مِنْ

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").

7:109; 20:23; 27:13.

Important Words:

ذانک (those two) is the dual of ذاک which is formed from ذا which is a noun of indication (properly meaning this, but sometimes, when repeated, better rendered that), relating to an object of masc. gender, such as is near: or it relates to what is distant (according to some, and therefore should always be rendered that). ذاک relates to an object which is distant or to that which occupies a middle place between the near and the distant. They say جاءنی ذانک الرجلان i.e. those two persons came to me (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The words, "the wrongdoers never prosper," lay down an immutable law of God and an infallible criterion to test the truth of a claimant to Divine revelation. The law is that a false claimant to Divine revelation or a false Prophet never succeeds in his mission. Sooner or later he must come to naught.

5:14; 6:44; 57:17.

Important Words:

یشقق (cleave asunder) which is originally یتشقق is derived from شق meaning, he cut it open or he clove it.

تشقق means, it clove or broke asunder (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The murder of the innocent Muslim referred to in the preceding verses sealed the fate of the Medinite Jews who thereafter became more and more hardened, their hearts becoming like stones or even worse.

The verse goes on to say that even lifeless things like stones are useful, but the Jews, although rational beings possessing understanding and descended from holy men, have become so hardened as virtually to become worse than stones. Stones have functions to perform; but as they possess no volition, their work can bring them no reward. Deeds are in fact of two kinds, firstly those which are performed through volition or exercise of will, and secondly those which are performed not through volition but under some natural law. According to Islam, it is only the deeds of the former class that bring reward; but the deeds of the latter class, though unable to bring a reward, are also sometimes useful. Most of the Jews, however, had become so depraved that, far from performing any act of virtue out of a desire to be virtuous, they did not even involuntarily perform anything that might be called virtuous. They had become worse than stones; for even from stones there comes out water which people profit by.

It has, however, been added that these remarks do not apply to the whole nation; for some of the Israelites were, no doubt, swayed by the fear of God. Of these the Quran says: Of them (the hearts) there are some that humble themselves for fear of Allah. It may be noted that the pronoun ھما (them) in the clause, and indeed of them there are some that humble themselves for fear of Allah, stands for قلوب (hearts) and not for حجارة (stones). The fact that of the two pronouns in the verse the first refers to حجارة (stones) and this one to قلوب (hearts) need not create any doubt. The Quran contains many instances of what is termed انتشار ضمائر i.e. where similar pronouns occurring in the same verse stand for different nouns. For example, we read in 48:10: That you may believe in Allah and His Messenger and may help him and honour him, and glorify Him morning and evening. In this verse the pronoun 'him' refers to the Holy Prophet in the first two places and to God in the third.

The sentence, for of stones indeed there are some out of which gush forth streams, and of them there are some out of which flows water when they cleave asunder, signifies that even among lifeless things there are grades, some being more useful than others; and the Quran hints that we should recognise the difference in the grade and usefulness of all things. Everything must have its due, whether small or great.

2:175; 3:200; 13:27.

Important Words:

ویل (woe) means: (1) the coming or befalling of some calamity, misfortune or sorrow; (2) punishment; (3) perdition. The expression ویل له or ویله or ویل لك or ویلك etc. is used as a warning for some coming sorrow or misfortune (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

There were Jews who composed books or parts thereof and then gave them out as the word of God. This malpractice was common among the Jews and other peoples. Therefore, in addition to the canonical Books of the Bible, there are a number of books which are supposed to be revealed, so that it has now become impossible to distinguish the revealed Books from those not revealed. Another mal-practice of the Jews was that they distorted the meaning of the Divine Word. They themselves wrote a whole book or part thereof and declared it to be based on Biblical evidence; while, as a matter of fact, it was opposed to this evidence. Those responsible for this were responsible not only for their own misdeeds, namely, fabricating and distorting the Word of God, but also for the misdeeds of their followers who were led by their example to commit one or all of the following acts (1) tampering with the Word of God (2:76); (2) preferring worldliness to religion (2:77); and (3) following their own vain desires and false notions (2:79). Hence, while speaking of them, the Quran uses the word ویل (woe) in order to warn them and remind them of the seriousness of their offence.

Some Christian writers have argued that the verse under comment proves that the Jewish and Christian scriptures were intact at the time of the Holy Prophet. This inference is absolutely unjustified. For tampering with the text does not necessarily mean tampering with a genuine text. One who tampers with a version of a false book which he believes to be true is as liable to blame as the one who tampers with a genuine scripture. Hence, the warning to the People of the Book against tampering with the Bible cannot be cited as proof of the existence of the true Bible at the time of the Holy Prophet.

The words, paltry price, do not mean that the taking of a good price would be lawful. The words have been used to point out that whatever price they may take would be paltry in view of the great loss they would be suffering thereby. Elsewhere, the Quran says: the benefit of this world is little (4:78).

In the last clause the Quran repeats the words, Woe to them, twice, saying: Woe, then, to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. This is to point out that by so doing the Israelites are committing two offences: (1) writing down a thing falsely and (2) doing it with the intention of earning some worldly benefit. As the offence is double, the punishment also will be double.

3:113; 5:61.

Important Words:

بغیا (grudging) is derived from بغی. They say بغی الشیء i.e. he wished or desired or sought the thing. بغی الرجل means, the man transgressed or turned away from the truth, or he disobeyed or revolted against a lawful authority. بغی علیه means, he wronged him and continued long in the act (Aqrab). بغی علی اخیه means, he envied his brother; he wished that a blessing might become transferred from his brother to himself (Lane). In the text the word has been translated as "grudging" which is the same as "envying".

باؤا (they incurred) is derived from باء which means, he returned. باء به means, he returned with it. باء بغضب من الله means, he returned with anger from God, i.e. the anger of God came upon him; he incurred His anger (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

In this verse, we are told that the Jews rejected the Holy Prophet solely because he was of different nationality. The verse means that the Jews upon whom the truth has dawned and who have come to recognize the Quran as the very Book mentioned in their Scriptures are, out of sheer pride and obstinacy, impiously rejecting it, little knowing that, by so doing, they are hastening the ruin of their own souls. The truth is that they cannot bear to see a Prophet raised from among any people other than their own. They fail to realize that all alike are the creatures of God and there is no earthly reason why Prophets should appear only from among the Israelites.

The words باؤا بغضب translated here as, they incurred wrath, literally mean "they returned with (God’s) wrath" which points to the fact that though God called them to His presence in order to bestow on them His favours, they, instead of receiving favours, returned from His presence loaded with His displeasure and anger.

The words, wrath upon wrath, are used to signify that even before the coming of the Holy Prophet the Jews had incurred the anger of God by their rejection of Jesus and other iniquities; so when they rejected the Holy Prophet, they incurred wrath upon wrath, i.e. they added to their previous load of God’s anger.

2:190; 9:36.

3:98; 22:28.

Important Words:

رفث (foul talk) means, foul, immodest or lewd talk or speech in relation to women. It also signifies acts leading to and including coition (Mufradat & Lane). See also 2:188.

فسوق (transgression) is the same as فسق for which see note on 2:27.

جدال (quarrelling) is derived from جدل. They say جدل الحبل i.e. he twisted the rope. جدل الرجل means, his dispute or quarrel became intensified. جادله means, he disputed or quarrelled with him. Thus جدال means, dispute or quarrel, or the use of strong and hot words (Aqrab).

تزودوا (furnish yourselves) and الزاد (provision) are both derived from زاد with واو as the central root letter. They say زادالرجلi.e. the man prepared a provision for himself for a journey, etc. تزود means, he took for himself a provision. تزودمن الامیرکتابا الی عامله means, he took from the caliph a letter of introduction to his governor so that the latter might afford him his assistance as and when required. الزاد means, any provision, etc. taken when proceeding on a journey (Aqrab). The word is used of extra store meant for future use (Mufradat).

Commentary:

The clause the months of the Hajj are well known is intended to hint that, in the matter of the time of Pilgrimage, the Quran gives no new commandment. The established custom is the right one, being rightly retained by the Arabs from the days of Abraham and Ishmael. The three lunar months during which one may formally undertake the Pilgrimage and enter into the state of Ihram are Shawwal, Dhul-Qa‘dah and the first ten days of Dhul-Hijjah (Bukhari).

The clause, there is to be no foul talk, nor any transgression nor any quarrelling during the Pilgrimage, does not mean that such acts are permissible at other times but that these are necessary conditions for the completion of Pilgrimage, which would be like a soulless body if one indulged in such things while undertaking it. Another purpose underlying these injunctions is that a person should abstain from them particularly during the period of Pilgrimage so that it might become easy for him to shun these things at other times as well. The three vices selected are typical of what should be scrupulously avoided in a religious gathering like that at the Pilgrimage. رفث (rafath) stands for all foul, immodest and lewd talk as well as acts relating to sex. فسوق (fusuq) stands for transgression against the laws of God and disobedience of lawful authority, whether spiritual or temporal. And جدال (jidal) stands for disputes and quarrels with co-travellers, companions and neighbours.

The clause, And furnish yourselves with necessary provisions, does not only refer to the preparation which one makes for an ordinary journey which is necessary in its own way, but also to the preparation which one has to make for a spiritual journey. In this sense the clause would signify "provide yourselves with piety and righteousness;" and in order to emphasize the latter kind of provision, the Quran fittingly adds, and surely the best provision is righteousness. But ordinary provision is also necessary; for, if a man does not take necessary provisions with him, he will be certainly put to great inconvenience and hardship on the way and will have to beg of others for help and both these things are detrimental to the noble object underlying Pilgrimage.

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.

3:75.

Commentary:

The People of the Book and the pagan tribes of Arabia grudged the favours which were being bestowed by God on Muslims. In reply to this, God says that He, being the Lord and Master of the entire Universe, could not forever bind Himself to one people but chose for His bounty whomsoever He pleased from among His creation. But now when He has chosen the Muslims, He is not confining His favours to one people only. The mission of the Holy Prophet being for all mankind, the call to come and receive God’s favours is universal and hence no people need now show envy or grudge. With the advent of Islam the era of الفضل العظیم i.e. "exceeding (viz. universal) bounty" had dawned.

16:102.

Important Words:

ننسخ (We abrogate) is derived from نسخ which has two meanings: (1) he abrogated or annulled, irrespective of the fact whether he brought another in its place or not; (2) he prepared a true copy of a book (Aqrab). It is from the latter sense that the word نسخة or "copy" is derived. From the former sense we derive the words ناسخ i.e. the thing which comes to abrogate another, and منسوخ i.e. the thing which is abrogated.

ننسھا (We cause to be forgotten) is derived from نسی meaning, he forgot, or he failed to preserve in his mind. انسی is the causative form of نسی meaning, he made a person forget a thing (Aqrab).

مثل (like) has three distinct uses: (1) either it is used to denote the like of a thing; (2) or it is used to denote a thing itself; (3) or sometimes it is redundant, giving no special meaning (Aqrab & Misbah).

Commentary:

Some commentators have attempted to infer from this verse that some of the verses of the Quran have been abrogated by others. But this conclusion is grievously erroneous and unwarranted. There is nothing in this verse to indicate that the word آیة (Sign) occurring here refers to the Quranic verses. Both in the preceding and the following verses, a reference is made to the People of the Book and their jealousies for the new revelation, which clearly shows that the word آیة spoken of in this verse as being abrogated, refers to the previous revelation. It is pointed out in this verse that the previous Scriptures contained two kinds of commandments. Firstly, those which, owing to the changed conditions of the world and the universality of the new revelation, required abrogation; secondly, those containing eternal truths which did not require abrogation but simply resuscitation so that people might be reminded of the forgotten truth. It was, therefore, necessary (1) to abrogate certain portions and bring in their place new ones, and (2) to restore the lost ones. So, God abrogated some portions of the old Books, replacing them with new and better ones, and at the same time He re-introduced the missing portions by similar ones. This is the only meaning which is consistent with the context and the general spirit of Quranic teaching. In the verse the word ننسخ (We abrogate) relates to the words بخیر (one better) and the words ننسھا (cause to be forgotten) relate to the words بمثلھا (the like thereof) meaning that when God abrogates a certain thing He brings a better thing in its place and when He causes a thing to be forgotten, i.e. when people forget a thing, He brings it over again, i.e. He resuscitates it.

The Jews themselves admit that after the Israelites were carried as captives to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar, the whole of the Pentateuch was lost (Enc. Bib, 653-654).

The meaning put on the verse by some Translators, viz., that certain verses of the Quran stand abrogated is not only opposed to the words of the Quran and the context of the verse, but is also against reason; nor can any authentic saying of the Holy Prophet be quoted in its favour. On the contrary, the Holy Prophet is reported to have said that the whole of the Quran must be strictly followed and he himself acted upon all its teachings throughout his life. Besides this, the Quran itself testifies to its own purity and integrity. The well-known verse: Verily, We Ourself have sent down this Exhortation and most surely We will be its Guardian (15:10) leads to no other conclusion. If the abrogation of any part of the Quran be conceded, the promise about its protection becomes null and void, for in that case it would be impossible to distinguish the abrogated portions from the rest of the Book. Again, there is absolutely no self-contradiction in the Quran, and therefore there is no need of resorting to the theory of abrogation. So-called contradictions only betray lack of deep study on the part of those who proclaim them. When one fails to understand two verses in their true relations, one is inclined to see a contradiction between them and then takes recourse to the convenient theory that one of the two verses must have been abrogated by the other. As soon as they appear to be reconcilable, the abrogation theory becomes gratuitous. This is why those who have upheld the abrogation theory have gradually been compelled to reduce the number of abrogated verses; for whereas the abrogated verses were formerly thought to be as many as 500, they have, by later scholars, been gradually reduced to only five. But even this is incorrect; for there is absolutely no verse in the Quran which is abrogated and we challenge any critic to come forward and prove that any verse of the Holy Book is abrogated. It is a pity that such beautiful significance of the verse under comment should have, as has been briefly portrayed above, become marred through ignorance and thoughtlessness. The verse has a reference to yet another significance as well. The People of the Book have been told that the Quran has come to abrogate all previous Scriptures; for, in view of the changed conditions of mankind, it has brought a new شریعة (Law) which is not only better than all the old codes of Law, but is also meant for all men and all times. An inferior thing with a limited mission must give place to a superior thing with a universal mission. Having explained this point, the Quran proceeds to say that although its teachings are meant for all time, yet a period is destined to come in the life of Islam when, though the letter of the Quran would still be intact, its spirit would be forgotten and lost by Muslims. When such a time comes, God will arrange to resuscitate the Quranic teachings, i.e. bring back "the like thereof" by raising a special Reformer from among Muslims. This prophecy is referred to more pointedly in 62:4 where God promises to raise a Reformer in the likeness of the Holy Prophet in the Latter Days. This Reformer, it is pointed out, would bring back the true faith to the world, even if it had soared away as high as the Pleiades (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). The prophecy has been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement.

6:125.

Commentary:

It is customary with disbelievers in the time of every Prophet that they demand from him signs and miracles which had been shown by a previous Prophet, while the disbelievers of that very Prophet had also rejected him in spite of the fact that he had shown the same miracles which disbelievers in the time of the later Prophet demanded. The verse exposes the absurdity of this worn out demand of disbelievers and purports to say that they demand from the Holy Prophet the same teachings which were given to Moses while the spiritual needs and requirements of the Holy Prophet’s time are different from those of Moses and, therefore, their demand is foolish. Yet when they are told that prophecies which were made by Moses have been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Prophet and that the teachings of the Quran in many respects support and corroborate the teachings of Torah, they say that both the Quran and the Torah are two pieces of magic that support each other.

2:127; 14:38.

Commentary:

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

6:30; 19:67; 23:38; 36:79.

Important Words:

الدھر (Time) is infinitive-noun from (dahara). They say دھر بالقوم امر مکروہ او دھرھم i.e. an evil event befell the people. دھرہmeans, he over came him; he prevailed upon him or surpassed him.دھر means: (a) time from the beginning of the world to its end; time long or short, any period or portion of time; (b) fate, fortune; (c) age, epoch; (d) course of events, vicissitudes of time, calamity; and (e) custom, habit, a desire, etc. (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The verse purports to say that when disbelievers are told that they will have to render an account of their deeds before God in the next life, they refuse to believe that there is or can be such a life. On the contrary, they allege that people die and other people take their place and this process goes on till, with the passage of time, the matter becomes dissolved and is destroyed; and that this is the be-all and end-all of human existence, there being no life hereafter.

13:27; 29:63; 34:37.

Important Words:

ویکان (Ah).ویک is a compound expression made up of وی and ک and is used for surprise and reproach, وی meaning woe and ک being a letter of address. They say ویک i.e. woe to thee. Some say ویک is ویلک (thy perdition), ل having been omitted. ویک being an expression of surprise or reproach means, oh; ah. وی لزید also means, well done Zaid, bravo Zaid (Aqrab).

2:195; 5:46.

Important Words:

قصاص (retaliation) is derived from قص. They say قصه i.e. (1) he cut it (hair, etc.), or be clipped it; (2) he followed him closely or followed in his footsteps; and (3) he described or narrated it. قاص الرجل means, he did with the man the like of that which he did to him; he retaliated on him for the wrong done to him. اقص الامیر زیدا من بکر means, the Amir retaliated upon Bakr for the wrong he had done to Zaid. قصاص therefore, means, retaliation, by slaying for slaying, and wounding for wounding, etc. (Aqrab) or the following up of a murder or an injury with a view to retaliating or punishing (Mufradat).

القتلی (the slain) is the plural of قتیل in the sense of مقتول i.e. a murdered person (Aqrab).

الحر (freeman) is derived from حر meaning: (1) he was free-born; (2) he was of good and noble origin. حرالارض means, the best portion of land. Thus الحر means; (1) a freeman, opposite of slave or captive; (2) a noble person; (3) the good and pure portion of a thing (Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse comprises a very important principle of civil law, i.e. equality of man and necessity of awarding proportionate punishment to all offenders without distinction, unless an offender is forgiven by the relatives of his victim under circumstances that are expected to lead to improvement and betterment of conditions.

The words کتب علیکم i.e. "is prescribed for you" show that retaliation for the slain is not simply permissible but is obligatory. Failure to inflict the punishment prescribed by Law on the offender would be tantamount to a violation of the commandment. The duty, however, of punishing the culprit does not devolve on the heirs of the murdered person but, as the plural number of the expression علیکم (for you) shows, on the authorities responsible for the maintenance of law and order. But, as the singular number of the expression اخیه (one’s brother) shows, the former have been given the option to forgive. The clause, therefore, means that on the one hand the concerned authorities are bound to punish the offender according to the requirements of law, having no right to pardon him of their own accord, and on the other hand the heirs of the murdered person are not entitled to take the law into their own hands and inflict the punishment on the guilty person themselves.

The verse under comment makes no distinction between different classes of persons in connection with the law of retaliation. The words used are of a general nature and apply to all offenders who might be guilty of murder, no matter of what rank or station in life or of what religion. Any person, irrespective of his caste or creed and irrespective of his station, must be put to death for the murder of any other person, unless pardoned by the relatives of the victim and unless the pardon has the sanction of the authorities. The sayings of the Holy Prophet are explicit on this point (Majah, ch. on Diyat).

There is indeed a saying of the Holy Prophet to the effect that a Muslim should not be put to death for killing a disbeliever. But this saying, read in conjunction with several others bearing on the same subject and interpreted in the light of the relevant Quranic verses, forces us to the conclusion that the word "disbeliever" in the tradition referred to above is not general but means only a حربی کافر i.e. such disbeliever as belongs to a people who are at war with the Muslims or, in other words, one who is a member of a belligerent community. In fact, the Companions of the Holy Prophet are all agreed that a Muslim may be put to death for murdering a non-belligerent unbeliever (Tabari, v. 44). The Holy Prophet himself ordered a Muslim murderer to be put to death for the murder of a non-belligerent non-Muslim (Qutni).

The expression, the freeman for the freeman and the slave for the slave and the female for the female, does not mean that a freeman should not be punished with death for the murder of a slave or that a woman should not be put to death for killing a member of the opposite sex, etc. The other verses of the Quran as well as the sayings and the practice of the Holy Prophet clearly establish the fact that the social position of a person or the sex of a party was never considered a bar to the application of this law. The peculiar construction, i.e. "the freeman for the freeman," etc. has been adopted here to refer to, and abolish, a custom of the Arabs whereby they used to take into consideration the sex and the social status of the murderer and the murdered person when determining punishment. If a man of high social position happened to kill a man of humble position, or if the slave of a great man killed that of a humble man, or if a lady of noble birth murdered a woman of humble origin, etc. the murderer was not punished with death, leniency being shown to him or her in sundry other ways as well. The commandment contained in this verse seeks to abolish that obnoxious custom of the Arabs and lays down in clear and unmistakable terms that no regard should be paid to the status of the murderer in the matter of retaliation.

In fact, the law of retaliation, as stated in this verse, is confined to the clause, equitable retaliation in the matter of the slain is prescribed for you, which forms a complete sentence in itself, giving a full and complete meaning. The ensuing expression, the freeman for the freeman and the slave for the slave and the female for the female, is something extra, not forming part of the law. It only contains a repudiation of the Arab custom referred to above and illustrates, by giving three instances, how the law is to be administered. Such an expression is known as جملة استینا فیه or جملة مستانفه in Arabic grammar, and is technically introduced with a view to answering a question which is suggested by the preceding clause to which it is added without any intervening conjunction. The question answered in such an expression is often understood and not expressed (Mukhtasar).

The sayings of the Holy Prophet and his practice also support the above interpretation, for it is on record that he once ordered a woman to be put to death for murdering a man (Muslim), and on another occasion he commanded that a freeman be put to death for the murder of a slave. Says the Holy Prophet: "Whoever kills his slave shall be put to death" (Majah). At another place he says: "The blood of all Muslims is alike in respect of the law of retaliation" (Nasa’i).

The words, if one is granted any remission by one’s brother, show that the infliction of capital punishment is not obligatory in all cases; for in special circumstances the murderer can be exempted from the extreme punishment by the heirs of the murdered person. Such exemption, which may be termed partial as the word شیء (any) indicates, means that the heirs of the deceased may renounce their right to have the murderer put to death and may in place of that receive from him blood money. Or as the Holy Prophet has made it clear, the heirs may, in exceptional cases and with the sanction of the authorities, even grant full pardon, remitting blood-money as well (Musnad & Baihaqi).

It is worthy of note that where the Quran speaks of remission, it uses the word "brother" instead of "heir of the murdered person". This is to hint to the heir of the slain person that he should, as far as possible, take a lenient view of the offence. On the other band, the murderer is also enjoined to pay blood money with good grace and without undue delay.

The concluding clause, i.e. whoso transgresses thereafter, for him there shall be a grievous punishment, is meant to point to the fact that if, after the matter has been amicably settled and the murderer granted a remission by the heirs of the murdered person, the heirs should take it into their heads to wreak vengeance on the murderer by killing him, they will be shown no mercy and will get capital punishment. Says the Prophet: "I will allow no remission in case of one whokills the murderer after he has accepted blood money from him" (Jarir).

The Islamic law of قصاص (retaliation), as briefly stated above, provides a very effective and practical means to put a stop to murder and safeguard human life. A man who shows a callous disregard for the life of a fellow person, loses his title to live as a member of human society. The option to pardon allowed to the heirs of the slain person should not be regarded as likely to encourage murder, for such option is not synonymous with exemption from punishment, as in ordinary circumstances the murderer will have to pay the blood money. Moreover, the would-be murderer possesses no means to know that the heirs of the person whose murder he contemplates will actually be persuaded to pardon him; so the fear of capital punishment will always be there to deter him from the commission of the crime. Again, pardon or remission is permissible only where the circumstances are such that pardon or remission is likely to improve matters and bring about good results for all parties concerned (42:41). Thus, while on the one hand, Islam has made due provision for the suppression of crime, it has, on the other, kept open the door for the display of the noble qualities of benevolence and mercy.

The way in which the Quran has upheld the ultimate necessity of the death penalty is indeed most significant. At the time when the Quran was revealed, people exacted retaliation for an injury done to them with a vengeance. They were not satisfied even with inflicting capital punishment on the murderer, to say nothing of pardoning him. They needed no incentive to retaliation. They were already overdoing it. In fact, the Islamic law of retaliation, viewed in the light of the circumstances prevailing at the time of its revelation, implied a prophecy that a time would come when people would go to the other extreme and a movement for the total abolition of capital punishment would be set on foot. So the Omniscient God laid down the law of retaliation in a form that is indispensable for the preservation and protection of human life, as well as the promotion of harmony and goodwill.

To prevent crime, Islam really aims at eliminating the conditions that produce it. It seeks to remove the very root-cause of all crime by working a complete moral reformation in man. But it does not remain content with that. It also prescribes deterrent laws in conformity with the dictates of reason, justice and humanity. The fact that, despite efforts to the contrary, the death penalty is still found on the Statute Books of most countries in one form or another, constitutes a sufficient proof of the wisdom of the Islamic teaching. As a matter of fact, even the most enthusiastic protagonists of the abolition of capital punishment have not yet been able to suggest a suitable alternative to it. They have had to admit that a long term of imprisonment as an alternative is "horrible" and is "not an ideal substitute" (Capital Punishment in the Twentieth Century by E. Roy Calvert, G. P. Putnam, London, 1930). The law of retaliation still remains the most effective deterrent to crime and an essential method to satisfy the demands of justice; and the Islamic Law takes a further step to bring about reconciliation between the offender and the aggrieved party.

2:198; 9:36.

2:178.

Important Words:

الاھلة (new moons) is the plural of الھلال i.e. the new moon. The word is generally used about the moon of the first two or three nights. About the moon of other nights the word used is قمر (Aqrab).

مواقیت (means for measuring time) is the plural of میقات which is derived from وقت i.e. time. میقات means: (1) time; (2) time fixed or appointed for a certain thing; (3) a promise for which a time is fixed; (4) a place in which a meeting is appointed to take place at a particular time (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

When the Companions of the Holy Prophet heard of the great blessings of the month of Ramadan, they naturally desired to know the blessings attending other months. This question on their part shows how solicitous they were to win God’s blessings and attain His nearness.

The clause, they are means for measuring time, should not give rise to the misunderstanding that Islam looks upon the moon only as a means of measuring time; for elsewhere the Quran speaks of the sun also as such (6:97 and 17:13). In fact, Islam has made use of both the lunar and solar systems for measuring time. Where worship is to be performed in different parts of the day, the solar system of reckoning time is used, as in the five daily Prayers or for the opening and the closing of a daily fast; and where worship is to be connected with a particular month or part thereof, the lunar system is used, as in selecting the month of fasting or the appointment of the time of Pilgrimage, etc. As a matter of fact, as religious commandments are meant for the general public, the system used is always such as may be easily understandable by the common people. All commandments relating to a fixed time are therefore based on the visible part of the solar or the lunar system of reckoning time, as the case may be. Changes in the position of the sun during the day are visible but the beginning of a solar month is not visible. On the other hand, the appearance of a new moon in the beginning of a lunar month is visible. Therefore Islam has made use of both; and the solar system is as much Islamic as the lunar system.

The clause, and it is not righteousness that you come into houses by the backs thereof, points to a very important principle that the real purpose in appointing different acts of worship is the intrinsic usefulness thereof and not that to each change of time there should be attached an act of worship. Therefore the question, resulting from the over-eagerness of the Faithful, that, like fasting, there may be prescribed other acts of worship relating to other months also, was like approaching a house not through its door but by "the back thereof". The primary thing was worship and time was only secondary, but those who put the question wanted to make time primary and worship merely secondary. This was like putting the cart before the horse.

The clause also means that one should adopt the right course to attain an object. Every end can be attained by having recourse to certain means. Similarly, certain ways have been prescribed by God for winning His pleasure and attaining His nearness. People should faithfully stick to these and not devise ways of their own. By doing so, they will only suffer trouble, and gain nothing.

It is also on record that it was the practice among the idolaters of Arabia that when they left their homes and started on Pilgrimage to Mecca, then if for some purpose or object they had to come back to their houses, they did not enter them by their doors, but climbed into them by their back walls (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). Islam does not approve of such meaningless practices.

Important Words:

استغفروا (ask forgiveness) is derived from غفر for which see 2:59. استغفر would thus mean, he asked God for مغفرة in all its senses, i.e. covering up of sins, forgiveness, protection against stumbling, protection against punishment of sins, etc. استغفار is not confined to verbal asking for forgiveness only, but extends to, and includes, practical change for the better on the part of him who asks for forgiveness. He should ask for pardon both by word and deed (Mufradat).

Commentary:

The word ثم (then) in the clause, then pour forth from where the people pour forth, has given rise to a divergence of opinion among commentators. If it means "then", it must needs be taken to indicate sequence or order and the clause would thus signify: "after you have returned to مشعرالحرام from عرفات (as mentioned in the preceding verse), you should return (from مشعرالحرام to منی) from where the people return". But this is obviously superfluous, as nobody has ever differed about proceeding to and returning from مشعرالحرام with the people. A difference existed only with regard to proceeding to and returning from عرفات; for, whereas the Quraish and the Kinanah, known as Hums, stopped short at Mash‘arul-Haram, a place within حرم (the Sacred Territory) and did not go up to ‘Arafat which is outside حرم, other pilgrims went right up to ‘Arafat. Consequently if the commandment with regard to "pouring forth with the people" was at all needed, it was needed with regard to ‘Arafat and not with regard to Mash‘arul-Haram but in the verse under comment the Quran appears to mention it in connection with the latter. This difficulty has led some to interpret the word ثم not as "then" but simply as "and" which the idiom of the Arabic language justifies (Lane). These commentators have translated the words ثم افیضوا not as "then pour forth" but simply as "and pour forth". In this case the "pouring forth" spoken of may relate to ‘Arafat and not to Mash‘arul-Haram as the clause under comment appears to indicate. This is certainly not an incorrect interpretation so far as the rules of the Arabic language go; but another interpretation is also possible in which the primary meaning of ثم (then) is retained. This may be explained as follows. The preceding verse speaks of "pouring forth" or returning from ‘Arafat, thereby making it plain that going up to ‘Arafat is necessary. This completes the commandment with regard to the stay at and return from ‘Arafat. The verse under comment takes us further, speaking of the return from Mash‘arul-Haram and not from ‘Arafat, and thus the primary significance of ثم i.e. "then" is retained, for the obvious reason that the return from Mash‘arul-Haram comes after the return from ‘Arafat. As to the words, pour forth from where the people pour forth, it may be noted that in this case they would be taken to have been used merely to indicate that whereas the return from ‘Arafat is confined to those who adhere to the right custom and go right up to ‘Arafat, the return from Mash‘arul-Haram is general, including also the proud Hums who stopped short at Mash‘arul-Haram and did not go further. This is further corroborated by the fact that whereas the Quran uses the word افضتم (you pour forth) with regard to the return from ‘Arafat, it uses the words افیضوامن حیث افاض الناس i.e. "pour forth from where the people (i.e. all people) pour forth" with regard to the return from Mash‘arul-Haram which was at that time more general and extended to all. Thus the meaning of the word الناس would also change with the change in the meaning of the word ثم. If ثم is taken to mean "and", and "the return" spoken of in this verse is taken to refer to the return from ‘Arafat, then الناس would mean "other people"; but if ثم is taken to mean "then" and "the return" spoken of here is taken to refer to the return from Mash‘arul-Haram, then الناس would signify "all people" and both these meanings are justified by the rules of the Arabic language.

In short, before the advent of Islam the Quraish and the Banu Kinanah known as Hums did not accompany other pilgrims to ‘Arafat, but stopped short at Mash‘arul-Haram, waiting to join other people returning from ‘Arafat. In this and the preceding verse, they are bidden not to stop short at Mash‘arul-Haram but to go up to ‘Arafat and do as other people do. After returning from ‘Arafat to Mash‘arul-Haram, pilgrims should proceed to Mina where sacrifices are offered and the state of Ihram comes to an end. The clause, and seek forgiveness from Allah, hints that as Hajj consists of certain rites, there is the possibility of some persons not understanding the meaning and spirit of these rites. Moreover, where a number of religious acts are crowded into a short space of time, there is always the possibility of some persons missing and omitting certain things or of forgetting the prescribed order thereof. The pilgrims are, therefore, exhorted to have recourse to Istighfar, i.e. seeking God’s forgiveness as well as His protection against error and its consequences.

The word استغفار literally means "to pray for the covering up of sins and protection," which signifies forgiveness for past sins and protection against future ones. Thus, when a pilgrim offers Istighfar, he seeks not only forgiveness for what is past or protection against stumbling with regard to the observance of the rites of Pilgrimage but also protection against future stumblings.

It should also be remembered that Istighfar is not needed by ordinary people only, but holy servants of God also resort to it. The former offer Istighfar to seek protection against future sins as well as from the consequences of past errors; while the latter seek protection against human shortcomings and limitations that may hinder their progress and work. Holy men too, are human, and though they may be free from sins, they are always eager to seek divine help and assistance against human weaknesses and frailties. Nay, as they have to set an example to others and their responsibilities are also far heavier than those of other people, they resort to Istighfar more often than ordinary men.

2:129.

See 2:153.

4:135; 42:21.

Important Words:

فاذکروا (celebrate praises of) is derived from ذکر which means, (1) he talked of him by way of praising him; (2) he remembered him in his heart (Aqrab & Mufradat). See also 2:41, 153.

او (or) is a preposition, used to convey a number of meanings, the more important being: (1) or; (2) and; (3) nay; (4) unless; (5) until (Aqrab & Lane).

خلاق (share) means, an abundant share in what is good (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The clause, celebrate the praises of Allah as you celebrated the praises of your fathers, points to a practice of pagan Arabs who used to gather together at a certain place in Mina after the performance of the rites of Pilgrimage and glorify their forefathers by reciting poems in their praise. Muslims are here bidden to glorify God instead, and praise Him as they used to praise their forefathers, and, the words "even more than that" have been added to emphasize that God’s praises should transcend all, for the word او (or) also means, "nay". It is also possible that the word ك (as) in the expression کذکرکم (as you celebrated praises) has been used only to denote general similarity without reference to degree, and the word او (or) has been used in the sense of "and". In this case the verse would mean that though in the general manner of praise your celebration of God’s praises may resemble the praises with which you glorified your fathers, in degree it should excel it, being اشد (stronger, loftier and firmer).

Here is a good example of how the Quran, while retaining some old customs, improved upon and, spiritualised them to serve the ends of Islam.

The clause, when you have performed the acts of worship prescribed for you, celebrate the praises of Allah as you celebrated the praises of your fathers or even more than that, has yet another meaning. As the word ذکر also means 'remembering' and the word اب (father) includes mother as well (12:101), the clause may also signify that the rites of Pilgrimage, if performed in the right spirit, should fill the heart of man with such love for God as to make him always remember Him just as a child remembers his parents. This is why the Quran begins the word اذکروا with the conjunction ف meaning "so" or "then", hinting that the result of the performance of the rites of Pilgrimage should be that a pilgrim should ever after remember his Creator with the fondness displayed by a child for his parents. But this is only the first stage. With holier men God’s love should be even greater, as the verse hints in the words, or even more than that. Says the Holy Prophet, "The sign of true faith is that a believer’s love for God and His Apostle should be greater than his love for any other being or thing" (Bukhari).

The concluding clause, i.e. of men there are some who say, 'Our Lord, grant us (good things) in this world, and such a one shall have no share in the Hereafter, points to the fact that if the pilgrim confines himself to the celebration of the praises of his fathers and forgets his Creator, he would be like a person who spends all his efforts in the pursuit of this world, even his prayers being confined to search after worldly things. Such a person shall evidently have no claim to the good things of the Hereafter. It is also significant that in this clause the Quran does not use the word حسنة (good things) with the words فی الدنیا (in this world) thereby hinting that such men generally make no distinction between the good things of this world and the bad things thereof, their sole object being the things of this world, irrespective of whether they are good or bad.

As explained under Important Words, the word خلاق (share) occurring in the clause, such a one shall have no share in the Hereafter, really means, "an abundant share in what is good". So the verse would really mean not that such a person will get only a small share in the Hereafter but that, by remaining engrossed in the things of this world, he will deprive himself of a big share and will get no share at all. As the Quran has to condense vast subjects in a small space, it purposely uses words and constructions that take the smallest space but convey the vastest meaning.

2:178; 4:37.

Important Words:

خیر (good and abundant wealth). See 2:181.

اقربین (near relatives) is the plural of اقرب (derived from قریب) meaning, one nearer; a near relative (Aqrab).

Commentary:

When the Companions of the Holy Prophet were told that they could not win the pleasure of God and enter Heaven unless they were made to pass through sufferings and afflictions like those that had gone before, they at once signified their readiness to part with their wealth and property in the cause of God and asked the Holy Prophet to let them know what they should spend in order to win the pleasure of God and attain spiritual progress. They did not wait for the threatened trials to actually overtake them, but were prepared to make every kind of sacrifice in advance. They simply wanted to be told what form their sacrifice should take.

In reply to their eager question, God’s reply also indicates a sort of eagerness, as if He meant to impart to the Faithful the relevant commandment in its entirety, without waiting for any further question on their part; for whereas their question related only "what" they should spend, God’s answer goes a step further, describing also "on whom" the money is to be spent. As to the question, what is to be spent should be (1) well-acquired and (2) abundant. In moments of great national need, there can be no hope of success unless people spend freely and generously. But as free and generous expenditure carries with it the danger of weak people resorting to acquiring wealth by unfair means, therefore the condition about the money being "good" has been added.

As to the other part of the anticipated question, i.e. on whom should the money be spent, the Quran says that money should be spent on parents and near relatives (lit. near ones) and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer. The five classes include all such persons as generally stand in need of help. The two first-mentioned classes include relatives, neighbours and friends who go to form the group that immediately surrounds a man and must claim his first attention, owning to personal relationship or personal contact. Then follow two classes that deserve help owing to their particular circumstance, orphans being without anyone to support them and the needy without any means of support. Lastly comes the wayfarer, whose claim consists in his being a stranger with no friend, no relative and no supporter. By pointing out these five classes as deserving of help, the Quran desires to hint that unless the entire community, including those who come to stay with them temporarily, is prepared to fight in the cause of Allah and unless the well-to-do classes help the weaker ones in their preparation for the national struggle, Muslims cannot present a united front nor can their efforts bring about the desired result. Each and every person must gird up his loins to contribute his fullest possible share, and those who cannot do so for want of means must receive help from others who can afford such help.

Important Words:

المحیض (menstruation) is derived from حاض. They say حاضت المرأة i.e. the woman menstruated; blood came forth from her womb or uterus at the known time and in the known manner. Thus محیض means, (1) menstruation, i.e. the monthly course: (2) time of menstruation; (3) place of menstruation (Lane & Mufradat). According to some, the word which means a tank or a place where water collects, is also derived from the same root though the central letter of the root is different (Lane).

اذی (harmful thing) is the infinitive-noun from اذی meaning, he came to harm, or he was annoyed. آذی means, he or it caused a harm. اذی means, a harmful thing; a disagreeable thing; an annoyance; a hurt; a thing held to be unclean or filthy; a slight evil less than what is termed ضرر (Taj).

اعتزلوا (keep away from) is derived from عزل. عزله عنه means, he removed him or it from that (Aqrab). اعتزل الشیء or اعتزل عنهmeans, he kept away from the thing (Aqrab).

یطھرن (they are clean) and تطھرن (they have cleansed themselves) and المتطھرین (who keep themselves clean) are all derived from طھر which means, he or it became clean or free from dirt or filth, etc.; or he or it became pure. طھرت المرأة means, the woman became clean from the menstrual discharge, i.e. her flow of menses stopped. طھرت المرأة means, she became cleansed or purified by washing herself. اطھر (ittahara) is like تطھر giving the same meaning, i.e. he became cleansed or he kept himself clean (Aqrab).

Commentary:

After laying down, in brief, the law about intermarriage, reference to marital relations and conjugal obligations became necessary. The verse under comment indicates that coition or sexual intercourse with one’s wife is not permissible during menses, for such intercourse would be harmful for both parties. Coition becomes permissible when menses cease, but as a further precaution the husband should wait till the wife has washed herself by taking a bath.

The command referred to in the words go in unto them as Allah has commanded you is contained in, and seek what Allah has ordained for You (2:188), hinting that coition with one’s wife should be in a manner productive of issue. A further hint to the above is contained in the following verse.

The words, and go not in unto them (lit. do not go near them) until they are clean, do not mean that the husband should keep away from his wife completely and in no case go near her. The Holy Prophet’s sayings as well as his practice belie that inference. The expression simply refers to coition and does not debar other forms of loving approach.

The concluding word "متطھرین" i.e. those who keep themselves clean has been put in the masculine gender, because firstly the use of the masculine gender generally includes and extends to females as well; and secondly because by using this word the Quran means to hint that if men go in unto their wives while they are unclean, they are sure to make themselves unclean too. Thirdly this word also hints that though it becomes lawful for a man to go in unto his wife after the monthly flow has ceased, yet it is better for him to wait till the woman has properly washed herself, for God loves those who are more careful about cleanliness.

Important Words:

عرضتم (you throw out a hint) is derived from عرض meaning, he offered and presented a thing. عرض (‘arrada) means, he used an expression susceptible of different meanings; or he mentioned a thing not clearly but in a veiled manner; or he used words to convey a sense which the words used did not definitely convey (Lane).

خطبة (proposal of marriage) is derived from خطب meaning, he addressed a meeting; he delivered a sermon. خطب المرأة means, he proposed marriage to her. خطبة (khutbah) means, a sermon. خطبة (khitbah) means, a proposal of marriage (Aqrab).

اکننتم (you keep hidden) is derived fromکن . They say کن الشیء or اکن الشیء meaning, he concealed the thing; he covered it. کنان means, a veil or covering, and مکنون means, covered or hidden (Aqrab).

عقدة (tie) is the infinitive-noun from عقد meaning, he tied; he made a thing firm and fast. عقد الحبل means, he tied the rope; he tied it in knots. عقدة means, a tie; a contract that ties up or binds two parties; a marriage contract (Aqrab).

Commentary:

According to this verse, it is forbidden to a man to make an open proposal of marriage to a widow within her عدة or the prescribed period of waiting. He who intends to marry a widow must keep his intention concealed from her. He may drop a hint indirectly suggestive of his intention. But he must on no account make an open suggestion or a formal proposal or even a secret proposal concerning marriage. A widow, too, is prohibited from giving her consent to such a proposal within the prescribed period. She must patiently wait for four months and ten days out of deference to the memory of her departed spouse and in order that her possible pregnancy may become apparent, because a pregnant woman is not allowed to marry until she is delivered of the child.

The words, beware of it, are meant to caution men to be on their guard against disobeying these commandments which are meant for their own good. If God had not laid them down, all social order would have gone to pieces.

The divine attributes, "Forgiving" and "Forbearing", have been mentioned at the end of this verse not to hint that breach of these injunctions would find God Forgiving and Forbearing but that the exigencies of the circumstances required stricter laws in this matter, but as God knows human weaknesses, He has been lenient in this respect. So whatever commandment has now been given, must be faithfully followed and all lapse be honestly guarded against.

14:22; 40:48.

Commentary:

Besides the hypocrites there is another class of men—the aggressive leaders of disbelief, who, taking advantage of their own high social status, seek to mislead others who are not so highly placed in life, telling them that they will bear all the loss the latter will incur by accepting their lead and by refusing to accept the true new Faith.

22:30; 76:8.

Important Words:

نذرتم (you vow) is derived from نذر i.e. he made a vow, thereby binding himself to do an act the doing of which is not obligatory on him; he made a vow dedicating his child for the service of religion. نذر is a vow by which a man binds himself to do an act not obligatory on him, sometimes conditional on the acquisition of an object or the fulfilment of a desire, in which case it amounts to a conditional promise. The word also signifies a votive offering (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

There is a tradition to the effect that the Holy Prophet did not approve of making conditional vows for the performance of non-obligatory acts of goodness; but if a man does so, fulfilment of the vow becomes obligatory.

The words Allah surely knows it mean that if a man spends in the cause of God, He will appreciate it and follow it with good results.

But as for those who do not spend or who break their vows, the punishment of God will visit such wrongdoers and no friend or sympathizer will be of any help to them. Similarly, in the life to come, neither will God help such men nor will the angels or the Prophets or other holy men help them with their intercession.

28:57; 92:13.

2:282; 4:174; 8:61; 39:11.

Commentary:

As the verse relates to believers, the word ھدی occurring in it does not mean "showing the right path," for believers have already accepted guidance. It means "making them follow the right path". It is indeed God alone Who can enable believers to continue treading on the right path and protect them from the dangers of the way. See also 2:6.

The Quran has here selected the word خیر (wealth) instead of any other word meaning wealth or property; for this word not only signifies "property" but "good and well-earned property". Nay, it signifies even more, for it extends to "anything and everything good". The choice of this word thus greatly extends the scope of charity and does not confine it to the spending of wealth alone. The expression includes the doing of good to mankind in any form.

The clause while you spend not but to seek the favour of Allah, is a great tribute to the Companions of the Holy Prophet. They are not bidden to spend their wealth to seek the pleasure of God, but are told that such is already their practice. This is also a form of exhortation which is considered to be more effective than a direct command or prohibition.

48:30.

Important Words:

ضرباً (move) is from ضرب. They say ضرب الشیء i.e. the thing moved. ضربه means, he struck or beat him with a sword or a stick, etc. ضرب فی الارض means, he set out on a journey through the country or he journeyed through it (Aqrab).

تعفف (abstaining) is derived from عف i.e. he abstained from doing what is unlawful or improper. تعفف in verb form also gives the same meaning with greater effort. عفة means, abstaining from the gratification of low desires. So تعفف means, abstaining from what is improper or unlawful (Aqrab).

سیما (appearance) is derived from سوم which is again derived from سام. They say سوم الفرس i.e. he branded the horse with some distinguishing mark or sign. سیما or سیمة or سومة means, a distinguishing sign or mark, or general appearance serving as such (Aqrab).

إلحافاً (with importunity) is derived from لحف. They say لحفه i.e. he covered him with a sheet or a blanket, etc. الحفه also gives the same meaning. الحف السائل means, the beggar begged with importunity, as if sticking to one like a covering (Aqrab & Mufradat).

Commentary:

Circumstances sometimes compel people to remain confined in a place where they are unable to earn their living. Such men deserve help from the better-off members of the community. Two kinds of people come particularly under this verse: (1) Those who voluntarily stick to a place owing to the love of a holy man and never quit his company so that they may listen to whatever he says and observe whatever he does and then impart the knowledge thus acquired to others. A remarkable example of persons of this class was Abu Hurairah, who embraced Islam only three years before the death of the Holy Prophet, but thereafter clove to the Mosque at Medina so that he might remain in constant contact with his beloved Master. The result was that he reported to the world a much larger number of the sayings and acts of the Holy Prophet than those reported by even such Companions as had embraced Islam long before him. (2) Sometimes a Muslim becomes confined to a place owing to the hostility of disbelievers and, being surrounded by persecutors, he has often to suffer extreme hardships and remain without the necessities of life. Such men are also among the fittest objects of help.

People generally help those who beg for help, ignoring those who need help but, through modesty or shyness, do not ask for it. The Quran exhorts Muslims not to confine their charity to those who beg, but also to look for those who are really needy and whom a sense of honour or modesty prevents from begging.

The words, thou shalt know them by their appearance, contain a tribute to the Holy Prophet, who is here spoken of as being able to know such persons as are in want but refrain from disclosing their needs to others; and believers are exhorted to follow the example of the Holy Prophet in this respect. Abu Hurairah relates a personal incident which beautifully brings out this characteristic of the Prophet. He says that one day he was suffering from extreme hunger but, as Islam did not approve of begging, he could not ask anybody for food, and at the same time he would not leave the Prophet’s mosque for fear of losing his company. At that time Abu Bakr happened to pass by and, in order to draw his attention to his own famished condition, Abu Hurairah asked him to explain a verse of the Quran which dealt with charity. Abu Bakr, failing to understand his real object, explained to him the verse and passed on. Then came ‘Umar, and the hunger-stricken Abu Hurairah approached him also with the request to explain the verse. ‘Umar too failed to catch his purpose and, explaining to him the verse, went on his way. The Holy Prophet, who at that time happened to be within hearing inside his house, opened his window and with a bowl of milk in his hand, called Abu Hurairah and smilingly asked him whether he was hungry. And, receiving a reply in the affirmative, he further asked him to invite all the seven men who happened to be present in the mosque at that time. Before handing the cup of milk to Abu Hurairah, the Holy Prophet offered it to those seven men who were also hungry like Abu Hurairah. All the seven drank milk out of the bowl but, says Abu Hurairah, it remained as full as ever. Then the Prophet gave it to Abu Hurairah who drank his fill. When Abu Hurairah could drink no more, the Holy Prophet took the bowl and drank the remaining milk (Tirmidhi ch. on Zuhd).

The verse incidentally praises those who abstain from begging and hints at the impropriety of begging as the words تعفف (abstaining from an improper or unlawful thing) and الحافا (with importunity) clearly indicate. The Holy Prophet greatly disapproved of begging and there are diverse sayings of his to that effect.