spread against Solomon. An account of his enemies is found in I Kings 11:14, 23, 26, and a reference to secret plots is met with in II Chron. 10: 2-4 where we learn that the Jews had sent for Jeroboam, a bitter enemy of Solomon, immediately after his death and had attempted to make Solomon’s son agree to some demands of theirs, involving certain imputations against Solomon, before his accession to the throne. We learn about the secret signs from I Kings 11:29-32, in which the ten tribes of the Israelites are likened to ten pieces of a garment, and Jeroboam is told that these ten tribes were on his side against Solomon; and so it proved to be, for on the death of Solomon, these ten tribes made Jeroboam their king (I Kings 12:20). Again, the reference of the Quran to the infidelity of Solomon’s enemies finds corroboration in II Chron. 11:15, from which we learn that his enemies, who falsely charged him with unbelief, themselves fell into idol-worship when they rose to power.

Besides the testimony of the Bible, there is other evidence to show that in the days of Solomon a secret society was at work against him. An old tradition, current among medieval Freemasons, indicates that Solomon was envious of the superior intelligence of Hiram, the chief architect who built the Temple at Jerusalem. He is said to have attempted to kill the great Mason by having him thrown into a tank of molten brass, but he was saved by the spirit of his ancestor, Cain, who prophesied that at last his people would get the better of their enemy. Solomon, however, as the tradition goes, had him afterwards put to death. It is said of him that he had fixed certain secret signs which were a sort of mystery known only to him and his associates (Secret Societies of the World, Volume II, pp. 1-8; as the original book could not be obtained, the reference is to an Urdu translation). We further learn from this book that before the period of the Accepted Masons, the same signs used in all the Lodges were current among the Masons of Solomon’s time (p. 11) and that at the time of initiation, the Hiram incident was related to the new member (pp. 29, 30). However incredible the story as a whole may be, it points at least to the conclusion that in one way or other, secret societies were associated with Solomon’s reign and were much in vogue in his time.

The second occasion when, according to the Quran, the Israelites had resort to secret societies was during their captivity in Babylon. But this time they were not acting against any Prophet but were, on the other hand, working under the leadership of two inspired personages, who were, in obedience to divine command, trying to bring about the deliverance of the Israelites. Their mission was to "tear asunder" and "break down" the empire of the enemies of the Israelites. These holy men told new members, at the time of initiation, that they were a sort of trial from God, serving to differentiate between the good and the bad, and that the Israelites should not therefore refuse to believe what they said, because this would lead them to infidelity. In their teachings they drew a distinction between males and females, confining membership to males only (this is an old practice found among most secret societies). It is also stated that the disciples of these holy men directed their activities against only those for whose chastisement they were commissioned by God.

In this narration, the Quran refers to the days when King Nebuchadnezzar brought the Jews as captives into Babylon and kept them there for a long time. The holy men referred to in the verse under comment were Haggai, the Prophet, and Zechariah, the son of Iddo (Ezra 5:1). When Cyrus, King of Media and Persia, rose to power, the Israelites entered into a secret agreement with him and greatly facilitated his conquest of Babylon. In return for this service, he not only allowed them to return to their own country but also helped in the rebuilding of the Temple (Historians’ History of the World, ii. 126).

After stating that the Jews of the Holy Prophet’s time were following the same course which was adopted by the rebels of Solomon’s days and which was later adopted by the Jews under two holy men in Babylon, it was necessary here to state the ultimate upshot of their efforts against the Holy Prophet, because on the two previous occasion’s their efforts had met with different results. On the first occasion the conspiracy of the Israelites, being directed against a Prophet of God, had ended in the total loss of their prestige and finally in their banishment to Babylon. On the second occasion, they took a similar course under two inspired personages and were successful. Hence, in order to indicate whether the efforts of the Jews against the Holy Prophet would meet with failure, as they did in the days of Solomon, or with success as in Babylon, the Quran says: these people are learning that which would harm them and do them no good; hinting that they will not be successful as in Babylon. Accordingly, the consequence of their hostile efforts against the Holy Prophet was that Chosroes, their only supporter, met his death at the hands of his son, and they themselves were exiled from Arabia in the time of ‘Umar. In the concluding portion of the verse, God adds: And they have certainly known that he who trafficks therein has no share of good in the Hereafter, meaning that a mischievous plotter never succeeds ultimately. The last clause, had they but known, throws a flood of light on how intensely God desires that His creatures should always take the right course and not be misled by mischievous people.

2:269; 24:22.

Important Words:

سوء (evil) is the noun-infinitive from ساء meaning, he or it became bad or evil. ساء الامر فلانا means, the thing was disagreeable to such a one and made him sorrowful. سوء means: (1) evil, bad or wicked; (2) mischief and corruption; (3) anything that makes a person sad and sorrowful (Aqrab & Mufradat).

فحشاء (foul) is derived from فحش i.e. it became excessive or immoderate; or it became manifestly or excessively bad, evil or unseemly. Thus فحشاء means: (1) anything manifestly or excessively bad, evil, etc.; (2) anything forbidden by God; (3) foul talk or saying; and (4) illegal intercourse or fornication (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse speaks of the subtle ways by which Satan misleads man. He first prompts him to do deeds which do not appear to be manifestly wicked and the influence of which is confined to the person of the doer alone. Then, step by step, he makes the deluded person a hardened sinner, causing him to lose all sense of modesty, till finally the man goes so far as to make innovations in religion for which he possesses neither knowledge nor authority. As Satan’s promptings are never based on knowledge, so the natural consequence is that those who follow him begin to attribute to God things without having the least authority for so doing. Their theories are based on ignorance and not on knowledge. In fact, all knowledge is based on close observation, and close observation cannot be had, unless one enjoys nearness of a thing. So it is futile to expect true knowledge of God from those who are away from Him.

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

Important Words:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Commentary:

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

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

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

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

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

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

10:19; 16:72; 22:72.

Important Words:

تخلقون أفکا (you forge lies). تخلقون is formed from خلق. They say خلقه i.e. he measured it, or he determined its measure, or proportion, he designed, or fashioned, or planned it; he made it according to a certain measure, or design; He (God) created it; He originated it; he forged a story or lie; he fabricated a saying. An Arab would say حدثنا فلان بأحادیث الخلق i.e. such a one related to us fictitious stories (Lane & Aqrab). See also 3:50 & 26:138.

3:131; 30:40.

Important Words:

ربوا (interest) is derived from ربا. They say رباالمال i.e. the money or property increased and became augmented. ربواmeans, an excess and an addition; an addition over and above the principal sum; interest. The hadith defines ربوا as کل قرض جرمنفعة فھوربا i.e. every loan advanced to draw profit comes under the definition of interest (Saghir).

یتخبطه (has smitten) is derived from خبطه i.e. he struck or beat him violently; he trod him under his feet vehemently. خبط اللیل means, he walked about in the darkness of the night without finding the true way. تخبطه means, he struck or beat him violently. تخبطه الشیطان means, Satan struck him and afflicted him with hurt or injury; Satan prostrated him (Aqrab).

المس (insanity) is derived from مس. They say مسه i.e. he touched it; or he touched it with his hand. من المرض اوالکبر فلانا means, disease or old age touched him, i.e. came on him. مسه الشیطان بنصب وعذاب means, Satan brought pain and trouble on him. المسmeans, any pain or trouble, etc. that comes to a man by coming in contact with someone or something; it also signifies madness or insanity (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The prohibition against lending money on interest is preceded by a long exhortation to exercise charity. When a person becomes accustomed to spending his wealth in charity and alms, it becomes easier for him to lend money free of interest.

The Quran prohibits all kinds of interest. In modern times, however, business has become so inseparably mixed up with interest that it appears impossible to avoid interest altogether. But if a change of system as well as of surroundings and circumstances were brought about, business without interest would establish itself in the world as was the case in the days when Islam was in ascendancy.

The clause, those who devour interest do not rise except as rises one whom Satan has smitten with insanity, means that just as a madman does not see the consequences of his actions, similarly those who lend money at interest become careless of consequences. They keep in view only their own immediate interests and do not care, and in fact generally become incapable of caring, for the great harm which they do to society and the world at large. Interest also encourages a person or a government to incur debt beyond his or its capacity and in this way also blinds them to consequences. Another way in which interest causes a touch of insanity is to weaken the sense of goodness and beneficence in man by making him over-engrossed in money-making. Interest also leads to war. Money-lenders are always creating circumstances which may cause conflict between one nation and another so that war may break out and the belligerent nations may be compelled to borrow money from them. Interest also helps to prolong war by encouraging belligerent nations to borrow money beyond their capacity. Again, interest helps the accumulation of wealth in a few hands and thereby most injuriously affects the distribution of wealth and the balance of society. Yet another manifestation of madness caused by interest is that those who pay interest have their sense of dignity lowered and they contract the habit of carelessness and hastiness, thus acquiring a resemblance to one stricken by madness. See also 2:280 below.

The words, trade also is like interest, represent the pet argument of the supporters of interest. They say interest is nothing but a form of trade. Just as in trade one invests money with a view to increasing and multiplying it, so does one in lending money at interest. But deeper thinking would reveal that there is a world of difference between the two. While interest is attended by all the evil consequences briefly referred to above, trade is not.

The words, then will that which he received in the past be his, mean that if one accepts guidance from God and desists from charging interest in future, the past will be forgiven him and God will make good the loss he may thus suffer by other means.

It should be remembered that any sum stipulated to be received or given over and above what one advances or receives as a loan is interest, whether the dealing is with an individual or a bank or a society or a post office or any other organisation. Interest is not confined to money. It extends to any commodity which is given as a loan with the condition that it will be returned with an agreed excess.

Finally, it may be noted that in view of the peculiar conditions of the present times, when there is a vicious network of the interest system surrounding us and Islam is in a greatly weakened condition, the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement has declared that if a person is forced to accept interest, he may do so and then spend the money thus received on (a) the propagation of Islam, and (b) paying off any interest that he may similarly be forced to pay. He should, however, scrupulously avoid spending such money on himself or his family or using it in any other way (Fatawa & Al-Fadl).

16:87.

Commentary:

The expression مودة بینکم may be interpreted as follows:

(1) Social relations or the desire to win each other’s love and not reason or sound arguments are the basis of your idolatrous ideals and practices; or

(2) you have made your idolatrous beliefs and practices the foundation of your love with each other, i.e. you have made the identity of your idolatrous beliefs the means to preserve the homogeneity of your community; or

(3) your idolatrous practices have proceeded from your love of each other, i.e. first you conceived love and affection for some persons and then let that love degenerate into their worship.

See 4:3.

Important Words:

یصلون (burn) is derived from صلی. They say صلی اللحم i.e. he roasted the meat. صلی الشیء means, he threw the thing into the fire to be burned. صلی النار means, he felt the burning heat of the fire, or he entered the fire and was burnt (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The words, into their bellies, in the clause, (they) only swallow fire into their bellies, though seemingly superfluous are not really so. They have been added to point out that the fire which they swallow will, as it were, become a part of their bodies and continue as a constant source of burning.

Commentary:

The "slipping" spoken of in the verse refers to the disobeying of the order given to the party stationed on the hill at the back of the main body of the Faithful. It may also refer to the running away of some Muslims from the battlefield. But God, out of His great mercy, and considering all the attending circumstances, pardoned them all.

The words, because of certain doings of theirs, contain an implied praise. These men were truly righteous people. It was only "some" of their misdeeds that brought them this temporary disgrace. All their doings were not bad; only some were bad. The words also embody a warning that a true believer should not rest satisfied even if most of his deeds are righteous. He is never quite out of danger unless all of his deeds are good. He can, however, hope for forgiveness, if he manages to make the majority of his deeds good.

6:38; 13:28.

22:50; 26:116; 51:51; 67:27.

Commentary:

In the Quran by the sign demanded by disbelievers is meant generally the sign of punishment. This meaning is clear from vv. 54, 55& 56 below. To this demand of disbelievers the Holy Prophet is commanded to say that it is not for him to fix the time when punishment should come, because he is only a Warner whose duty is confined to warning them that if they persisted in their rejection of the Divine Message and did not mend their ways they will perish.

7:28; 16:101; 35:7.

Commentary:

The expression یخوف اولیاءہ rendered in the text as, Satan only frightens his friends, may mean: (1) Satan tries to make believers fear disbelievers, who are his friends; (2) he frightens disbelievers themselves, i.e. he becomes the cause of their fear, for the friends of Satan can never be brave. In the latter case the pronoun "them" in, so fear them not, would refer to the noun الناس (people) in 3:174 above.

22:45.

Important Words:

The particle ل (lam) in the expression لیزدادوا here denotes not purpose but result or consequence: as in the well-known Arabic couplet:

لدو ا للموت و ابنوا للخراب فکلکم یسیر الی تباب

i.e. Bear children that they should die and build houses that they should fall into ruins, for all of you are marching towards destruction. Thus the verse would mean: We grant them respite that they should mend their ways, but the result is that they increase in sin. Such ل (lam) is known as لام عاقبت in Arabic.

The particle ل may, in one sense, also denote cause, as an Arab would say خرجت من البلد لمخافة اشر i.e. I left the town because of the fear of evil. In this sense, the clause would mean, We grant them respite because they have increased in evil, i.e. their increasing in evil has been the cause of Our granting them respite so that they may have an opportunity to mend their ways and reform themselves.

6:55; 16:120; 24:6.

Commentary:

The expression بجھالة (ignorantly) does not mean that the offenders do evil without knowing that it is evil. In fact, every evil deed which a man does is an act of ignorance, born of lack of true knowledge. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "There are some kinds of 'knowledge' which are really 'ignorance' ", i.e. the learning of which is injurious to man (Bihar). So the expression بجھالة (ignorantly) has been added to point to the philosophy of sin and to exhort people to acquire true knowledge with a view to avoiding sin.

The words من قریب (soon after) here mean "before death" which may come at any time and is thus always near. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said: "Allah accepts the repentance of man till the agonies of death" Muslim, ch. on Taubah). This explanation is corroborated by what is said in the next verse (4:19), viz. who continue to do evil until when death faces one of them, he says, I do repent now. This shows that repentance may be accepted of any person, if he sincerely repents before death actually overtakes him.

5:78.

58:23.

5:74.

2:117; 10:69; 17:112; 18:5; 112:4, 5.

Important Words:

کلمته (His word). کلمة has been used in the Quran in different senses:(1) good tiding (e.g. 37:171, 172); (2) warning of coming punishment (e.g. 39:20); (3) a thing or being created without the instrumentality of any physical means, i.e. by the Will of God expressed by saying "Be" (e.g. 3:46-48); (4) a Sign (e.g. 18:110); (5) a message (e.g. 3:65); (6) a design; (e.g.9:40); (7) a word or saying (e.g. 23:101). See also 3:46.

روح (mercy) is derived from راح i.e. it became cool and pleasant; he was brisk, lively, active, prompt or quick. روح means, soul or spirit; the subtle substance in man which is the principle of vitality and of sensation and of voluntary motion; the breath which a man breathes and which pervades the whole body, after the exit of which he ceases to breathe; Divine revelation or inspiration; the Quran; angel; joy and happiness; mercy (Lane).

Commentary:

From the above-mentioned different meanings of روح and کلمة becomes clear that no higher spiritual status can be assigned to Jesus than to the other Prophets, on account of the word روح or کلمة having been used about him in the Quran. These and similar expressions have been used in the Quran about other Prophets also and even about persons who were not Prophets, such as Mary and the children of Adam (see 58:23; 15:30; 32:10; 21:92). It may be noted here that the words روح منه (mercy from Him) do not mean that the روح formed a part of the Divine Being but that it was only a gift of God. The expression منه (from Him) has been used in the Quran in this sense in 45:14.

In fact, the Quran uses these words about Jesus because foul charges were brought against him and his mother, Mary, by the Jews. These words are thus meant to exculpate and exonerate him from those charges and not to deify him. The Quranlends no support whatsoever to the absurd and unfounded view that Jesus was anything higher than a human being. He was human and of the earth, and yet a Messenger of God (e.g. 43:60; 19:31).

The verse refers to the three alleged persons of the Trinity, i.e. the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, and condemns Trinity, declaring Allah alone to be the one true God, and the Messiah and the Holy Spirit as only the servants of God and in no way sharers in Godhead.

Important Words:

قربا (they offered) and قربانا (offering) are both derived from قرب (qaruba) which means, he or it was or became near, either in place or in station or grade or rank. قربه (qarraba-hu) means, he caused or made him to become near; he made him to be a near associate; or he made him an object of favour or honour. قرب لله قربانا means, he offered or presented to God an offering or oblation. Hence قربان means, an offering or oblation; a sacrifice; anything by means of which one seeks nearness to God; a near or particular or favourite associate or companion (Lane).

Commentary:

As sacrifice is at the root of all success, whether individual or national, the Quran here fittingly turns to the subject of sacrifice, the lack of which proved the fall of the followers of Moses. "The two sons of Adam" may be taken in the figurative sense as well, meaning any two individuals from among mankind.

The words, Allah accepts only from the righteous, addressed by Abel to his brother Cain (both sons of Adam) are intended to mean that the latter would gain nothing by slaying the former, except that he would become all the more removed from righteous-ness—a quality essential for the acceptance of an offering.

The concluding words of the verse point to the important truth that in sacrifice mere outward form is nothing. It is only the underlying spirit that makes it acceptable and fruitful. The story is continued in the following verses.

4:167; 13:44; 29:53.

Commentary:

God Himself answers the question which He has put in the beginning of the verse; for the disbelievers did not know how to answer. They could not think that God also could bear witness. The answer has been given by God in order to instruct and teach believers.

Now the question is, how does God bear witness? This verse and the next two mention three ways by which God bears witness to the truth of the Holy Prophet. The first is by means of the Quran. This Quran has been revealed to me, the verse calls upon the Holy Prophet to say, so that with it I may warn you and whomsoever it reaches. These words signify that whosoever opposes the Quran and obstructs it will be visited by Divine punishment. This punishment will constitute God’s testimony to the truth of the Holy Prophet. The second and the third ways by which God bears witness are mentioned in the verses that follow.

9:107.

Commentary:

The verse has two applications. Figuratively it applies to the People of the Book who, by rejecting the Prophet from among their brethren (see the preceding verse), were, as it were, waging war against God. The punishment which the verse prescribes for them finds a fitting illustration in their history. Taken in its apparent sense, the verse lays down the different forms of punishment that may be meted out to those who wage war against innocent Muslims, killing and slaying them and creating disorder in the land.

The object underlying the injunction embodied in the words, their hands and their feet be cut off on alternate sides, is, on the one hand, to disable the culprit from carrying on a war of aggression, and on the other, to leave him fit enough to earn his living by doing some work. The cutting off of the hand and the foot on the same side would leave the victim utterly helpless. The verse also shows that Islam does not hesitate to take extreme measures to uproot an evil when the interests of society or the State demand it. Islam is not a religion of false sentiments but of sound judgement and true reason. See also the next verse.

2:258; 3:69.

Important Words:

راکعون (who worship God alone). See 2:44.

2:220; 5:92.

5:4.

Important Words:

الخمروالمیسر (wine and games of hazard). See note on 2:220.

انصاب والازلام (idols and divining arrows). See note on 5:4.

رجس (abomination) is derived from رجس which means, it was or became unclean or dirty or filthy or disliked or hated; he performed a bad or evil or abominable action. رجس means, it made a sound or noise. رجس means, dirt or filth; or a dirty or filthy thing; anything or any action that is disliked or hated for its uncleanness or filthiness; a sin or crime; an action that leads to punishment; punishment; unbelief and infidelity; suggestion of the devil (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

See 2:220 & 5:4. Almost all the meanings of رجس are applicable here.

Commentary:

After stating that the four things mentioned in the previous verse are all رجس (abomination) in one sense or another, the present verse confines itself to two of the four mentioned things—wine and games of hazard—and gives additional reasons against them. These reasons are, as stated in the verse, four in number and rest on political, social, spiritual and socio-religious grounds, this being hinted in the words "enmity and hatred and keeping back from the remembrance of Allah and from Prayer". The interrogation in the clause, But will you keep back?, embodies a strong admonition not to do the thing, the use of the interrogative form being the most effective form of exhortation. See also 2:220.

Commentary:

The verse signifies that those who are good of heart and are willing to listen will readily accept the truth as the result of preaching. As for those who are potentially dead but are fit for rejuvenation, God will quicken them with a sign and then they will listen and embrace Islam. Thus, it was that when God showed His sign at the Fall of Mecca, the whole of Arabia embraced Islam, and the Word of God was fulfilled.

Important Words:

انـما (surely) is considered to be a compound of ان and ما . It imports restriction of that which it precedes to that which follows it, giving the sense of "only". The Quran says: انما الصدقات للفقراء i.e. the sadaqat (the alms) are meant only for the poor, etc. But the word does not always import restriction but sometimes only corroboration of an affirmation, giving the sense of "verily" or "surely", as in the tradition; انـما الربا فی النسیئة i.e. verily, (one form of) usury is in the delay of payment (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The latter part of the verse may also be rendered thus, "Say, 'Surely, Signs are with Allah, and that (too is with Allah) which will make you know that when it comes, they will not believe.'" In this rendering, the

particle ما rendered in the text as "what" would be taken as a relative pronoun, in the sense of الذی i.e. "that" and not as an interrogative pronoun. According to this rendering, the words "and that (too is with Allah) which will make you know that when it comes, they will not believe" would refer to the punishment of God and the clause would mean that not only are other signs with God, but the sign of punishment is also with Him and that when that sign comes, you will see that it will do them no good.

17:108, 110; 19:59.

6:152.

3:152; 7:72; 22:72.

Commentary:

The verse draws our attention to the purity of Divine teachings by pointing out that all evil things are forbidden by Islam. But at the same time it reminds the reader that there are certain things the evil of which is generally hidden from men. These, too, are forbidden and most of them have been mentioned by the Holy Prophet.

The verse next proceeds to explain what it means by فواحش (foul deeds). It divides them into three classes: (1) اثم (the sin of disobedience or of falling short in the performance of a duty), and بغی (transgression, i.e. exceeding the proper bounds); (2) شرك (associating with God that for which He has sent down no authority). The فواحش (foul deeds) of this class mean idolatrous beliefs and polytheistic ideals. (3) "That you say against Allah what you do not know." By the فواحش of this class are meant the false and evil words we utter. Thus we are enjoined to be pure not only in thought but also in word and deed.

19:56; 20:133.

Important Words:

رجس (uncleanness) is derived from رجس (rajasa) which means, it was or became dirty or filthy or unclean or hated; he did a bad or evil action. رجس (rijsun) means, dirt or filth; a dirty or filthy thing; a thing or action disliked for its filthiness; a sin; an action that leads to punishment; doubt; infidelity; suggestion of the devil (Lane & Aqrab). See also 5:91.

Commentary:

The words "stay in your houses" show that the principal sphere of the activities of a woman is her house—not that she is not allowed to leave its four walls. She may go out as many times as she may require for the performance of a legitimate errand or the satisfaction of a legitimate need. But to move about in a mixed society and take part in all sorts of avocations and professions, shoulder to shoulder with man, and to do so to the neglect and detriment of her special domestic duties as the mistress of the house is not the Islamic conception of ideal womanhood. The Holy Prophet’s wives were particularly required to "stay in their houses" because the dignity of their exalted position as "Mothers of the Faithful" demanded this and also because Muslims often visited them to pay their respects and sought necessary information and guidance from them on all important religious matters.

The commandment seems to apply only to the wives of the Holy Prophet but it equally applies to all Muslim women. It is the Quranic way of address that while it appears to be particularly addressing the Holy Prophet, the address is meant equally for all Muslims. Similarly, a commandment addressed to the wives of the Holy Prophet applies also to all Muslim women.

The expression اھل البیت applies principally and primarily to the Holy Prophet’s wives. This is quite clear from the context and also from vv. 11:74 and 28:13. In its wider sense, however, it includes all members of a family who form one’s household, even one’s children and children’s children. The expression had also been used by the Holy Prophet for some of his select Companions. سلمان منا اھل البیت i.e. "Salman is member of our household" (Saghir), is a well-known saying of the Holy Prophet.

Commentary:

The verse means to say that the kaleidoscopic variety in form, colour, and kind to which reference has been made in the preceding verse does not only exist in flowers, fruits and rocks, but in men, beasts and cattle as well. The words الناس (men), الدواب (beasts) and الانعام(cattle) may also represent men of different capabilities, dispositions and natural aptitudes. The words, "only those of His servants who possess knowledge fear God," further lend weight to the view that these three words stand for three classes of men from among whom only those endowed with right knowledge fear God. Knowledge, here, however, does not necessarily mean spiritual knowledge but also knowledge of the laws of nature. A reverent study of nature and its laws inevitably leads one to realise the great powers of God and consequently makes him hold God in reverential awe.