عَلَی

10:61; 40:62.

Commentary:

To the demand for punishment made by disbelievers and mentioned in v. 72 above, the present and the preceding verse constitute a befitting answer. The preceding verse purported to say that the disbelievers will soon receive Divine punishment but it will not be a devastating and all-destructive punishment, but will only constitute a part of what they demanded because God is gracious to mankind i.e. in deference to the Holy Prophet his people will be shown mercy and like the disbelievers of the former Prophets they will not get a destructive punishment.

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.

11:124; 25:59; 26:218; 33:49.

2:154; 7:129.

4:143; 9:54.

Important Words:

صبر (patience) means: (1) to steadily adhere to what reason and law command; (2) to restrain oneself from what reason and law forbid; and (3) to restrain oneself from manifesting grief, agitation and impatience, the word being the contrary of جزعi.e. manifestation of grief and agitation (Mufradat).

خاشعین (the humble) is the plural of خاشع which is derived from خشع which means, he became lowly, humble or submissive; he exercised restraint over himself; he confided in God only, throwing himself completely at His mercy (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lisan). The verse that follows explains what God here means by the word خاشعین.

Commentary:

This verse along with the one that follows may be taken to be addressed either to the Jews or to the Muslims. In the former case, it constitutes a continuation of the address to the Israelites, meaning that the Israelites should not be hasty in rejecting the Holy Prophet but should seek to find out the truth with patience and prayer. The verse, however, ends with an expression of the fear that, as seeking to find out the truth in the aforesaid manner is difficult, the Jews perhaps will not resort to the method which only the humble adopt. Or it may be taken to be addressed to Muslims. When the Quran recounted so many hostile activities of Jews against Muslims, it was natural that the weak-minded people among the latter should begin to entertain fear of the Jews. So, as necessitated by the psychological effect of the verses on the listeners, the Quran here turns to the Muslims and gives them a message of hope and encouragement. If Muslims acted with صبر and الصلوة (patience and prayer), they need have no fear. In other words, if they abstain from evils, and practise virtue and be steadfast and observe patience and constantly pray to God for help, He will certainly send them His help, and they will conquer all opposition.

The pronoun in the words, this indeed is hard except for the humble in spirit, refers either to الصلوة or to استعانة derived from the word استعینواmeaning, that the act of seeking God’s help through صبر and الصلوة is not an easy affair. It requires not only a righteous spirit but also one of complete restraint and trust.

See 2:41.

2:123; 3:34; 5:21; 6:87; 7:141; 45:17.

Commentary:

This verse is clearly addressed to the Jews. God here introduces the previous subject with a repetition of the words, O children of Israel, remember My favours, occurring in verse 41 above. But the words are not truly a repetition; for they are followed by others which do not form part of verse 41. Thus the verse under comment serves to introduce a new point. In the earlier verse the reference in the word "favours" is to the covenant between God and the Jews, whereas the reference in the verse under comment is to the fact that God exalted the Israelites above other peoples.

In the verse under comment the Israelites are reminded that God had fulfilled His promise to them, but as they had, on their part, failed to fulfil their covenant, He had withheld from them the blessing which He had been conferring on them before. The Promised Prophet from among their brethren had come and God’s covenant had been transferred to a new people. So they had no ground for complaint.

The words, I exalted you above all peoples, do not mean that the Israelites are superior to all peoples who have ever dwelt or will ever dwell on this planet. Such a meaning is inconsistent with other passages of the Quran. For instance, in 3:34 it is said: Allah did choose Adam and Noah and the family of Abraham and the family of Imran above all peoples. As there can be only one people who can have superiority over all other peoples in the true sense of the term, evidently the word عالمین (peoples) here signifies peoples of that age only.

Where the Quran desires to convey the idea of real superiority over all nations, it uses other expressions. For instance, the Quran addresses the Muslims in the words: You are the best people raised for the good of mankind (3:111). Here the Muslims are definitely spoken of as the best nation that has ever been brought forth for the good of the world.

Commentary:

When the degradation and humiliation of the Israelites in Egypt reached its nadir and the cup of iniquities of Pharaoh and his people became full to the brim and God in His infallible wisdom decreed that the oppressors should be punished and those held in bondage be emancipated, He raised Moses. Such has always been God’s practice that He raises a Prophet to lead a down-trodden people to honour and glory and through his influence and under his lead the erstwhile suppressed and exploited people become the leaders and teachers of men. This phenomenon which took place in the time of every Divine Messenger witnessed its fullest and finest manifestation during the ministry of the Holy Prophet of Islam.

The words "to make them inheritors", refer to the Israelites becoming heirs to that 'land of promise'—Canaan—which, like Egypt, "flowed with milk and honey" and which God had "ordained for them" (5:22).

7:163.

Important Words:

رجز (a punishment) means: (1) filth; (2) punishment; (3) idol-worship (4) iniquity or sin (Aqrab).

من السماء (from heaven). For سماء see note on 2:20. As سماء means a "height" or "anything that is high above us", therefore the expression من السماء would mean "from on high" or "from God", implying that the punishment meted out to the Israelites was not brought about through earthly means but, as it were, descended from above.

Commentary:

This verse is a continuation of the previous one. God commanded the Israelites to behave submissively and to pray to Him for the forgiveness of their sins, but they, mischievous and arrogant as ever, disobeyed the injunctions given to them and changed the words of prayer taught by God, whereupon He chastised them with a punishment that was not of this earth, i.e. He visited them with a pestilence or plague that destroyed a number of them. Or the expression رجزا من السماء may mean that their disobedience recoiled on their own souls in the sense of moral degradation and filthiness of heart and mind.

The question of the word which the Israelites used in place of the one taught to them is immaterial. According to some, they used the word حبة or حنطة i.e. "give us corn to eat" instead of حطة i.e. "remove our sins" (Bukhari & Jarir). The words sound alike and afforded a playful opportunity to the mischief-minded among the Israelites. But as already said, the word substituted is not material. What matters is that they, i.e. many of them as the Quran hints, disobeyed the Lord and made religion a plaything. Hence the punishment.

20:41; 26:20.

Important Words:

وکزہ (struck him with his fist) means, he struck or beat him; he beat or struck him with his fist; he pushed or impelled or repelled him; he goaded him (Lane).

Commentary:

Being of a very noble nature and having been inspired by high ideals, Moses was always ready to help weak and oppressed people and so when a poor and weak Israelite sought his help against an arrogant and cruel Egyptian, he at once went to his rescue.

The expression, "this is of Satan’s doing," according to Arabic idiom means that some evil thing has happened, i.e. "Satan had caused an Egyptian and an Israelite to fight and I had to come to the assistance of the oppressed Israelite which resulted in an evil thing i.e. the death of a person." Or the words might have been addressed to the dead Egyptian meaning, "this is the outcome of your satanic deed," i.e. "your death is the result of your own wickedness and transgression." The fact that Moses used no lethal weapon and only repelled the Egyptian or at best struck him with his fist shows that the latter’s death was accidental. Clearly there was no intention on Moses’ part to cause it.

The Quran has not mentioned the wicked deed of the Egyptian to which Moses refers in this verse but from Jewish Encyclopedia we know that the said Egyptian had forced an Israelite woman to commit adultery with him and that was indeed a devilish deed. It apparently led to the quarrel referred to in the verse and ultimately to Moses’ interference and the death of the Egyptian (Jew. Enc. under "Moses").

26:30.

40:37.

Commentary:

The verse is susceptible of two interpretations: (1) The Israelites were already working as labourers at the kilns. Pharaoh alludes to this ignoble condition of theirs and seems derisively to say to Haman: "These people do not appear to have sufficient work to do. Having more than enough leisure they have begun to dream of prophethood. They must be put to hard labour; then will they come to their senses and give up having false illusions about God and prophethood." (2) The Egyptians were well-versed in astronomy. They built high observatories for observing the movements of the stars. So Pharaoh jeeringly asked Haman to build for him a lofty observatory so that he might have a peep at the God of Moses. The verse may also imply a reference to an ancient belief of the Egyptians that heavenly spirits descended upon lofty places and therefore in order to achieve spiritual perfection they constructed high buildings.

3:25; 5:19.

54:44.

Important Words:

النار (the Fire) means fire both as a source of light and of heat, the latter aspect being more dominant. Another word derived from the same root is نور meaning light, which is used without reference to the element of heat. The word النار (the Fire) has come to be used about "Hell", the punishment of which will consist of fire (Aqrab). It is significant that whereas the blessings of Heaven have been metaphorically spoken of as "streams of water", the punishment of Hell has been called "fire".

Commentary:

After recounting some malpractices of the Jews, the Quran proceeds to explain the root cause of their arrogance and hard-heartedness. These evil practices of the Jews, the Quran points out, are due to the wrong notion that they were immune from punishment (Jew. Enc. under Gehenna), or if they will at all be punished, the punishment will be very slight. It is recorded that at the time of the Holy Prophet, a section of the Jews thought that the punishment of the Jews would not last more than forty days (Jarir, under 2:81). Others regarded even this as too long, and reduced it to seven days (Jarir, ibid). As for modern Jews, Sale says: "It is a received opinion among the Jews at present, that no person (from among the Jews), be he ever so wicked, or of whatever sect, shall remain in Hell above eleven months or at most a year, except Dathan and Abiram and atheists (from among the Jews) who will be tormented there to all eternity" (Wherry, i. 318).

The concluding portion of the verse, i.e. have you taken a promise from Allah…? has been added to point out that the matter of salvation does not rest on the wish of a person or people but only on the grace and mercy of Allah Who has prescribed a law for it. This law the Quran proceeds to explain in the following two verses.

2:42, 92, 98, 102; 3:82; 4:48; 35:32; 46:13.

2:147.

Important Words:

یستفتحون (they prayed for victory) is derived from فتح meaning (1) he opened a thing, or he disclosed a thing; (2) he conquered or gained victory over. The word یستفتحون would, therefore, have two meanings: (1) they disclose; and (2) they ask or pray for victory (Aqrab).

Commentary:

According to the first meaning of یستفتحون the verse would signify that Jews used to disclose to the pagan Arabs the fact that there was foretold in their Scriptures the appearance of a Prophet who would spread the truth all over the world. But when that Prophet actually appeared, even those of them who had seen the signs of God fulfilled in his person turned away from him.

Taking the second meaning of the word, the verse would signify that before the advent of the Holy Prophet, the Jews used to pray fervently to God to raise a Prophet who would cause the true faith to triumph over the false ones (Hisham, i. 150). But when the Prophet for whom they prayed actually came and the ascendancy of truth over falsehood became manifest, they refused to accept him. This naturally brought on their heads the curse of God.

It may be repeated here that the word "curse" is not used in the Quran as abuse but as indicative of the actual state or condition of a person or a people. As explained under the preceding verse, the literal meaning of the word لعنة is "to be driven away from God" and hence all who stand in opposition to God and His Prophets incur لعنة and are spoken of as being under the curse of God; i.e. driven away from God’s presence and deprived of His mercy.

8:40; See 2:191.

Important Words:

الدین (religion) has a number of meanings including (1) religion; (2) rule and government (Aqrab). See also 1:4.

عدوان (hostility) is derived from عدا. They say عداه meaning, he passed beyond it. The expression عدا علیه means, he acted wrongfully towards him or he exceeded the proper limit against him. The words عاداه mean, he treated him with enmity and hostility. Thus عدوان means: (1) hostility; (2) wrongful conduct; (3) punishment for wrongful conduct and; (4) approach or way to a person by way of justification or excuse against him (Munjid, Mufradat & Lane).

Commentary:

This verse is often quoted by the opponents of Islam in support of their allegation that the Quran inculcates the carrying-on of war against unbelievers until all traces of false religions are wiped out and the whole world embraces Islam. But such a view is clearly wrong. The word which throws light on the true significance of this verse is فتنة (persecution) which, as has been explained in the preceding verse, means religious persecution. This verse therefore enjoins Muslims to fight only till persecution for religion is over. It is on record that during the war between Hadrat ‘Ali and Mu‘awiyah, ‘Abdullah, son of ‘Umar, was once asked why he did not take part in the war when the Quran enjoined the Muslims to fight to put an end to فتنة. He replied: "We did indeed act upon this injunction of the Quran when in the time of the Holy Prophet the number of Muslims was small and a man was subjected to فتنة i.e. persecution for his religious beliefs, being either put to death outright or tortured, until at last Islam spread and the "فتنه was over" (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). These words of ‘Abdullah, son of ‘Umar, leave no doubt that the word فتنة in this verse means persecution for religious beliefs and nothing else. Muslims are enjoined to fight until there is no فتنة i.e. no persecution for religious beliefs.

The words that follow, i.e. and religion is professed for Allah, would, therefore, mean that Muslims should fight till profession of a faith is not influenced by the fear of men, but that whatever religion a man follows, he should follow it only for the sake of God, and not out of the fear of men. The above interpretation is also borne out by the fact that the Holy Prophet entered into a number of treaties of peace with disbelievers, which could have no justification if the divine commandment had been to continue fighting until all embraced Islam. The object of the jihad or holy war which the Holy Prophet was bidden to undertake is clearly stated in 22:40-42, which were the first verses that gave Muslims the permission to take up arms against disbelievers and the idea has been further clarified in 2:191, 193 above. Among the numerous other verses which throw light on this subject the reader is referred to 2:195, 218, 257; 3:135; 4:91, 92; 5:3, 9, 33; 8:39, 62, 63; 9:6, 8, 10, 13; 22:39,41; 41:35; 42:49; 50:46; 60:9, 10.

The concluding clause i.e. but if they desist, then remember that no hostility is allowed except against the aggressors, further confirms the interpretation of the verse as given above. If the Quran enjoined the waging of war till Islam obtained universal acceptance, then there would be no sense whatever in the injunction that if disbelievers desisted from fighting and no longer remained aggressors, Muslims should also stop hostilities; for, as the verse puts it, fighting is not permissible "except against the aggressors".

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.

See 2:41.

See 2:48.

Commentary:

Before proceeding to deal with the point that when the cup of the iniquities of the Jews became full to the brim, prophethood was transferred from the House of Israel to that of Ishmael, God in this verse again reminds the Jews of the manifold favours He had conferred upon them, and by inference also reminds them of their crimes and wickednesses.

The favours which God showered upon the Israelites from the time of Moses to that of Jesus are briefly recounted in the preceding verses along with a tale of their misdeeds and iniquities. Particular reference has been made to the reprehensible treatment they meted out to the Holy Prophet of Islam and the Muslims, and finally the whole subject has been briefly recapitulated in the above verse, forming an introduction to the new theme, i.e. the transfer of prophethood from the House of Isaac to that of Ishmael. With the advent of the Holy Prophet a new era had been ushered and those who rejected him could no longer bask in the sunshine of God’s favours.

3:111.

22:79.

Important Words:

وسطا (exalted) is derived from وسط meaning, he stood in between two things. وسط فی حسبه (wasata) or وسط (wasuta) means, he was or became good and noble. الوسط means: (1) occupying the middle position or taking the middle course; (2) good and exalted in rank (Aqrab). That the word وسط is used here in the sense of good and exalted, is clear from 3:111 where Muslims are called the best people.

لنعلم (that We might know) signifies that We may make known or distinguish. In fact, God being Omniscient knows all things; so He does not stand in need of knowing a thing because everything is already known to Him. The word has been used elsewhere also in this sense (33:51). The expression ممن (from him who) occurring after it also shows that the word is used here in the sense of distinguishing or making known to the people.

Commentary:

The clause, and thus have We made you an exalted nation, refers to, and is connected with, the concluding clause of the preceding verse, i.e. He guides whom He pleases to the right path. God means to say that whatever guidance He sends down to the Muslims is for their own good and it is through His guidance that they have been made an exalted nation. So in the matter of the Qiblah, too, they should be prepared to accept His guidance which is meant for their own good. This will make them "guardians over men" and the Messenger of God a "guardian over the Muslims".

Muslims are told that, as decreed by God, they are to become the leaders of men and win the pleasure of God by their good deeds and that on that account they will naturally become recipients of God’s special favours, with the result that other people will be forced to the conclusion that the religion which they follow is the true religion. In this way will Muslims bear witness to the truth of Islam, just as the Holy Prophet was a witness of its truth for them.

Another meaning of the clause, that you may be guardians over men, is that each generation of Muslims should guard and watch over the next generation. Being the best of people, it is incumbent upon them to be always on their guard against falling away from the high standard of life expected of them, and to see that each succeeding generation also follows the path pursued by those who enjoyed the ennobling company of the Holy Prophet. Thus the Holy Prophet was to be a guardian over his immediate followers, while they in turn were to be guardians over their successors, and so on.

Taking the particle علی (over) in the clause under discussion to mean "against" and the word شھید (guardian) to mean "witness", which it often does, the clause would mean "that you may be witnesses against men and the Holy Prophet may be a witness against you"; i.e., the Holy Prophet would serve as a mirror for the Muslims by looking into which they would be able to see their own shortcomings, while the lives of true Muslims would serve as a model for other people who, by comparing their lives with those of true Muslims, would see and realize their own defects and correct them accordingly. This state of affairs could be brought about only if Muslims faithfully followed all the behests of God including the one regarding Qiblah, which was important as a rallying-point for the new community.

It may be noted here that, as hinted in the words, and We did not appoint the Qiblah which thou didst follow, the Holy Prophet had adopted the Temple at Jerusalem as his Qiblah by God’s command; but as it was meant by God to be only a temporary Qiblah, and was to be subsequently replaced by the Ka‘bah which was to be the Islamic Qiblah for all time, the command with regard to the temporary Qiblah was not included in the Quran. This shows that all such commandments as possessed temporary application were not included in the Quran; only those were included which were of a permanent nature. Hence the theory that the Quran contains some verses that now stand abrogated is quite unfounded.

The Arabs were greatly attached to the Ka‘bah, the ancient house of worship at Mecca. It was their national Temple which had come down to them from the days of Abraham. It, therefore, proved a severe trial for them when they were asked at the very inception of Islam at Mecca to abandon the Ka‘bah in favour of the Temple at Jerusalem which was the Qiblah of the People of the Book. And later on at Medina, the change of the Qiblah from the Temple at Jerusalem to the Ka‘bah proved a great trial for both Jews and Christians. It was very hard for them to abandon their Qiblah for a rival temple which had been held sacred by the pagan Arabs. Thus God provided a trial for both the People of the Book and the idolaters of Mecca.

The Temple of Solomon at Jerusalem was not adopted as Qiblah by the Holy Prophet to conciliate the Jewish population of Medina, as is wrongly supposed by Sale and other Christian critics, because it was not at Medina that this Temple was adopted as the Qiblah. It had already been the Qiblah of the Muslims at Mecca where there was no Jewish or Christian population to placate (Bukhari & Jarir). If, by appointing a Qiblah, the Holy Prophet had intended to win over a people, the natural course would have been to appoint the Ka‘bah as a Qiblah while at Mecca and turn round to the Temple of Jerusalem while at Medina. But what actually happened was quite the reverse. Moreover, the Quran expressly says that the adoption of neither of the Qiblahs was meant to win over any people to Islam, but was intended only as a trial to distinguish the true believers from those not true.

The words it does not behove Allah to let your faith go in vain have a twofold meaning: (1) that this change of Qiblah is in no way calculated adversely to affect the faith of Muslims but would actually strengthen it; (2) that if Muslims were not directed to turn to the Ka‘bah, they would not inherit the blessings resulting from the prayers of Abraham offered at the time of its building (2:130). It was impossible that the Companions of the Holy Prophet who had displayed such steadfast loyalty and devotion to their noble ideals, should not have been made heirs to the blessings contained in Abraham’s prayers with which the Promised Prophet was to be so closely associated. The faith of Muslims would, as it were, go in vain if they remained detached from the Ka‘bah and did not inherit its blessings.

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.

2:17; 3:178; 4:45.

Commentary:

The words ما اصبرھم علی النار i.e. how great is their endurance of the Fire, and similar other expressions are used in the Arabic language to express wonder on the part of the onlooker and tenacity and intensiveness of the relevant quality in the object. The expression, therefore, means that though the deeds of disbelievers are sure to bring down upon them the great punishment of Fire, yet they so tenaciously persist in their wicked course as to indicate that they are, as it were, possessed of great endurance of its torment.

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).

Commentary:

If a person makes a will in compliance with the above commandment, but his heirs, finding it to be prejudicial to their interests, alter it or hinder its execution, the blame and the responsibility for consequences will lie on those who tamper with the will and not on the maker of the will. Apparently, the verse seems to be superfluous; for what it says is obvious, i.e. the responsibility of any subsequent alteration cannot lie on the testator. But deeper consideration would show the futility of such an idea. In fact, the verse serves three important purposes. Firstly, it warns the testator that fear of any subsequent alteration should not deter him from making the will. Secondly, that he should act intelligently and cautiously and should try to foresee and forestall all possible mischief by his heirs. Thirdly, the verse warns the heirs and their friends that any alteration made by them in the will will bring them under the wrath of God Who is All-Knowing.

Important Words:

الصیام (Fasting) is derived from صام meaning, he kept back or refrained from doing something; or he refrained from eating or drinking or talking or walking, etc. The Arabs say صامت الریح i.e. the wind became calm or motionless. فرس صائمmeans, a horse from which food has been withheld, or a horse which is confined to its manger and not made to walk or race. Thus صیام means: (1) keeping back or refraining from something; (2) refraining from eating and drinking, etc; and (3) formally refraining from eating, drinking, going in unto wives, etc. i.e. fasting from dawn till sunset as ordained by Islam. صائم is one who so refrains from food, etc. i.e. one who keeps a fast (Aqrab & Mufradat). An interesting feature of the Arabic language is revealed when we notice that the word صمات though derived from a different root, yet, owing to its having two root letters common with صیام gives a somewhat similar meaning, for, whereas صیام means, refraining from food, drink or speech, صمات means: (1) refraining from speech; and (2) intensity of thirst, the latter state being the direct result of refraining from drink (Aqrab).

Commentary:

As the preceding verses contain a reference to patience in trials and sacrifices as well as refraining from disputes and temptations, the Quran here fittingly turns to the subject of fasting, which is a most effective means of self-discipline.

The command to fast, whatever its details, is to be found in most religions in one form or another. The early devotions and fasting of Buddha (see Lalitavistara & Buddhacharita), the fasting of Moses, prior to his receiving the Ten Commandments (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 9:9), the fasts of Jesus before his receiving the heavenly call (Matt. 4:2), all testify to the importance of this institution. In fact, fasting is a form of devotion and self-discipline which has a natural appeal to man. "By the greater number of religions," says the Encyclopaedia Britannica, "in the lower, middle and higher cultures alike, fasting is largely prescribed: and when it is not required, it is nevertheless practised to some extent by individuals in response to the promptings of nature." The verse under comment, however, does not mean that fasting has been prescribed for the Muslims in the same form in which it was prescribed for the people of earlier faiths. Islam has greatly spiritualised this institution by attaching to it a number of highly useful regulations and restrictions.

The clause, so that you may become righteous, explains the deep philosophy underlying the commandment relating to fasting. It is a special characteristic of the Quran that, whenever it gives an important commandment, it does not give it arbitrarily but also explains its usefulness so that the addressee may be convinced of, and satisfied about, the wisdom underlying it. The object of صیام or fasting has been stated in this verse as the attainment of تقوی i.e. righteousness.

As explained in 2:3 the word تقوی or اتقا from which the word تتقون used in the present verse is derived means, to guard oneself against (1) harm and suffering, and (2) evil and sin. Thus the verse points out that the real object of fasting is, first, to be saved from harm and suffering, and secondly, to be saved from sin and evil.

The first object is attained through fasting in two ways: (1) When a man commits evil deeds and becomes deserving of God’s punishment on account of those deeds, but later feels ashamed of them and turns to God in repentance, then fasting serves as an atonement for his sins. (2) Fasting not only makes a man fit and able to bear hardships but also makes him realize the sufferings of his brethren in distress and feel sympathy for them. Thus fasting goes a long way to remove and minimize the pains and sufferings of humanity.

The second object, viz., that of being saved from sin and evil, is attained through fasting because, while fasting, a person has not only to abandon eating and drinking but also, to a certain extent, to keep himself aloof from worldly connections and to abstain from indulging in his desires, with the result that his thoughts naturally tend towards spiritual things. Spiritual men of all religions unanimously testify, on the basis of personal experience, that a certain degree of severance from physical relations and worldly connections is essential for spiritual advancement and has a powerful purifying effect on the mind. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that to carry such severance too far is sure to weaken the body to such an undesirable extent as to render a person unfit not only to fulfil his social and religious obligations but also to withstand temptations which requires a certain amount of strength. Islam, therefore, follows the path of the golden mean. While it does prescribe a certain degree of abstention from material pleasures, it does not permit such a weakening of the body as should incapacitate it for performing its normal functions. This is why the Holy Prophet has forbidden continuous fasting, saying, "Your self has a claim upon you and your family has a claim upon you and your guests have a claim upon you" (Tirmidhi). On another occasion, he is reported to have said, "Verily, I am the most righteous of you all, yet sometimes I fast and sometimes I abstain from fasting, and so must you do" (Bukhari).

Fasting also stands as a symbol for complete sacrifice. One who fasts not only abstains from food and drink, which are the chief means of sustenance and without which one cannot live, but also from going in unto one’s wife which is the means of assuring one’s future race. Thus he who fasts really expresses his readiness, if need be, to sacrifice his all for the sake of truth. Fasting indeed affords a wonderful training ground for man.

It must also be noted here that this verse does not actually contain a command to fast, which follows in the verse coming after the succeeding verse. It only prepares Muslims for the coming commandment by saying that (1) the fasting which is going to be prescribed for them is not a new thing but was also prescribed for the people that had gone before, and that (2) it is a most useful thing which is sure to benefit them greatly. It will be seen that very often the Quran does not give a commandment all of a sudden but first prepares the ground for it by making some general remarks. In this connection see also 2:143-145 where a similar process has been adopted.

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.

23:10; 70:35.

Important Words:

حافظوا (watch) is derived from حفظ. They say حفظه i.e. he preserved it, or he guarded or protected it, or he prevented it from perishing or becoming lost. حفظ القرآن means, he memorized the Quran, i.e. he learned it by heart. حافظ علی الامر means, he watched over the thing; he attended to it carefully and constantly (Taj).

قانتین (submissively) is derived from قنت for which see 2:117. The word conveys, among others, three important meanings: (1) standing motionless, (2) refraining from speech and (3) standing submissively (Lane). All these meanings are applicable here.

Commentary:

This verse which stresses the importance of, and regularity in, Prayers appears to be rather oddly placed, being wedged in between verses relating to conjugal relations. But the very context of it explains the deep philosophy of its meaning. After marriage one is apt to become a little lax in Prayers, particularly the supererogatory Tahajjud Prayer (said in the latter part of the night). Besides, family life multiplies the cares of both man and woman. Hence, the necessity of urging married people to be regular and punctual in their Prayers.

الصلوة الوسطی (the Middle Prayer) has been differently explained. According to some commentators it is the Tahajjud Prayer, and according to others, it is the morning Prayer, while according to yet others, it is the late afternoon or ‘Asr Prayer. The latter view is supported by some of the sayings of the Holy Prophet. For it is on record that on his missing the right time of the ‘Asr Prayer, when engaged in repelling the repeated attacks of the enemy in the Battle of the Ditch, and having been obliged to combine it with the Maghrib or the sunset Prayer, the Holy Prophet is reported to have said: "May God curse the Jews (who were mostly responsible for this battle)! They have prevented us from saying our Middle Prayer in time" (Bukhari). Truly speaking, however, the "Middle Prayer" is the Prayer which happens to fall within busy hours. In the above-quoted tradition, the Holy Prophet called the ‘Asr the "Middle Prayer," because it fell within extraordinarily busy hours. The Quran has placed this verse here to point out firstly, that married life, and for that matter any life however busy, should not make man slack in the observance of Prayers, and secondly, that like this verse, the Middle Prayer is one which is surrounded by apparently incongruous elements. The style is peculiar to the Quran but is quite natural.

The clause, and stand before Allah submissively, teaches that besides aiming at complete concentration in Prayers the worshipper should observe three special injunctions: (1) he should refrain from speech, (2) he should stand motionless and refrain from making any unnecessary movement, and (3) his general attitude should be that of submissiveness, as lack of these is liable to adversely affect concentration and detract from the sanctity of worship.

2:232; 65:3.

Commentary:

Just as the preceding verse bestowed an additional favour on widows, the present one bestows an additional favour on divorced women. The injunction is particularly essential in the case of divorced women, because in moments of bitterness, which is the inevitable aftermath of a dissolved marriage, people are liable to be unjust and cruel towards their former wives. The verse warns them not to lose sight of the fear of God on such occasions and to act towards their former spouses not only with justice but with positive benevolence and kindness.

5:27.

Commentary:

The commandments relating to conjugal relations were mentioned as an offshoot of the subject of جھاد (holy war) dealt with in 2:217 and the following verses. The Quran now reverts to the original subject and by way of re-introduction cites the example of the Israelites who had left the land of the Pharaohs for fear of death. Trodden under the foot of the tyrant, the children of Israel were then in a most abject condition, and the wise God, in His eternal wisdom, decreed that they should lead a life of ordeals in the wilderness before becoming fit for the great life that awaited them in the Promised Land. The words, Allah said to them: 'Die', point to the great truth that all life must be preceded by death, i.e. great trials and extraordinary sacrifices.

As mentioned above, the clause, those who went forth from their homes, refers to the Israelites who had gone forth from Egypt to escape persecution by Pharaoh. It was the fear of death which had made the Israelites migrate from the land (2:50).

The words, they were thousands, contradict the Bible which represents the number of the Israelites migrating from Egypt as six hundred thousand. Recent researches favour the Quranic view (See History of the People of Israel, p. 145, by Ernest Renan, London, 1888, and History of Palestine and the Jews, i. 174 by John Kitto, London, 1844). See also. 2:55.

The story of the exodus of the Israelites is briefly this. When, being persecuted by Pharaoh, they left Egypt and crossed over to Asia, Moses wanted them to enter the Promised Land, but they were afraid of the people that dwelt there and refused to march ahead, saying Go thou and thy Lord and fight and here we sit (5:25). The result was that they drew upon themselves the wrath of God, Who said to Moses, Verily, it shall be forbidden them for forty years; in distraction shall they wander through the land (5:27). The promise was thus put off for forty years and the children of Israel were left to wander in the wilderness until those who had refused to fight perished in the desert, whereafter the younger generation led by Joshua conquered the land. Thus it was that the people whom God had caused to perish had new life breathed into them. It is with reference to these events that the Quran uses the word "die" in the verse under comment. This very death, i.e. destruction of the rebellious and training of the youth through trials and ordeals, proved the forerunner of life. Elsewhere, the Quran says about the Israelites: Then We raised you up after your death (2:57).

It may also be noted here that from this verse onward, the Quran begins the description of تزکیة or means of national progress spoken of in 2:130, reference to "Signs" and "the Book" and "Wisdom" having already been made.

3:148, 201; 7:127.

2:287; 3:148.

Commentary:

The trial by water referred to in the preceding verse and the subsequent exhortation mentioned in the concluding clause of that verse seem to have filled the Israelites with hope and courage. Consequently their prayer in the verse under comment does not betray a defeatist tendency as heretofore shown by them, but a buoyant spirit of hope and good cheer.

22:41.

Commentary:

Talut or Gideon was able to defeat Jalut or the Midianites and curb their rising spirits, but their crushing defeat to which the verse refers as the killing of Jalut came in the time of David about two hundred years afterwards. This is why, whereas the defeat of Jalut by Talut has been spoken of by the Quran as ھزم i.e. routing, the complete crushing of their power has been referred to by the world قتل i.e. killing. The Bible speaks of the man defeated by David as Goliath (1 Sam. 17:4), which is similar to Jalut. Probably the attributive name given by the Quran to the people was also borne by their leader in the time of David.

The last clause of the verse, i.e. and had it not been for Allah’s repelling men, some of them by the others, the earth would have become filled with disorder, gives, in a nutshell, the whole philosophy of all wars of truth and justice. War should be resorted to only as a means of checking disorder and restoring peace, and not for creating disorder and breaking peace. The clause also serves as a criterion between Muslims and their adversaries and beautifully points to the party destined for final victory in the struggle.