رُّسُلُ

17:56.

4:165.

4:159;

2:88.

4:56; 10:41.

Important Words:

اقتتلوا and اقتتل (fought with one another) are derived from قتل i.e. he killed. اقتتلوا means, they fought with, and attempted to kill, one another (Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse supplies an answer to an implied question that naturally arises from the preceding verse. The Prophets that had been raised previous to Islam were sent to particular peoples and their missions were confined to specified periods, but the Holy Prophet was sent to all nations and for all times. Hence it may be argued that the case of David or similar other Leaders who had to deal with certain hostile tribes could not apply to him. God answers this implied question by saying that the previous Prophets also were not all alike, for some of them were greater in rank and had to perform more difficult tasks than others. David, for instance, whose name has just been mentioned as the final link in the chain of the Israelite Prophets and kings who had to contend with their enemies, performed a much greater work than many of his predecessors. So the final victory promised to the Holy Prophet should not appear doubtful in the eyes of the people.

The clause, among them there are those to whom Allah spoke and some of them He exalted by degrees of rank, does not mean that there are some Prophets to whom Allah does not speak or that among them there are those who are not raised in rank. The expression has been used to point out that there are two kinds of Prophets: (1) those who bring a new Law, i.e. those who receive revelation bearing new and direct commandments from God; and (2) those who are not Lawgivers, i.e. those whose prophethood consists only in the loftiness of their spiritual rank. By the word "speaking" therefore is here meant a special kind of speaking, i.e. a revelation which brings a new Law. Thus those Messengers who are represented here as having been "spoken to" by God are the Law-giving Prophets, while those who are spoken of here as having been simply raised in rank are those Messengers of God who are raised to the rank of Prophets without being given any new Law. Of Moses who was a Law-giving Prophet the Quran says: And Allah conversed with Moses particularly and freely (4:165). That there are two kinds of Prophets, (1) مکلم (to whom God speaks particularly), i.e. Lawgivers, and (2) غیر مکلم (to whom God does not speak in that particular manner), i.e. Non-Lawgivers; is also clear from the sayings of the Holy Prophet. For instance, when asked by Abu Dharr whether Adam was a Prophet, the Holy Prophet is reported to have answered, "Yes, he was a مکلم (Mukallam) Prophet" (Musnad). The addition of the word Mukallam to the word Prophet clearly shows that Prophets are of two classes, Mukallam (Lawgivers) and Ghair Mukallam (Non-Lawgivers). Adam was a Lawgiver because it was he who brought the elementary Law.

The Arabic clause منھم من کلم الله و رفع بعضھم درجات may also be rendered as, "Among them there is he to whom Allah spoke and one of them He exalted by degrees of rank." In this case the clause would signify that by the Prophet to whom Allah spoke is meant Moses and by the Prophet whom He exalted by degrees of rank is meant the Holy Prophet to whom God did not only speak, as He speaks to all Prophets, but whom He raised above all others by so many degrees.

The clause, And We gave Jesus, son of Mary, clear proofs, does not mean that other Prophets were not granted such proofs. As a matter of fact, all Prophets are given clear proofs and all are strengthened with the Spirit of Holiness; but here God makes particular mention of Jesus in order to refute the objections of the Jews who declared that he had shown no Sign and that he was possessed with an Evil Spirit (Luke 11:15, 16). The Quran declares that Jesus was not an impostor, as the Jews believe, but a true Prophet, and that he was not possessed with the Devil but, like all other holy men, was aided with the Spirit of Holiness. In this connection see also note on 2:88.

The Arabic clause translated as, if Allah had so willed, those that came after them would not have fought with one another, does not mean, as some may wrongly think, that God is the originator of differences. The expression like لوشاء according to the Quranic idiom, does not simply mean "if Allah had willed" but "if Allah had acted according to His will", i.e. if He had enforced His will. In fact, Allah has, in His infinite wisdom, made man free to choose or reject a thing as he likes. That being so, differences are sure to arise among men. But God does not remain a placid on-looker; for whenever differences become vast and acute, He raises a new Reformer. This is why when discord and disagreements began to rend the ranks of the followers of the previous Prophets, God, in accordance with His old law, raised the Holy Prophet of Islam.

The words, Allah does what He desires, further indicate that the infinite wisdom of God demanded that man should be made a free agent. So God does not compel anyone to adopt this course or that. He has given man the power to choose the good or the evil course as he may like and God rewards him accordingly; He does not force anyone to accept the truth; nor should the Faithful.

5:76.

2:144, 218; 5:55; 47:39.

Commentary:

As already mentioned (3:122), the false report was spread at Uhud that the Holy Prophet was killed. The verse refers to this incident and purports to say that although the report about the death of the Prophet was untrue, yet even if it had been true, that should not have made the Faithful waver in their faith. Muhammad was only a Prophet; and as other Prophets before him had died, so would he. But the God of Islam ever lives.

It is also on record that when, seven years later, the Holy Prophet died, ‘Umar stood up in the Mosque at Medina with a drawn sword in his hand, and said, "Whoever will say that the Prophet of God is dead, I will cut off his head. He is not dead, but has gone to his Lord, (i.e. he has ascended to heaven) even as Moses had gone to his Lord, and he would come back and punish the hypocrites." At this stage, Abu Bakr, who happened to be away at the time of the Prophet’s death, hurriedly came back, went straight into the Prophet’s chamber and, seeing that he was really dead, kissed his forehead, saying, "Sweet art thou in death as thou wert in life, and surely God will not bring on thee two deaths." Then he came out, strong and firm, asked ‘Umar to sit down and, addressing the Companions, who were gathered in the Mosque, recited to them this very verse, i.e. Muhammad is only a Messenger; verily all Messengers have passed away before him; if then he die or be slain, will you turn back on your heels? meaning, that in the circumstances it was no wonder that the Holy Prophet also had passed away. Hearing this timely recital, ‘Umar, and all others, were convinced of the death of the Holy Prophet and were overpowered with grief. Thus, the verse incidentally proves that the Prophets that lived before the Holy Prophet had all died; for if any of them had been alive, the verse could not have been quoted as proof of the Holy Prophet’s death.

The verse also negates the idea that any Prophet has risen to heaven; for it was used to falsify ‘Umar’s contention to the effect that the Holy Prophet was not dead but had risen to heaven. The verse thus proves, without a shadow of doubt, that Jesus too, who was one of the Prophets that had appeared before the Holy Prophet, is not physically alive in the heavens, as some present-day Muslims, following the Christian belief, erroneously think. He is certainly dead, as proved by this verse and the consensus of the Companions’ opinion on the occasion of the death of the Holy Prophet.

In fact, religion does not depend on any personality. It belongs to God alone. That is why the Quran says that if the Holy Prophet dies or is killed, it will be no ground for Muslims to turn away from Islam; for the Prophet is only a Messenger and the religion is God’s. Elsewhere, however, the Quran clearly says: And Allah will protect thee from men(5:68). These two verses are not at variance with each other. What the Quran intends to emphasize in the verse is the fundamental truth of Islamic teachings. Muslims had seen how pure and true these teachings were. Their truth was evident and they could not have become false even if the Holy Prophet had been slain. For instance, the fundamental teaching of Islam is the Unity of God. Now, this truth could not become an untruth if the Prophet were killed. But apart from this announcement in principle, the Prophet could not be killed, for God had definitely promised to protect him.

It should also be remembered that immunity from being murdered is not given in the Quran as a criterion of a Prophet’s truth. People are required to accept a Prophet in his lifetime, and, therefore, they must have proofs of his truth in his lifetime, so that, by witnessing them, they may believe in him. They cannot wait till the time of his death in order to know whether he is a true or a false claimant.

Once a Prophet has furnished clear proofs of his truth in his lifetime, his claim is established and nothing can undo those proofs. Only if a Prophet were murdered before he had been able to give any proof of his truth could we conclude that he had proved a failure and was not a true claimant. But such a thing has never happened.

The enemy rejoiced when the report went round that the Prophet had been slain, but that supposed death of the Prophet turned out to be the veritable "life" of Islam. It fulfilled a great purpose. It prepared Muslims for the actual passing of the Holy Prophet. If this event had not occurred, the death of the Holy Prophet would have proved an unbearable trial for Muslims. In fact, this painful experience brought in disguise many blessings for Islam. At the Battle of Uhud, it brought to light the unshakable faith of the believers; at the time of his death it served to save Islam from going to pieces; and now that Islam is to all appearances dead, it is serving as a means of breathing new life into it, by proving that Jesus, whom Christians have deified, is dead, like all other Prophets that lived before Islam.

21:9.

Important Words:

یؤفکون (they are turned away) is derived from افك (afaka). They say افکه i.e. he changed his or its state or condition or manner of being; he turned him or it away or back from a thing; he turned him away or back by lying; he changed or perverted his judgement or opinion; or he deceived or beguiled him. They say افك الرجل عن الخیر i.e. the man was turned away or turned back from good by deceit or guile. افك (afaka) or افك (affaka) also means, he told a lie or uttered a falsehood which, in essence, is the same as changing the state of a thing (Lane).

Commentary:

The verse advances a number of arguments against the alleged divinity of Jesus. Firstly, it points out that Jesus was no better than other Messengers of God in any way. He enjoyed no higher status. He showed no miracles the like of which were not shown by other Prophets. In fact, the greatest miracle ascribed to him by his followers is that of the alleged raising of the dead. But the Bible ascribes similar miracles to other Prophets also (see 2 Kings 4:16-35; 13:21).

The second argument mentioned by the verse against his alleged divinity is that he was born of a woman. Being born of a human being, he could not be divine. Moreover, a child is known to inherit some of the prominent traits of the physical and moral make-up of its parent. Jesus, being born of a woman must have inherited her nature and her qualities and so he could not be God.

Again, being human, he was, like other human beings, subject to the natural laws of hunger and of satisfying it by taking food and he was subject also to the natural phenomena that ensue.

By describing the mother of Jesus as "a truthful woman", the Quran has incidentally refuted the Jewish allegations concerning the birth of Jesus.

2:215.

Important Words:

کذبوا (they had been told a lie) is the passive plural from کذب (kadhaba) which means, he lied; or he uttered a falsehood; or he said what was untrue whether intentionally or unintentionally; he found his hopes to be false or vain. کذبه الحدیث means, he gave him a false account of the thing and said what was untrue. They say کذب الرأی i.e. he imagined the thing contrary to its real state. An Arab would say کذبتك عینك i.e. thine eye showed thee that which had no reality i.e. thou wast deceived in the vision. They say کذبته نفسه i.e. his soul made him desire things and conceive hopes that did not come to pass. کذب الرجل(kudhiba) means, the man was told a lie or a falsehood or an untruth (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

Like the preceding verse, the verse under comment speaks of both the Prophets and their opponents. The first sentence speaks of the Prophets of God, and the second of their enemies. The verse purports to say that the enemies of Prophets so continue to increase in wickedness and opposition to them that a stage is reached when the Prophets begin to think that those who were destined to believe had already believed and they despair of the rest. Their opponents, on the other hand, owing to the delay in the coming of Divine punishment, begin to feel secure in the thought that they will never be visited with any punishment and that the prophecies of the Prophets about their own final success and about the discomfiture of their enemies were so many pieces of falsehood. When matters come to such a pass, God’s help comes to the Prophets and the leaders of disbelief are destroyed.

This is exactly what happens at the advent of every Prophet. The hour of final reckoning is delayed so long that disbelievers begin to have a false sense of security. Then God comes to the succour of His Prophets and makes their cause prevail.

The words, when the Messengers despaired, cannot be taken to mean that the Prophet despair of the help of God. This inference is obviously wrong and is belied by v. 88 of this very Surah wherein we have, none despairs of Allah’s mercy save the unbelieving people. As a matter of fact, Prophets never despair of God’s help. They only sometimes despair of their people believing in them, and this happens when the latter continue turning a deaf ear to their preaching.

Similarly, the words, they thought that they had been told a lie, do not mean that the Prophets thought so. The words only mean that their enemies thought so. The Prophets cannot entertain any doubt about the truth of their prophecies and of the promises of ultimate success made to them by God. Their faith in God is invincible; it stands on the firm rock of certitude. The pronoun "they" thus refers, not to the Prophets, but to their opponents mentioned in the previous verse. According to Arabic idiom it is allowable to use in the same sentence pronouns referring to different antecedents when the nouns to which they refer are clear from the context. But if the pronoun "they" be taken to refer to the Prophets, the sentence, they thought that they had been told a lie, would mean that wishful thinking and overconfidence in the help of God had made the Prophets interpret the Word of God containing promises of success in such a way as to believe in the very early triumph of their cause which, however, was not so ordained by God. Thus their own minds, as it were, lied to them or held out to them false hopes, by placing on the Word of God an interpretation which it did not bear.

The words, they thought that they had been told a lie, may also mean that the hopes that the Prophets had entertained about the repentance of their opponents turned out to be false. When at a certain stage the hostility of their opponents temporarily slackened, the Prophets began to entertain the hope that they would repent of their past misdeeds and would accept the truth, but that hope turned out to be a delusion. Taken in this sense, these words also serve as an explanation of the words "the Messengers despaired." See the different meanings of the word کذبوا under Important Words.

7:33.

Commentary:

The fact that there exists a deep and subtle connection between the food that a person eats and his actions good or bad has now begun to be increasingly recognized by medical science. But Islam laid down as far back as 1400 years directions and instructions relating to food which possess great moral significance. While it is admitted that the properties of vegetables and mineral foods have their effect upon man, there is no reason why a man should not be affected by peculiar habits of an animal whose flesh he frequently eats. It has been established that the eating of the flesh of certain animals encourages unnatural vice and sexual perversions. Further research in this direction will confirm the principle on which Islamic restrictions and regulations concerning food are based. The basic principle laid down by Islam is that as man must develop all his natural instincts and faculties, therefore he should partake of all kinds of food, except those that are likely to do him physical, moral or spiritual harm. The use of pure and good food produces healthy mental condition which in turn produces good and righteous actions. It is to this great scientific truth that the words "and do good deeds" point, and thus by recognizing that food exerts a powerful influence on man’s morals Islam has subjected it to certain limits and conditions.

The word الرسل (Messengers) includes their followers also. The commandments given to the Messengers and Prophets of God are meant for their followers also.

2:84; 12:41; 17:24.

Commentary:

The verse means to say that the Prophets of God used all possible means to make their people accept the Divine Message and also warned them of Divine punishment if they rejected it.

Commentary:

The meaning is: When prophecies concerning the second advent of various Messengers will be fulfilled with the appearance in the world of a great heavenly Reformer who will come in the power and spirit of such Messengers, clad, as it were, in the mantles of all of them.