دُونِ ٱللَّهِ

10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.

Important Words:

عبد (servant). For the root meaning of the word see note under 1:5. As explained there, the verb عبد means, he showed complete submissiveness and humility; or he received the imprint of a thing. So عبد would mean a person who, through complete submission and humility to God, has become, as it were, an image of God. The word has been used here about the Holy Prophet by way of endearment and is expressive of the exalted position he holds in the sight of God.

شھداء (helpers) is the plural of شھید which is derived from شھد i.e. he was present; or he gave witness, etc. Thus شھیدmeans, one who is present; one who sees or witnesses; one who gives testimony or evidence; one who possesses much knowledge; one from whose knowledge nothing is hidden (Aqrab & Lane); also a helper (Mufradat). Following the last mentioned signification the word may also refer here to the Jews who were friends of the disbelievers (5:81) and spoke of the idolaters as being better guided in religion than those who believe (4:52).

Commentary:

In the preceding two verses the Quran gave its first commandment to the people. Having been thus directly addressed by God, the polytheistic disbelievers felt a natural reaction to repudiate the monotheistic teaching of the Quran, because they felt that its acceptance meant that they should give up their long cherished beliefs.

In the present verse God says that if the Quran created doubts and disquietude in their minds and is not worthy of acceptance, the disbelievers should produce one like it. If they cannot, then this very fact would prove them to be wrong.

The subject of the incomparable excellence of the Quran, has been dealt with at five different places in the Quran, i.e. in 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89; & 52:34, 35, and disbelievers have been challenged, to produce its equal.

In two of these five verses (2:24 & 10:39) the challenge is identical, while in the remaining three verses three separate and different demands have been made from disbelievers. Thus, to begin with the largest demand in 17:89, disbelievers are challenged to produce the like of the whole Quran, and they have been told that even if all jinn and men should join together, they would not be able to produce it. In 11:14 the challenge is limited to the production of ten chapters. In 2:24 and 10:39, however, it has been confined to one Surah only; while in 52:34-35, the condition of even one Surahhas been omitted and disbelievers have been given the option of producing even a single narration similar to any one narration (i.e. announcement) of the Quran. On the face of it, this difference in the form of the challenge at different places seems to be incongruent and to spring from a lack of harmony in the Quran. Some commentators have endeavoured to explain away this seeming incongruity by saying that it was due to the challenge having been made at different times. At first disbelievers were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran. When they failed to do so, the challenge was whittled down to the production of the like of any ten chapters. When, however, they were unable to produce even ten chapters, the challenge was further reduced to the production of a single chapter; and, lastly, disbelievers were asked to produce even a single narration like any narration of the Quran. This explanation, however, does not seem to be satisfactory. The different Surahs containing these different challenges were revealed, in the following order: (1) 52:34, 35; (2) 17:89; (3) 11:14; (4) 10:39; (5) 2:24 (Rodwell). Now in Surah 52, the first to be revealed, the challenge is not qualified by any condition as regards size, disbelievers having been given the choice of producing even one single narration similar to any narration of the Quran. It is very strange that, whereas at first the challenge was unqualified and disbelievers were called upon to produce something comparable to any narration of the Quran, later it began to be hedged round by conditions and stipulations, first requiring disbelievers to produce the like of the whole book, then reducing the challenge to ten Surahs, and last of all reducing it to a single chapter. The order is most unnatural.

Moreover, some of the Surahs which contain this challenge were revealed on occasions so close to one another that some commentators have found it difficult to fix their order of priority with certainty. Hence it is unwise to settle this question on the basis of the chronological order of the Surahs containing this challenge.

Another point worth considering in this connection is that the verses in question do not mention any historical event but contain only a general challenge which stands for all time. Now the question is, in what form should the challenge be delivered to the world? Should disbelievers be called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran, or to produce ten Surahs like any ten Surahs of the Quran, or should they be called upon to bring forward the like of one Surah only or the like of any single piece of the Quran? If it is enough to make a demand for the like of a single piece of the Quran, why should a demand for the like of a Surah be made, and if it is enough to make a demand for the like of one Surah, the demand for the production of ten Surahs or, for that matter, for the whole of the Quran seems extravagant.

The fact is that these verses contain certain demands which stand for all time, and there is no need to enter into the question of their chronological order. The challenge can be made even today in all the different forms mentioned in the Quran as it was made at the time of the Holy Prophet.

Before explaining the various forms of these challenges it is worth noting that mention of them in the Quran is invariably accompanied by a reference to wealth and power, except in 2:24, which, as already stated, does not contain a new challenge but only repeats the challenge made in 10:39. From this it may be concluded that there exists a close connection between the question of wealth and power and the challenge for the production of the like of the Quran or a part thereof. This connection lies in the fact that the Quran has been held out to disbelievers as a priceless treasure. When disbelievers demanded material treasures from the Holy Prophet and asked, Wherefore has not a treasure been sent down to him (11:13), they were told in reply that he possessed a matchless treasure in the Quran. The same reply was repeated when disbelievers asked, Wherefore has not an angel come with him? (11:13). They were told in reply that angels did descend upon him; for their function was to bring the word of God, and the Divine Word had already been vouchsafed to him. Thus both the demand for a treasure and the demand for the descent of angels have been jointly met by offering the Quran as a matchless treasure brought down by angels, and the challenge to produce the like of the Quran has been put forward as a proof of its peerless quality.

Let us now take the different verses containing this challenge separately. The greatest demand is that made in 17:89, where disbelievers are required to bring a book like the whole of the Quran in all its manifold qualities. In this verse disbelievers are not required to represent their composition as the word of God. They may bring it forward as their own composition and declare it to be the equal of or, for that matter, better than the Quran. As, however, it was necessary to define in what respect the work to be produced was to resemble the Quran, the Quran says in the next verse, And of a truth We have (herein) set forth for mankind in various ways, all kinds of similitudes, but most of men would reject everything but disbelief (17:90), hinting thereby that if disbelievers reject the Divine origin of the Quran and believe it to be the work of the Prophet himself, then let them produce a book which, like the Quran, should possess the following excellences: (a) it should throw light on every essential subject pertaining to religion; (b) its discussion of these subjects should be exhaustive, offering detailed guidance on every question; (c) it should be free from all harm and contain nothing but good; and (d) it should aim not at the good of any particular people or community but at the well-being of all mankind, containing guidance for all temperaments and dispositions as well as for all circumstances and conditions. But as at the time when this challenge was made the whole of the Quran had not yet been revealed, disbelievers were not required to produce the like of the Quran there and then; and the challenge thus implied a prophecy that they would not be able to produce the like of it, neither in the form in which it then was nor when it became complete. Again, the challenge was not confined to the disbelievers of the Prophet’s time alone, but extended to doubters and critics of all times.

The second verse which contains a challenge is 11:14. In this verse the disbelievers’ objection that the Prophet had not come with a treasure, nor had an angel come to him, has been met by calling upon them to bring similar Surahswhich they should represent as the word of God. The latter demand, i.e. that pertaining to the representation of the required production as the word of God, has a reference to the objection of the disbelievers that no angel has come down to the Prophet. They are told that if no angel has really come to him and his claim to receive divine revelation through the medium of angels is false, then let them also produce ten Surahs, claiming, like him, that they have been brought down to them by angels, and then see what their end would be. If they had not the courage to forge a lie against God, how could they think that the Prophet could be guilty of such fabrication or, if he had dared to commit this forgery, why had he remained secure from God’s punishment?

The reason why the disbelievers in this verse have been called upon to produce ten Surahs and not the whole Quran is that the question here did not relate to the perfection of the Quran in all respects, but to that of only a portion of it. The disbelievers had objected to some parts of it being defective, as is evident from the words: They imagine that thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee (11:13). Hence, they have not been required here to bring a complete book like the whole Quran, but only ten Surahs in place of those parts of the Quran which they deem to be defective, in order that the truth of their assertion may be tested.

As for the selection of the specific number 10 for this purpose, it should be noted that in Arabic 10 represents a complete number. As the object was to refute the assertion of the disbelievers that certain portions of the Quran were defective, therefore the disbelievers were given the option of making as many as ten efforts to substantiate their claim. They were thus asked to produce ten Surahs not because they could produce less than that number but because the best way to refute their objection was to afford them several opportunities to substantiate the truth of their assertion. In short, since in 17:89 the whole Quran was claimed to be a perfect Book, its opponents were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran; but since in 11:14 the point was that certain portions of it were objected to, so they were asked to choose ten such portions as appeared to them to be most defective and then, produce a composition even like those portions.

The third verse where the Quran has been declared to be matchless is 10:39. Here disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of only one Surah of the Quran. This is so because, unlike the above-mentioned two verses, the challenge made in this verse is in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. In the verses preceding 10:39, it was claimed that God possessed full authority over all things (see 10:32-36), and as a proof of this, in 10:38 the Quran was put forward as possessing the following excellences: (a) it contains teachings which could not be devised by man; (b) it has come in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the previous Scriptures; (c) in it the imperfect teachings of the previous Scriptures have been perfected; (d) the word of God embodied in it has been made secure from being interpolated or tampered with by man; and (e) its teachings are meant for all men and all time. In support of this claim, verse 10:39 throws out a challenge to those who deny or doubt it to produce a single chapter containing these excellences in the same perfect form in which they are contained in this chapter, i.e. ch.10.

The verses 52:34, 35 contain the smallest of all demands. In these verses disbelievers are challenged to produce a single piece or a single announcement like any piece or announcement of the Quran. This demand also has been made in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. Hence the smallness of the demand. The claim in question is made in the opening verses of chapter 52, i.e. Surah At-Tur, to the effect that the Quranic revelation which was promised to mankind through Moses on Mount Sinai, will continue to be written, read and published throughout the world and that its followers will continue to multiply and will comprise not only common men but persons of great spiritual and temporal eminence, and that the fountain of the new faith will continue to provide the water of eternal life to all the countries of the world so that the fulfilment of these prophecies will constitute a proof of the fact that there is a Day of Judgement. Thereafter the Quran proceeds in 52:34, 35 to challenge disbelievers that, if they look upon the revelation of the Quran to be a fabrication, then they should come forward and make a prophecy like the one made above. This challenge is unconditional and without qualification. Disbelievers are not required to represent what they produce as the word of God, nor is it laid down as a condition that their prophecy should be of their own devising. They may as they like either make a prophecy of their own devising or borrow it from any other Scripture. Again, disbelievers are not asked to bring forward as many prophecies as there are in the Quran—and these are legion—but to bring forward only one single prophecy similar to any one of the prophecies made in the beginning of the Surah. They are told that they will not be able to fulfil this demand, for such a prophecy could be made only by the Being Who is the Creator and Owner of the heavens and the earth, along with their treasures, and Who not only knows, but possesses mastery of, the unseen. This challenge also stands for all time.

The fifth challenge to produce a like of the Quran is contained in the verse under comment (2:24) and here also, as in 10:39, disbelievers have been called upon to bring a Surah like that of the Quran, not in refutation of any of their objections, but in support of a claim made by the Quran itself. In the case of the verse under comment this claim is stated in the beginning of the Surah in 2:3 which says: This is a perfect Book; there is no doubt in it; it is a guidance for the righteous. Similarly, 10:39 is also preceded with the words: there is no doubt about it (10:38). This shows that the challenge to produce a chapter like one of the Quran has special reference to the peculiarity which is described by the words, there is no doubt about it. The challenge given in the present Surah is preceded by the claim that the Quran is a guidance for those who fear God (2:3), which means that it guides the righteous to the highest stages of spiritual progress. Hence in the above challenge it has been declared that if disbelievers are in doubt as to the Divine origin of the Quran, then they should bring forward a Surah that may be com­parable to the Quran in the spiritual influence it exercises over its followers.

One of the characteristics of the Quran is that, whatever chapter of it we may read, it casts a subtle and sublime spiritual influence over our minds. Thus, instead of creating doubts it dispels them and takes men to a stage where no doubt can possibly survive, which is the stage of communion with God. This stage can be attained only by the study of the Quran; no other Book can compare with it in this respect.

The above explanation will show that all these challenges calling upon disbelievers to produce the like of the Quran are quite distinct and separate one from another, and all of them stand for all time, none of them superseding or cancelling any other. The misconception that these challenges are one and the same seems to have arisen from the wrong notion that in all of them it is the elegance of the Quranic style and diction that has been held out as unique and incomparable and that it is such elegance of Arabic diction that disbelievers have been called upon to produce. But this is not the case. The challenges made in the five Surahs referred to above are not one or identical nor do they make the same demand; each has a distinct and separate demand of its own and it is in keeping with the nature of these demands that disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran or a part of it.

The question now remains whether these demands also include a challenge to produce a work comparable to the Quran in elegance of style and diction. The answer is that they certainly do so, but only in an indirect way and not as a direct and fundamental demand, for sublime ideas can only be expressed in sublime language. As the Quran comprises sublime and lofty ideas, it was inevitable that the most beautiful diction and the most chaste style should have been employed as the vehicle for the expression of those ideas; otherwise, the subject matter was liable to remain obscure and doubtful and the perfect beauty of the Quran would have become marred. Thus, in whatever form and in whatever respect disbelievers have been challenged to produce a composition like the Quran, the demand for beauty of style and elegance of diction comparable to those of the Quran also forms a part of the challenge.

3:190; 5:41; 7:159; 9:116; 43:86; 57:6.

Important Words:

ولی (protector). They say ولی الرجل i.e. he helped him; or he made friends with him. ولی البلد means, he got control or authority over the town. So ولی means: (1) friend; (2) helper; (3) protector; (4) ally, etc. (Aqrab).

Commentary:

In this verse an argument has been brought forth in support of the fact that Quranic revelation abrogates the previous revelations. God says that to Him belongs the entire universe, the heavens and the earth, and it was in the fitness of things that finally a revelation meant for the whole of mankind should have made its appearance.

In the verse, the Jews are also told that it will be to their own interest to embrace Islam; for otherwise they will have neither friend nor helper against Allah.

There is a subtle implication in the verse, viz. that the Muslims, though despised and persecuted today, will not only receive spiritual favours from God, but will also become masters of large earthly kingdoms as well; for is not Allah the Controller of the heavens and the earth?

29:41.

Important Words:

خسفنا (We caused him to be swallowed up) is formed from خسف. They say خسف المکان i.e. the house fell down or sank into the earth. خسف القمر means, the moon suffered an eclipse. خسف الرجل means, the man became emaciated. خسف فلاناً means, he humbled him and made him to bear a thing which he did not like. خسف اللّٰه الارض بفلان means, God made the earth to sink with such a one and to swallow him up (Lane & Aqrab).

Important Words:

دون (other than) is derived from دان i.e. he or it was or became low, mean or weak. دون used as an adjective means, low, mean, paltry, or contemptible; also high and noble. When used as a preposition, as in the present verse, دون gives the sense of (1) this side of, i.e. behind or lower in tank; (2) that side of, i.e. ahead or higher in rank; (3) other than (Aqrab).

انداد (objects of worship). See 2:23.

Commentary:

While dealing with the subject of idolatry the Quran makes use of the following four words: (1) ند (like or equal); (2) شریك (co-partner or sharer); (3) اله (worthy of worship); and (4) رب (sustainer). While the first two words are used only about those objects of worship that are other than God, the last two are used about God also. The word ند (like or equal) which is used in the present verse refers to such objects of worship as are supposed to be like God or equal to Him, being contrary or opposed to the true God. Among those who have set up انداد (equals) with God may be mentioned the Zoroastrians who believe in two independent gods, i.e. Ormazd, the God of Light, and Ahriman, the God of Darkness.

Love of God is the essence of all religion. In Islam it forms the central point, the pivot round which the whole Islamic teaching revolves. No religion has emphasised the love of God as much as Islam has. The Holy Prophet was so much engrossed in God that he was spoken of by the pagan Arabs as having fallen in love with Him, even as a lover falls in love with his beloved. No other subject has been so completely and so repeatedly dealt with in the Quran as God’s beauty and excellence and such of His attributes as create an irresistible love and longing in the human soul for his Lord and Master Who is spoken of in the Quran as a "Most Loving God" (11:91; 85:15). Yet Christian writers accuse Islam of being a cold and calculating religion, bereft of all love for God. Can anything be farther from the truth?

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

Important Words:

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

10:54; 11:34; 42:32.

Commentary:

The warning is conveyed to disbelievers in yet more emphatic words in this verse, that they cannot frustrate God’s plan, and avert the terrible fate that is in store for them as the Divine decree has issued forth that Islam shall make progress and its cause shall triumph.

9:31.

Important Words:

اربابا (Lords) is the plural of رب (Lord) for which see 1:2. رب means, lord, master or owner; a chief or ruler to whom obedience is rendered; one who fosters, brings up, or nourishes (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these faiths become united in the doctrine of the Oneness of God, the verse permits the sacrifice of other Islamic teachings as being of comparatively little importance. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The Quran, the Hadith and the facts of history are all united in belying this ridiculous assumption. It is simply unthinkable that compromise in matters of faith could be allowed by any religion worth the name, particularly with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer contest to invoke the curse of God upon those who lie in their beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in the Oneness of God could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save Heraclius from God’s punishment. Elsewhere the Quran emphatically declares that, Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam, (i.e. complete submission); and whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the losers (3:20 & 86). Can anything be clearer?

The truth is that this verse is intended to suggest an easy and simple method by which Jews and Christians can arrive at a right decision regarding the truth of Islam. Christians, in spite of claiming belief in the Unity of Godhead, felt satisfied in believing in the divinity of Jesus; and Jews, notwithstanding their claim to be monotheists, gave blind allegiance to their priests and divines, practically placing them in the position of God Himself. The verse exhorts both these communities to come back to their original belief in the Oneness of God and give up the worship of false deities who stand in the way of their accepting Islam. Thus, instead of seeking a compromise with these faiths, the verse virtually invites Christians and Jews to the faith of Islam, by drawing their attention to the doctrine of the Oneness of God which being, at least in its outer form, the common fundamental doctrine of all, could serve as a meeting ground for further approach.

It was exactly on these lines that Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, in his "Message of Peace", made an offer to the Hindus of India to enter into an agreement with the Muslims of his way of thinking to the effect that they (Hindus) would respect and honour the Holy Prophet of Islam and would look upon him as a true Messenger of God, even as he and his followers believed in Rama and Krishna as God’s Elect.

Special emphasis has been laid in the verse under comment on the Oneness of God—a doctrine on which in theory all revealed religions seem to agree, but regarding the details, of which no two Faiths are found to concur. Most religions claim to be monotheistic; but under the outer veneer of monotheism, polytheism very often lies hidden in most hideous forms. It is the simple faith of Islam alone which is really and truly monotheistic in all its aspects and which strongly condemns the association with God of anything or any being in His person, attributes, worship or works. It is most unfortunate, however, that in spite of Islam being such a strictly monotheistic faith, a section of present-day Muslims has drifted away into the quagmire of what cannot but be termed idol-worship in the wider sense of the word.

Incidentally, it may be noted that the letter mentioned by Bukhari and other Muslim traditionists as having been addressed by the Holy Prophet to Heraclius in the words of this verse inviting him to accept Islam has recently been discovered and found to contain the exact words quoted by Bukhari (R. Rel. vol. V. No. 8). This furnishes a strong proof of the essential authenticity of Bukhari and, for that matter, of other accepted works of Hadith.

5:117, 118.

Important Words:

ربانیین (solely devoted to the Lord) is the plural of ربانی which is a relative noun derived from رب (Lord) just as لحیانی (long-bearded) and شعرانی (having long hair) are derived from لحیة (beard) and شعر (hair) respectively. Keeping in view the different meanings of رب (see 1:2 and 3:65) the word ربانی would mean, one who devotes himself to religious service, or applies himself to acts of devotion; one who possesses knowledge of God; one who is learned in religious matters; a good or righteous man; a worshipper of the Lord; a teacher of others who begins to nourish people with the small matters of knowledge or science before taking the great ones; a learned man who not only practises what he knows but also instructs others; one of high rank in knowledge; a lord or master; a leader; a reformer (Lane, Sibawaih & Mubarrad).

The expression ماکان له (it is not possible for him) is, according to Arabic idiom, used in three senses: (1) it does not become him; as in the hadith ماکان لا بن ابی قحافة ان یصلی بین یدی رسول الله صلعم i.e. it does not become the son of Abu Quhafah, (i.e. AbuBakr) to lead the Faithful in Prayers in the presence of the Prophet of God (Bukhari); (2) it is rationally impossible for him to do so; or, it does not stand to reason that he should have done so; (3) he cannot possibly do so, i.e. it is physically impossible for him to do so. It is in the second sense that the expression has been used in this verse. See also 2:35.

Commentary:

It is quite inconceivable that a man whom God has raised as a Prophet and to whom He has given a revealed Book for the guidance of men should teach them to take him as God beside Allah. Such a supposition would imply a serious reflection on God Himself Who chose for His Messenger a man who undid the very work which he had been commissioned to do, and who, instead of calling upon men to worship God, set himself up as God and called upon them to adore him. Such a thing can never occur. A Prophet would always exhort men to become the devotees of God only.

The words, because you teach the Book and because you study it, show that it is the duty of all those who succeed in acquiring spiritual knowledge to impart it to others and not to let men grope in the darkness of ignorance.

16:87.

Commentary:

The expression مودة بینکم may be interpreted as follows:

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

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

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

Commentary:

In the previous several verses arguments have been given in refutation of Shirk and brief references have been made to the lives and missions of some of the greatest preachers of Divine Unity to show that those who rejected them ultimately came to grief. This subject of the Unity of God is brought to a close in this verse with a beautiful metaphor which drives home the folly, futility and falsity of idolatrous beliefs and practices of polytheists. They are as frail, says the verse, as the web of a spider and cannot stand intelligent criticism.

17:57.

Commentary:

As the human soul is immortal, man is warned against committing deeds which might vitiate it and which are displeasing to God. The most heinous of all evil deeds is the setting up of equals with Him and the adoring of false gods.

Important Words:

فلیبتکن (will cut) is derived from بتك. They say بتکه i.e. he cut it or severed it, or slit it, or cut it off entirely, or plucked it out (Lane).

Commentary:

The opening part of the verse is a continuation of the speech of Satan begun in the last verse, and the latter part embodies a pronouncement of the judgement of God.

As a mark of their dedication to false deities, the Arabs used to cut the ears of dedicated animals in order to distinguish them from other animals. This foolish practice persists even to this day among some ignorant people in India and elsewhere.

The "alteration of God’s creation" can be, and is, generally done in four ways: (1) by deifying God’s creation; (2) by changing and corrupting the religion of God; (3) by deforming or disfiguring the body of a newborn child; (4) by turning to an evil use that which God has created for a good purpose. For instance, God has endowed man with many faculties by making a right use of which he can make great progress in all departments of life, but not unoften he seeks to alter God’s creation by making an evil use of them and as a result thereof "suffers a manifest loss".

4:46; 33:18, 66.

Commentary:

The expression, It shall not be according to your desires, does not mean that the desires of the Faithful will not materialize. The verse purports to lay down a general principle that it is only the Will of God which prevails. As the desires of true believers must coincide with the will of God, they are bound to materialize.

3:58; 16:97; 39:11.

7:158; 64:9.

6:72; 10:107; 21:67; 22:13.

Commentary:

Jesus, who is looked upon as God, had no power to do either harm or good to any person. He could not, rather cannot, hear prayers nor does he know the needs of men that he may satisfy them; for it is Allah alone Who is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.

5:110; 9:78; 34:49.

Important Words:

The words ما یکون لی (I could not) may be interpreted in various ways, such as, it was not fitting or proper for me to do so; or it did not behove me; or it was beyond my power or position; or it was impossible for me; or I had no right to do so, etc. See also 3:80.

نفس (mind) means, among other things, knowledge; purpose or intention (Lane). See also 3:29.

Commentary:

The expression, Holy art Thou, besides hinting that it is only God Who is free from error, embodies a beautiful reply on the part of Jesus to the question put to him by God in the words, didst thou say to men, 'Take me and my mother for two gods', which seemed to imply a sort of reproach and an expression of displeasure. The reply of Jesus appears to be something like this: "I was only a humble Messenger, O God, therefore I could not ask men to take me and my mother as gods beside Thee, for if I had done so, that would have been a reflection on Thee that Thou didst choose as Thy Messenger a person who turned faithless to Thee and asked his followers to take him and his mother as gods beside Thee. But Thy choice, o God, cannot be wrong; hence it was impossible that I, a Messenger of Thine, should have bidden men take me and my mother as gods, and Thine own all-embracing knowledge, o God, is a testimony of my innocence."

The word نفس (mind) when used about God implies "intention." Thus the last sentence of the verse would mean, "I do not know what Thou meanest by this question. Thou, being All-Knowing, well knowest that I did not say so; hence, I fail to understand the object or purpose of Thy ques-tion." This reply of Jesus shows that in his heart he was afraid that some shortcoming in the execution of his duty might have displeased the Almighty.

6:123; 9:37; 10:13; 27:5; 40:38; 49:8.

Commentary:

In the foregoing verses, the Quran has spoken rather contemptuously of the utter helplessness of the false deities whom people associate with God. This might lead some Muslims to revile the false deities of the polytheists. The present verse warns them against following such a course. God has denounced the idols in His capacity as a judge, and the denunciation of a judge is not considered as abuse, but as a necessary expression of opinion. This does not give others the right to abuse the persons condemned by the Heavenly Judge and thereby offend their feelings, or the feelings of those who love and respect them.

The verse provides yet another reason for this noble teaching. It purports to say, if you, O Muslims, revile disbelievers’ false gods whom they treat with love and reverence, the result will be that they will be excited by your abuse and will retaliate by reviling God in return. The verse thus not only inculcates respect for the feelings of others but also assures amity between nations and communities.

The expression زینا (We have caused to seem fair) signifies not that God has actually beautified evil actions but that He has so created the nature of man (and in this law of God lies the secret of man’s progress) that when he goes on doing a thing for some length of time, he acquires a liking for it, and his action begins to appear good in his sight. So, in accordance with this general law of God, idolaters have also come to like their worship of idols, which appears to them to be good and meritorious.

5:50; 42:16.

Commentary:

This verse is connected with 6:53 above. The Holy Prophet is here bidden to say to disbelievers what may be described as follows: "I have nothing to do with your gods and I therefore cannot, for your sake, drive away my poor followers. They believe in the One God, while you are idolaters. How can I then drive away the believers in the One God for the sake of those who disbelieve! You say that if you join Islam, it will receive strength and support from you. But the truth is that if I follow your wishes, the result will be that I shall become lost and my movement will be ruined rather than strengthened. Again, my mission is that men may accept and follow guidance; but if I act upon your wishes, the result will be that I myself will go astray. Then there will be no Islam and no guidance. What then shall I gain from your support?"

5:58; 7:52; 8:36.

10:5.

Important Words:

تبسل (be consigned to perdition) is derived from بسل i.e. he prevented or prohibited or debarred. ابسل besides giving the above-mentioned meaning, also means, he gave in pledge; or gave in exchange. ابسله also means, he gave him up to or he delivered him over to or he consigned him to destruction or perdition or punishment (Lane & Aqrab).

شراب (drink) is derived from شرب i.e. he drank. شراب means, a drink or beverage; any liquid which is drunk and not eaten or chewed. This is the original significance. Post-classical writers, however, sometimes use the word in the sense of خمر (wine) also (Lane).

حمیم (boiling water) is derived from حم i.e. it (water, etc.) became hot or very hot. The word is also used transitively, meaning, he heated water, etc. or he heated it fully. حم الشحمة means, he melted the fat. حمه means, he washed him with hot water or, conversely, with cold water. حمیم means, hot water or, conversely, cold water; sweat or perspiration. The word also means a friend or a beloved person (Lane). The last significance is probably based on warmth of feeling.

Commentary:

The context and the sense of the passage required the use of the words "thy religion," but the Quran uses the words "their religion" instead of "thy religion". This is to point out that it was for their own good that the religion of Islam had been sent and that they were injuring themselves by rejecting it.

The words, admonish people thereby, signify that if disbelievers are in a state of excitement and it is found that admonition will provoke them all the more, then one should "let them alone"; but if there is no fear of their being provoked, then one should first admonish them and then quit their company. The pronoun in به (thereby) refers to the Quran.

The verse also contains an exhortation to believers not to get enraged at the scornful remarks of disbelievers. As it is the duty of believers to admonish and warn disbelievers, therefore the former should patiently endure the taunts of the latter.

As shown under Important Words, the word تبسل (consigned to perdition) may also mean, "be given up or surrendered." Taking the word in the latter sense, the sentence would mean, "Admonish the people lest a soul be surrendered to what it has wrought," i.e. admonish them lest they be given over to the evil works they are now engaged in, viz. lest they continue in their evil condition. See also 2:16. Taking the word in the former sense, i.e. as rendered in the text, the sentence would mean, "Admonish them lest they be consigned to destruction or punishment on account of the evil deeds which they have wrought."

The verse is addressed to believers and points out to them the urgent need of preaching the truth to disbelievers. It calls upon believers to picture to themselves the dire consequences of their failure to preach the truth to disbelieving people. If they do not show disbelievers the right path, the result will be that the latter will continue in their error and will be delivered over to destruction on account of their sins, being reduced to a condition when they will have no helper and no intercessor and when no compensation or ransom will be accepted from them.

The "boiling water" mentioned in the verse will serve as a medicine to bring about a cure, while the "grievous punishment" will be in the nature of an operation.

21:67; 22:74.

Important Words:

استھوته (entice away) is derived from ھوی. They say ھوی الشیء i.e. the thing fell down or came down (from a higher to a lower place). Conversely ھوی الرجل الجبل means, the man climbed the hill. ھوت الریح means, the wind blew.ھویة means, he loved and desired it. الـھوی means, love of good or evil; desire; inclination; evil inclination or desire. استھواء means, he took away all his desire and reason leaving him confounded; he made his evil desires look fair in his eyes (Aqrab). الـھوی also means, inclination of the soul or the mind to a thing; an object of love; the inclination of the soul to that in which the animal appetites take delight, without any lawful invitation thereto; opinion swerving from the right way or from the truth (Lane).

حیران (bewildered) is derived from حار which means, he was or became dazzled by a thing at which he looked, so that he turned away his eyes from it; he was or became confounded or perplexed and unable to see his right course; he erred or lost his way. حیران means, in a state of confusion or perplexity, being unable to see his right course; erring; having lost his way (Lane).

Commentary:

The opening clause of the verse teaches by means of an example how to preach the truth. It points out that the best way to preach is to begin by exposing the errors of the opposing party as hinted in the words, neither profit us nor harm us, and then to proceed to point out the truth as hinted in the words, after Allah has guided us.

The verse then gives an apt illustration to expose the futility of شرك i.e. attributing co-partners to God. It compares the case of an idol-worshipper to that of a distracted person who has no fixed course to pursue. Such a person first goes to one idol or to the tomb of one saint and then to another and has no certainty or conviction. But a true believer has a fixed purpose and a fixed goal. He always prays to the One God with a deep-rooted conviction and does not wander about distracted like an idolater.

The reader will note that, true to its own principle, the verse first exposes the error of idolaters and then enunciates the teachings of Islam.

16:37; 22:19.

39:39.

6:22; 10:18; 11:19; 61:8.

6:23; 40:74-75.

6:131.

Commentary:

The verse gives the reasons why the rejecters of Divine Messengers deserve severe punishment. People incur the wrath of God because they treat His Messenger as a liar and reject the heavenly signs he brings with him. Indeed, impostors and the rejecters of true Messengers are equally doomed and can never escape the punishment ordained for them.

The words, who shall have their lot as ordained, mean that the rejecters of God’s Messengers will see before their very eyes the fulfilment of the prophecies foretelling their defeat and discomfiture and shall taste of the punishment promised to them for opposing God’s Messengers.

35:15.

Commentary:

The verse constitutes an open challenge to the idol-worshippers or believers in the plurality of gods that all animate and inanimate things that they call on beside Allah will never answer their prayers, because they do not possess the power to do so.

3:143, 180; 29:3-4.

3:29; 4:140, 145; 9:23.

Important Words:

ولیجة (intimate friend) is derived from ولج. They say ولج البیت i.e. he entered the house. اولجه means, he caused it or him to enter; he inserted it. ولیجة means, anything that is introduced or inserted into another thing; an intimate friend or associate; one whom a person takes to rely upon, not being of his family (Lane).

Commentary:

This verse hints that the trials of Muslims were not yet over. They had still to face more grievous dangers and greater trials, and only those who were true and sincere believers would be able to stand them. The verse thus warns believers to be prepared for still severer tests and yet greater sacrifices. Muslims had indeed been already tried at Badr and Uhud and at the Battle of the Ditch, and had stood the test. But as a new era now dawning for them with the expedition to Tabuk on the border of Syria, the verse calls upon them to make yet greater preparations. The trials and tribulations through which Muslims had already passed were indeed little as compared with the ordeals they had yet to face. The later dangers were far more terrible and grievous than anything they had yet experienced.

The words, and do not take anyone for an intimate friend besides Allah and His Messenger and the believers, are also intended as a warning to Muslims to become yet more united and to allow no foreign element to split their ranks in the coming days of trial and sacrifice.

12:41; 17:24; 98:6.

Important Words:

For احبار (learned men) and رھبان (monks) see 5:45 and 5:83 respectively.

Commentary:

احبار (learned men) belonged to Jews and رھبان (monks) to Christians. Both these people virtually looked upon their religious leaders as so many gods besides the true God.

12:112; 16:90.

Commentary:

The previous verse dealt with the subject that it was necessary for God to have sent down revelation for the guidance of mankind and that it is not in the power of anyone else to provide such spiritual guidance. From a discussion of the subject in principle, the Quran in this verse turns to the particular question, whether the Quran could be the word of man. It answers this question in the negative and gives five very cogent reasons to show that it is indeed the revealed word of God.

The first argument hinted at in the words, except Allah, is that the Quran comprises such subjects as are beyond the power of man to know and as can be revealed by God alone. Now among the things which are known to God alone are matters which pertain to the unseen, viz. prophecies about great events of the future; and there can be no doubt about the Divine origin of a book which contains things which are known to God alone.

The second argument given here to prove the Divine origin of the Quran is that not only do its own prophecies contradict the idea of its having been forged and fabricated by a man but the prophecies of the previous Prophets also establish its Divine origin. This is hinted at in the words, it fulfils that which is before it; and obviously no man-made book has the power to fulfil in itself prophecies foretold in previous Scriptures.

It is a peculiar characteristic of the Quran that, instead of speaking of former Prophets as bearing witness to the truth of the latter Prophets, it represents the latter as fulfilling what the former Prophets have said, the reason being that whereas former Prophets do indeed predict the advent of the Prophets that are to come after them, the latter Prophets establish the truth of the former Prophets by making their appearance exactly at the time and in the manner foretold. The best way of expressing this idea is the one that has been followed by the Quran. For, to say that the former Prophets bear testimony to the truth of such and such a Prophet or of such and such a revelation, is not so effective as to say that it is only by means of the present revelation or the present Prophet that the truth of the former Prophets can now become established. This is a line of reasoning which the followers of the former Prophets dare not reject.

The third argument embodied in this verse is hinted at in the words, an exposition of the Law, i.e. the Quran explains and expounds the teachings of previous Scriptures. This also constitutes a very strong proof of the truth of the Quran. The previous Scriptures require the help of the Quran for the exposition and elucidation of their teachings. The Torah, the Gospels, the Vedas, the Zend-Avesta, all discuss such great spiritual problems as the Unity of God, revelation, Divine attributes, prophethood, life after death, moral and spiritual conditions, etc., but none of these books deals with these questions in such a manner as to make them perfectly clear and understandable, and their ambiguities and obscurities have to be explained with the help of the Quran. So in the verse under comment the claim is made that the Quran explains and clarifies those parts of previous Scriptures about which so much vagueness and obscurity exists and disbelievers are told that, if they deny the Divine origin of the Quran, they will have to admit that the All-Knowing God Himself was unable to put so much spiritual knowledge in all the former revealed books as this human being (the Prophet of Islam) has succeeded in placing in this small Book, the Quran. So the followers of other faiths will have either to admit the Divine origin of the Quran or deny previous Scriptures also.

The fourth argument given in this verse is contained in the words, There is no doubt about it, which means that the Quran contains all the reasons and arguments needed to prove its Divine origin and does not require the help or support of any outside person or book for that purpose. It deals with various social, moral and spiritual problems in such a perfect and exhaustive manner that he who ponders over it dispassionately can readily see that the Quran makes no claim which it does not support with cogent reasons and powerful arguments. This constitutes irrefutable evidence of the fact that this Book has indeed proceeded from God; for the Quran demands our belief in many unseen things and it is not in the power of man to prove unseen things by intellectual reasoning alone without the help of observation and experience. But obviously man cannot provide bases of observation and experience for things unseen. Only God can do it.

The fifth argument of the Divine origin of the Quran as given in this verse is contained in the words, It is from the Lord of all the worlds. This is to hint that by means of the Quran the Divine attribute of Rabbul ‘Alamin (Lord of all the worlds) has been made manifest to all mankind. The Quran is not meant to satisfy the need and requirements of a particular people or a particular period only, as were the previous Scriptures, but is meant for all nations and all ages. Now it is impossible for a human being to produce a book which should satisfy the requirements of all mankind for all time. Man is naturally influenced by his environment and ordinarily foresees and seeks to meet his immediate needs only. It is God alone Who can give such teachings as are equally useful for all times and all peoples and as are unaffected by changes in time and in the conditions and circumstances of man. The Quran embodies such teachings.

39:45; 57:3.

16:74; 22:72; 29:18.

49:17.

Commentary:

The real cause of shirk (idolatry) lies in failure on the part of men to understand the object and purpose of their creation. A mushrik (idolater) has a false conception of the person and attributes of God and of his own great inborn capacities and capabilities. He entertains the foolish belief that he cannot have access to God without the aid of an intermediary, and also that God cannot condescend to come to him except through the medium of those who have already attained His nearness. Islam is opposed to both these views. It does not allow us to entertain any such suspicion about God, nor does it permit us to underrate our own natural powers. God has created man that he may attain His nearness and He does not tolerate that anyone should intervene between Him and His creatures. Even the Prophets of God are not intermediaries. They are only Divine Messengers and Warners, and their intercession is also based on Divine sanction. See also 2:49.

The expression, Would you inform Allah of something He knows not, contains an excellent refutation of shirk (idolatry). It purports to say that if God had appointed anyone as intercessor either in the heavens or in the earth, a declaration would have been made by Him to that effect. But no such announcement has ever been made by God. It is the people themselves who declare that such and such a person has been appointed as an intercessor, and so they, as it were, inform God of something which He does not know.

The words, Holy is He, are meant to point out that it is incompatible with the perfection of God that He should first create man for a certain purpose and then should Himself place obstacles in his way, or should reveal no guidance to warn him of those obstacles.