الۡبَحۡرَیۡنِ

20:54; 78:7.

25:54; 55:20-21.

Commentary:

The argument begun in the preceding verse is here further developed and expanded. For an explanation of the expression "and put a barrier between the two waters" see 25:54.

Important Words:

حقبا (ages) is the plural of حقب (huqbun) which is derived from حقب (haqiba). They say حقب المطر i.e. the rain was delayed. حقب الامر means, the affair became marred or impeded. حقب (huqbun) means, time; indefinite time; long time; an age; a year or years; seventy years; eighty years or more (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).

Commentary:

With this verse begins the very important subject of the اسراء (Spiritual Night Journey) of Moses. As stated above, the followers of Jesus Christ achieved great material power and prosperity and in their chequered career left their imprint twice on world’s history. This double prosperity of Christian nations has been likened to "two gardens" in v. 33 above. The first of these two periods began with the conversion to Christianity of the Roman Emperor Constantine, when it became the religion of the State, and continued to the birth of the Holy Prophet of Islam. The second and more important of these two periods is represented by the present age when Christian nations of the west have acquired so much power and prestige that the nations of Asia and Africa have had to dance attendance upon them like serfs and slaves. Between these "two gardens" flowed a "stream" (v. 34). These "two gardens", as stated above, represent the two periods of Christian prosperity and progress. The "stream" denotes the birth and rise to power of the Prophet of Islam. He and his followers made their mark in human history during the interval between these two periods.

Now in order to provide a historical setting to the whole account and complete the connected whole, a somewhat detailed description of the Isra’ or the Spiritual Journey of Moses has been given in the present and following few verses. Moses had foretold the advent of a Prophet like unto him (Deut. 18:18). This prophecy has been referred to in the Quran in 73:16. By putting the account of Moses’ Spiritual Journey between that of the Dwellers of the Cave and of Dhul-Qarnain—the two periods representing Christian progress and advance—the Quran has pointed to the fact that the Prophet referred to in Moses’ prophecy, who was also to be his counterpart, was to appear during the interval between these two periods. Thus, these incidents have been mentioned in their historical order.

Very fantastic stories have gained currency about the nature and purpose of the Isra’ or Spiritual Journey of Moses and the circumstances under which it took place. Commentators of the Quran differ as to the name and status of "the servant of God" whom Moses sought and met and about "the young man" who was with him in his "journey". Failing to comprehend the spiritual aspect of this seemingly physical journey most of them have indulged only in conjectures and guesses and consequently have grievously erred. The fact is that mention was made of the Isra’ or Spiritual Journey or as literally interpreted, the Migration of the Holy Prophet to Medina in v. 2 of the present Surah. Light was also thrown on the great results that were to ensue from this Migration and the wonderful success that Muslims were to achieve after it. They were also warned of the great dangers that lay in their way and of the unrelenting opposition of Jews and Christians, particularly of the grievous blows that Islam as a political force was to receive at the hands of the latter. The Isra’ of Moses has only been mentioned to lend support to the prophecies of ultimate success of Islam that were implied in the Isra’ of the Holy Prophet and also to make it clear beyond doubt that the seemingly dazzling power and prosperity of Christian nations will endure for a limited time and the cause of Islam will eventually triumph.

Similarly, the Isra’ of Moses was, like the Isra’ of the Holy Prophet, no physical journey but a spiritual experience by means of which Moses was transported from this body of flesh and blood to a spiritual tabernacle. The Bible and the Quran both support this contention. Some of the arguments advanced in its support are as follows:

(1) The Bible which is more or less a reliable record of Moses’ life has omitted all mention of this most unusual and wonderful incident and has failed even to make a passing reference to it.

(2) Before Moses was made a Prophet, he is known to have undertaken only one journey and that was to Midian. The Bible and the Quran have both referred to this journey, the latter at several places. The Bible and the Quran also both agree that Moses undertook this journey alone, while in the journey referred to in the present and the following verses of the Quran he is described as having been accompanied by "his companion."

(3) Even after he was made Prophet, Moses undertook no such journey. The Bible embodies a somewhat detailed record of Moses’ life but it contains no account of any such journey and even makes no reference to it.

(4) It is well known that after Moses had been away on Mount Tur for a few days his people took a calf for worship. When his absence from them for only forty days on Mount Tur caused such great spiritual havoc among them, which has been described in the Bible in detail, the depths of spiritual chaos to which these people of weak faith and fickle minds should have sunk in Moses’ absence on a journey of a much longer duration, as evidently the journey referred to in these verses was, can easily be imagined. The Bible could not have failed to mention it. But the Bible alludes to no such happening. Moreover, it would have cast a serious reflection on Moses’ wisdom and intelligence if, having had such a terrible experience once, he should have undertaken another journey which would have kept him away from his people for a much longer period.

(5) In his absence on Mount Tur for only forty days Moses appointed Aaron his vicegerent for his people. But apart from this solitary instance Moses is not known ever to have appointed anybody his vicegerent or Khalifah in his absence on any journey. The Bible contains no reference to any such appointment. It is inconceivable that if Moses had gone on such a long journey as mentioned in these verses he would have failed to appoint a Khalifah in his absence.

(6) It is against the established practice of all the Prophets of God to remain separated from their people for a long time. Some of them are known to have gone on short journeys but those were missionary expeditions and their scope did not extend beyond their own peoples. Jesus certainly did go to Kashmir after the Crucifixion but he left one section of his people in Palestine to live among another and a larger section in Kashmir. But Moses’ journey referred to above was not a journey undertaken with any missionary purpose nor was it confined to his own people. He left his people in search of a man who was more learned than himself.

(7) The expression مجمع البحرین (junction of two seas) occurring in the verse under comment also points to the fact that the Isra’ of Moses was a spiritual journey because there is no place in the world which is known by this name. The expression can have only one significance i.e. "the junction of two seas." Such junctions nearest to the place where Moses lived after he had left Egypt are Bab ul-Mandab which unites the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean, the Straits of Dardanelles which joins the Mediterranean Sea with the Sea of Marmora and Al-Bahrain where the waters of the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean meet. Of all these places the Straits of Dardanelles alone can possibly be the point where such a meeting could have taken place because on its way lies Canaan which was the destination of Moses but which he could not reach in his life-time. All these three points were about one thousand miles distant from Moses’ place of living and considering the absence of good means of communication and transport in those days it would have taken him about a year’s time to cover such a long distance and Moses could not afford to remain absent from his people for such a long time without seriously jeopardising their spiritual well-being.

From this historical evidence it can be safely inferred without fear of contradiction that Moses’ Journey referred to in these verses was a spiritual journey undertaken with a spiritual body for a spiritual purpose.

Besides this external evidence there is also internal evidence in the Quran which clearly shows that this journey was no physical event but a spiritual experience of Moses.

(a) The "learned man" made a big hole in the boat to save it from being forcibly seized by the king. Now a quite natural question arises here, viz. was the boat navigable after it was damaged or was it not? If it was, why did not the king seize it; if it was not, why did it not sink? In this physical world no boat is ever known to have remained floating after a big hole had been made in its bottom. In the world of visions, however, such things are possible.

(b) The "slaying of the young boy" also shows that this incident happened in a vision because in this world of flesh and bones no sensible person, much less a Prophet of God, would take the life of another person without legitimate cause.

(c) The incident of the "repairing of the wall" also lends support to the above conclusion. How could a great Prophet of God and a most noble and broad-minded person like Moses have found fault with his learned companion for not demanding payment from two poor orphan boys for repairing their wall because the people of their town had refused to entertain him and his companion? What had the two orphan boys done to deserve Moses’ displeasure? It was the people of the town and not they who had refused to entertain them as their guests. What earthly connection was there between these two things? In this material world no sensible person could indulge in such talk, much less a great Prophet of God. Such things can happen only in visions and dreams.

(d) Ibn ‘Abbas is reported to have said that the word کنز (treasure) occurring in v. 83 below means "a treasure of knowledge". This shows that this word has been used in this verse in its metaphorical sense and needs to be interpreted and explained. Similarly, the repairing of the wall and the demanding of hospitality were not physical acts. Thus the whole journey was only a spiritual experience.

In short, even a casual and cursory glance over the relevant verses leaves no doubt about the fact that the whole affair was nothing more than a vision. It is simply inconceivable that a great Prophet of God like Moses should have undertaken a long and arduous journey in search of a "man of God" to learn from him how to break a hole in a boat or kill a young man or to repair a wall and demand no remuneration for it. Even an illiterate rustic would consider it below his dignity to do such a foolish thing, much less a Prophet of God.

Moreover, the Holy Prophet is reported to have said ودونا ان موسی کان صبر حتی یقص اللّٰه علینا من خبر ھما i.e. would that Moses had kept silent, so that God would have revealed to us many more secrets of the future (Bukhari, Kitabut-Tafsir). This saying of the Holy Prophet shows that the unusual acts which this "man of God" is stated to have performed were great secrets of the future which were communicated to Moses in his Vision in metaphorical language. If these acts are understood to have literally taken place, then they could not have excited the Holy Prophet’s curiosity and he could not possibly have wished Moses to have kept silent in order to learn more about similar acts. According to Mawardi, the person whom Moses had gone to see was no human being but an angel (Kathir).

All these facts taken together constitute very solid and weighty evidence, incapable of being doubted or contradicted, that the story of the journey of Moses is but a vision which needs to be interpreted and explained to understand its reality and significance.

The words "his young companion" may refer to Joshua, the son of Nun, but they apply more fittingly to Jesus. Jesus was the young companion of Moses i.e. he was the last great Prophet of the Mosaic Dispensation who came not to destroy but to fulfil the Law and the Prophets (Matt. 5:17).

The words, I will not stop until I reach the junction of the two seas, show that Moses’ young companion joined him towards the end of his journey. Moses did not seem to have taken the young man with him from the very outset of his journey. The words do not represent him as having started on his journey but only as pursuing it with a young companion. Strictly speaking these words can only be spoken by one who is about to reach his destination.

The expression مجمع البحرین i.e. junction of two seas, denotes the time when the Mosaic Dispensation was to have come to an end and the Islamic Dispensation to have commenced. According to Ta‘tirul-Anam بحر (sea), when seen in a vision, signifies a powerful, just and kind king. It also signifies praise and glorification of God. In the first sense of the word, بحر (sea) the expression مجمع البحرین would mean the meeting place of two powerful, just and kind kings i.e. Moses and the Holy Prophet Muhammad, and according to the second signification, the expression denotes the junction of the two seas of God’s glorification which means two religious Dispensations—Mosaic and Islamic.

The words, Or I will journey on for ages, signify that the Mosaic Dispensation would remain in force for many centuries. The period from the time of Moses to the advent of the Holy Prophet when the Mosaic Dispensation came to an end extends over 2000 years.

35:13; 55:20, 21.

Important Words:

مرج (caused to flow) means, he mixed two things together. مرج الشیء بالشیء means, he mixed one thing with another. مرج الدابةmeans, he sent a beast to pasture wherever it would. They say مرج لسانه فی اعراض الناس i.e. he let go his tongue in abusing people and backbiting them. مرج البحرین means, He (God) has mixed the two seas; He has let them flow freely (Lane & Aqrab).

فرات (sweet) is derived from فرت (faruta). They say فرت الماء i.e. the water was or became sweet or very sweet. فرات applied to water means sweet, very sweet or of the sweetest kind that which subdues thirst by its excessive sweetness (Lane & Aqrab).

أجاج (bitter) is derived from أج . They say أجت النار i.e. the fire burned or burned brightly or fiercely. أج الماء means, the water was or became saltish or bitter. أجاج means, anything burning to the mouth whether saltish bitter or hot. ماء أجاج means, water that burns by its saltishness; or salt water or very bitter water like the water of the sea, or water of which no use is made for drinking or for watering seed-product or other purposes; or very hot water (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat). See also 21:97.

برزخ (partition) is a thing that intervenes between any two things; a bar; an obstruction; or a thing that separates two things i.e. a partition (Lane). See also 23:101.

Commentary:

Taking "two waters" in the verse to represent the true religion and the false one, the verse signifies that both Islam, the true religion, and other corrupted faiths will continue to exist side by side, the former yielding sweet fruit and slaking the thirst of the spiritual wayfarers and the latter barren and bitter, incapable of producing any good results.

The "two waters" may also signify the water of the sea and that of the river. The former is saltish and bitter to taste while the latter is drinkable and sweet. When the sweet water of the river flows into the sea and becomes mixed with its saltish water, it also becomes bitter. As long as these two waters keep themselves separate, they have different tastes. Similarly, when the teaching of a true religion becomes mixed up with the teachings of false religions, it loses its sweetness and usefulness. But God has so ordained that in spite of its close proximity to false religions Islam will never lose its sweet taste as God has taken upon Himself to protect and guard it (15:10). There is an unbridgeable barrier between the two which keeps them apart. Or the word بحر meaning both river and sea, the verse may signify that under the system instituted by God rivers are fed by rain and snow and their water is always fresh, and though they fall into the sea, sea water is always saltish and bitter. This is in effect an illustration of Divine guidance, which when it is constantly reinforced by fresh revelation remains fresh, sweet and life-giving, but when it becomes stale, it loses all value.

25:54; 27:62; 35:13.

Commentary:

See next verse.