کَانُوۡا

5:53; 9:125; 74:32.

Important Words:

مرض (disease) is derived from مرض i.e. he fell ill; he lost his health. Thus مرض means, anything whereby a man loses his health (physical, moral or spiritual); disease or hypocrisy; doubt or darkness or loss; omission of any kind (Aqrab); any disease or any physical or moral weakness or defect of faith, in fact, anything that hinders man’s physical, moral or spiritual progress (Mufradat).

یكذبون (they lie) is derived from كذب which means, he lied; he said what was untrue while he knew the truth; he gave a wrong account of something, whether intentionally or unintentionally; it (the heart or the eye) felt or perceived wrongly (Aqrab); he said what was true but said it insincerely, i.e. he himself believed the thing to be untrue (the Quran 63:2). كذب(kadhdhaba) is the causative or transitive form from كذب. They say كذبه i.e. he accused him of lying; he attributed falsehood to him in his claim or statement; he pronounced him a liar. كذب به means, he rejected and disbelieved it. كاذبmeans a liar, and كذاب means a great and habitual liar. كذب (kadhib) and كذاب (kidhdhab) mean, falsehood, lie, untruth; also the act of uttering a lie. كذاب also means the act of accusing one of lying (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

God speaks of two diseases of the heart: (1) كفر i.e. disbelief; and (2) نفاق i.e. hypocrisy. The former has already been referred to in verses 7 and 8. The present verse refers to the disease of hypocrisy and points out that those suffering from it do not act as normal healthy persons do.

The Holy Prophet has mentioned the following signs of hypocrisy. Says he: "When a hypocrite speaks, he lies; and when he makes a promise, he does not fulfil it; and when he is entrusted with anything, he acts dishonestly and when he makes a contract, he breaks it; and when he engages in a dispute, he uses foul words" (Bukhari).

In the verse under comment the increase of hypocrisy is attributed to God, not because God increases it but because the increase results from disregard of His commands; also because it is God who finally dispenses the good and evil consequences of human actions. The Quran has only been revealed for healing diseases. Says Allah: O mankind! There has come to you an exhortation from your Lord and a cure for whatever disease there is in the hearts (10:58).

The increasing of disease also means that the expanding power of Islam was naturally increasing the disease of the hypocrites who were all the more forced to remain, against their will, in outward friendliness with the Muslims.

In the case of disbelievers the punishment mentioned is عذاب عظیم (great punishment), whereas in the case of hypocrites it is عذاب الیم(grievous punishment). This is because disbelievers express their disbelief and enmity openly, while hypocrites keep their feelings of hatred and malice concealed in their hearts, thinking that they are thereby deriving twofold pleasure—one of enmity towards Islam and the other, of befooling the Muslims. So the ret­ribution in store for the hypocrites is characterized by special pain and anguish—a fit recompense for their false pleasure.

2:87, 176; 3:178; 14:4; 16:108.

Important Words:

اشتروا (have taken in exchange) is derived from اشتری which again is derived from شری both having the same meaning, i.e. he purchased a thing or became owner of a thing by purchase. The word also sometimes gives the meaning of باع i.e. he sold a thing. The word اشتری is also used of a person who gives up one thing and lays hold on another (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The expression, who have taken error in exchange for guidance, means (1) that they have given up guidance and taken error instead; or (2) that both guidance and error were offered to them but they preferred error and refused guidance. Both these meanings apply here. According to the first, the verse would mean that originally everybody is endowed with a pure nature and the best of capacities (30:31; 95:5), but, owing to wrong training or wrongdoing, the original nature and capacities become lost. In this case "guidance" would mean the nature or capacities with which every man is endowed by God, and "exchange" would mean that, through improper use, people lose the God-given guidance, landing themselves in error instead. According to the second meaning, the verse would signify that through His Messengers, God communicates to man only truth and guidance, whereas Satan presents to him his own evil teaching. Wrong choice by man results in hisacceptance of error instead of guidance.

This traffic, however, brings the hypocrites no gain. They believe that by preferring the promptings of Satan to the guidance of God, they would reap a good profit in this life. But, says God, they will reap no such profit. On the contrary, they will be the losers and will suffer humiliation through their own wrong choice.

The words, nor are they rightly guided, point to yet another consequence of the wrong choice of hypocrites. They will not only suffer loss and humiliation in this life, but will also suffer punishment in the life to come, for being deprived of guidance they will not reach the goal. Thus the words, their traffic has brought them no gain, refer to the benefits that accrue to one in this life, and the words, nor are they rightly guided, refer to the end they will meet in the life to come.

The verse teaches an important truth. Every action of man is attended by two kinds of results, one immediate and the other deferred. A person who is detected in theft suffers punishment and humiliation in this life. This is the immediate consequence of his action. The deferred consequence is that, by the same action, he reduces his ability to find and accept the truth and guidance. Similarly, when a person does a good deed, the immediate result is that he is pleased with himself and rises in the estimation of others. The deferred consequence is that he increases his power of finding and accepting truth and guidance. It is the deferred consequences that are referred to in the expression, nor are they rightly guided.

Important Words:

وقع (is passed). They say وقع الشیء من یدہ, the thing fell from his hand. وقع الحق means, the truth became established (Lane & Aqrab).

قول is inf. n. from قال and means, decree, sentence or the prophecy about punishment. واقع الطیر علی الشجر means, the bird descended upon the tree. The expression وقع القول علیھم means, the sentence or the decree became due against them; they made themselves deserving of the sentence or the decree (Lane & Aqrab).

دابة (insect) is active participle from دب which means, he or it crept or crawled slowly like an ant or a reptile or a weak person. دابة signifies all such animals or insects as creep or crawl or walk slowly, all animals big or small, whether walking on two legs or on four legs or creeping on the belly, etc. The word is also used about beasts like the horse, the mule, the donkey, etc. (Lane & Aqrab). In the Quran the expression دابة الارض has also been used for a worldly-minded man whose efforts are wholly devoted to the acquisition of material benefits; a grossly materialistic person, a worthless creature or worm of the earth (34:15).

تکلمھم (shall wound them) is aorist from کلم (kallama). کلمه means, he talked to him or he conversed with him much and freely; he wounded him (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The verse seems to imply two prophetic references. Taking دابة الارض in the sense of a grossly materialistic person whose endeavours are wholly directed to the acquisition of worldly riches and material comforts, the reference seems to be to the materialistic western nations "whose labour is all lost in search after things pertaining to the life of this world" (18:105) and who have fallen on this world with all their might and main. The verse purports to say that when men will reject the signs of God and by indulging in evil deeds will make themselves deserving of Divine punishment, they will fall a victim to the plunder and pillage of the materialistic and mechanistic western nations. Taking the word in the sense of "a worm or insect of the earth," the reference may be to the bubonic plague which was to have appeared in the time of the Promised Messiah and from whose ravages his followers were to remain miraculously immune, thus bearing witness to the truth of his claims.

7:138; 26:60; 44:29.

Commentary:

Exploitation and tyranny produce their own nemesis and the exploiters and oppressors never feel secure from the standard of revolt being raised against them by those whom they exploit, suppress and oppress. The greater the oppression of the tyrant, the greater his fear of revolt on the part of the tyrannized. Pharaoh, too, was seized with this fear and, therefore, he employed all sorts of means and machinations to keep the Israelites under permanent subjection. But the time had come that he should be punished and those held in bondage should be emancipated.

Haman was the title of the High Priest of the god Amon, "ham" in Egyptian meaning high priest and Amon was the god who dominated all other Egyptian gods. "Haman was the director of the double treasury and granary and director of the soldiers and all the craftsmen of Thebes. His name was Nebunnef and he was high priest under Ramesus II and his son Merneptah. Being the head of the extremely rich sacerdotal organization embracing all the priesthoods of the country his power and prestige had increased so much that he controlled a most influential political faction and even kept his own private army" (A story of Egypt by James Henry Breasted, Ph.D.).

Haman is also said to be the name of a minister of Ahasuerus, a king of Persia who lived many ages after Moses. There is nothing strange or objectionable in two persons living in two different periods bearing the same name. But Mr. Wherry, only to expose his own crass ignorance, has pretended to discover a serious anachronism in the Quran having called a minister of Pharaoh by the name of Haman, which incidentally was also the name of a minister of a king of Persia (Wherry’s Commentary, vol. 3, p. 254). In fact, anachronism lies in the brain of Mr. Wherry himself and not in the Quran.

20:40.

Important Words:

التقطه (picked him up) is derived from لقط which means, he picked it up, took it up from the ground. التقط الشیء means, he picked up the thing; he stumbled upon it unexpectedly without seeking it. لقیته التقاطا means, I met him unexpectedly (Lane & Aqrab).

The particle ل in لیکون (that he might become) is called لام العاقبة and denotes result and consequence, as in the well-known Arabic couplet:

لدو اللموت وابنوا للخراب

فکلکم یسیر الی تباب

i.e. bear children that they should die and build houses that they should fall into ruins, for all of you are marching towards destruction. Thus the first part of the verse would mean, "And the family of Pharaoh picked him up with the result that ultimately he became an enemy and a source of great grief and sorrow for them."

7:163.

Important Words:

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

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

Commentary:

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

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

3:113.

2:91; 3:113; 5:61.

2:88; 3:22, 113, 184; 5:71.

Important Words:

فومھا (its wheat). فوم means: (1) wheat; (2) any corn suitable for making bread; (3) garlic; (4) chick-pea (Aqrab).

مصر (a town) means:(1) a town or a city; (2) the frontier between two countries; (3) the thing that intervenes between two things (Aqrab).

یقتلون (would kill) is derived from قتل i.e. he killed. The infinitive means: (1) killing with a sword or with a stone or with poison or by any other means; (2) attempting to kill; (3) making up the mind to kill; (4) boycotting or cutting off all connections; (5) killing one’s carnal desires; (6) weakening the strength of a thing, as alcohol is "killed" with the addition of water, or hunger is "killed" with food, etc.; (7) humbling a person completely; (8) rendering a person like unto one killed either physically or morally or spiritually; (9) acquiring complete and certain knowledge about a thing; and (10) cursing a person or thing (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lisan)

Commentary:

In this verse another instance is cited to show how the Israelites made no effort to turn the favours of God to good account. When they were in the desert, God sent them Manna and Salwa. But soon after this they began to exhibit discontent with one kind of food and to clamour for a variety of grain, onions, salad and green-stuff (Num. 11:5-11). It may be noted that both Manna and Salwa taken together were considered one kind of food as they were taken continuously for a long time. It is further learnt from the Bible that the supply of Salwa was discontinued after a while and the Israelites were thus left to live on Manna alone (Num. 11:6). As the demand was not based on a right understanding of the wisdom of God Who wanted the Israelites to breathe the free air of the desert for a time, they met with disgrace and drew upon themselves the wrath of God.

God’s displeasure with the Israelites was not due to their demand for other food. The real cause lay elsewhere. Having lived for a long time in bondage and a state of dependence, they had become cowardly and indolent. So God wished them to stay in the desert for sometime, living on game and wild herbs, that they might get rid of their cowardice and indolence by living an independent life in the desert. Thus revitalized, they were to be led to the Promised Land and made rulers of Palestine. The Israelites, however, failed to understand the real purpose of God or having understood it, failed to appreciate it, and foolishly insisted upon living in a town. God pointed out their error, saying that they had asked for a life of agriculture in preference to what was to lead them to sovereignty. He wanted to prepare them for rule over the Promised Land, but they hungered for husbandry. So He indignantly ordered them to go down to a town where they would get the desired things.

The Israelites deserved punishment, because their impatience was the outcome of a want of faith in the promise of God. This lack of faith in God was due to their opposition to His Prophets and, disbelief in His Signs, and they opposed the Prophets because they were transgressors and evildoers. The Prophets invited them to guidance and virtue which they disliked, and, as a result, they opposed them. Thus the Quran admirably traces the causal sequence of every evil to its origin and strikes at its very root so as to prevent all possibility of recurrence.

The words, we will not remain content with one kind of food, contain a threat and are full of arrogance. If the Israelites had meant simply to express a wish, the words would have been "we are unable to remain content with one kind of food," and not as they stand in the Quran. The Bible gives a vivid picture of their insolent and almost rebellious attitude on this occasion (Num. 11:5-15).

The words یقتلون النبیین translated in the verse as "would kill the Prophets" do not mean that the Israelites actually killed the Prophets, because, up to the time of Moses, no Prophet is known to have been slain by them. As a matter of fact, Moses is the first Prophet who was sent to the Israelites as a nation. Thus Moses and his brother, Aaron, are the only persons to whom the words can be applied; but obviously these two Prophets were not killed by the Israelites, although the latter often opposed them and were sometimes even bent upon killing them (Exod. 17:4). Hence, the word قتل in the verse cannot possibly mean actual killing. Its only meaning here is that they severely opposed the Prophets and were even prepared to kill them. This interpretation finds corroboration not only in Arabic lexicons, for which see Important Words, but the Quran itself supports it in a number of verses where the word قتل has been used undoubtedly, not in the sense of actual killing but in that of attempting to kill or intending to kill (3:22 and 40:29). Bukhari also relates a tradition to the effect that once certain hot-headed Quraish youths brutally assaulted the Holy Prophet in the precincts of the Ka‘bah, whereupon Abu Bakr rushed to his rescue, saying, اتقتلون رجلا ان یقول ربی الله "Do you kill a man because he says Allah is his Lord and Master?" (chapter on Tafsir). In this hadith the word قتل is clearly used in the sense of attempting to kill or intending to kill and not actual killing.

It will not be out of place to point out here that the purport of verse 2:59 discussed above is altogether different from the one under comment. Though in both of them God apparently orders the Israelites to go to some habitation, yet the meaning is entirely different, rather quite the opposite in each case. As a matter of fact, whereas in verse 2:59 God Himself willingly commands the Israelites to go to some habitation, His ordering them to "go down into a town" in the verse under comment is expressive of definite displeasure and anger. In the previous verse the قریة or habitation meant only a habitation found in the desert by going into which the Israelites did not leave the free desert life but rather combined it with the facilities of a habitation. On the contrary, by "going down into" a مصر i.e. a town or city as mentioned in the verse under comment, they altogether abandoned the desert life and adopted a life of ease, as is led in towns and cities. Hence the difference. This is why the Quran uses the simple word ادخلوا i.e. "enter" in 2:59 and the word اھبطوا i.e. "go down", a term expressive of decline, in the verse under comment. Similarly, whereas in verse 2:59 the Quran follows up the commandment with the words eat therefrom plentifully wherever you like, in the present verse the commandment is followed by the words and they were smitten with abasement and destitution. The difference is apparent. The former expression is indicative of the freedom of life in the desert, and the latter of the suffocating atmosphere and mental slavery of towns and cities.

27:59.

Important Words:

رجزا (punishment) is infinitive-noun from رجز (rajaza) and means, punishment; dirt or filth; iniquity or sin; idol worship, etc. (Aqrab). See also 2:60.

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).

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.

3:180; 5:66, 67.

Important Words:

مثوبة (reward) is, like ثواب (with which it is synonymous), derived from ثاب which means, he returned, or he returned to a good condition. مثوبة and ثواب mean, requital or reward of good or bad deeds. Generally, they are used in the sense of a reward of good deeds (Aqrab).

Commentary:

If the Jews had possessed true faith in God and had acted in His fear, they would not have devoted all their energies to the acquisition of worldly gains but would have sought the good of the Hereafter. They have, however, been seeking the advantage of the present life only and have neglected the Hereafter altogether, which shows that they are utterly lacking in true faith and are not leading righteous lives.

5:69.

5:69.

Important Words:

الیھود (the Jews) signifies the followers of Moses or of what is known as Judaism. The word as already explained is either derived from ھاد which means, he turned to God or to the truth with repentance (Aqrab); or it is derived from یھودا (Judah) who was one of the sons of Jacob. As the descendants of یھودا formed an independent kingdom at Jerusalem which became the religious centre of the Jews, therefore the Jewish religion came to be known as Judaism and the people professing that religion as یھود or Jews (Enc. Brit. under the word Jews. See also 2:63 and 2:112).

یتلون (they read) is derived from تلا which means: (1) he followed; (2) he read or recited (Aqrab). The Quran says والقمراذا تلاھاi.e. by the moon when it follows the sun; and again یتلوا علیھم آیاته i.e. the Prophet reads or recites to them God’s Signs. In the present verse the word یتلون may be taken to signify either of these two senses, i.e. they both read the same Book or they both follow the same Book. See also 2:103.

Commentary:

Nothing is more foreign to the spirit of Islam than opposition to truth, wherever it may happen to be. Islam teaches that all faiths possess certain truths and the true religion is so called not because it has a monopoly of truth, but because it possesses all truth and is free from all defects. While, therefore, claiming to be a perfect and complete religion, Islam does not denounce other faiths but frankly acknowledges the truths and the virtues they possess. If this golden principle of Islam be properly understood and appreciated, much existing religious rancour and bitterness would disappear. But unfortunately, there is a general tendency among the followers of different religious systems to refuse to acknowledge the truth found in faiths, other than their own. The Quran declares this attitude of mind to be the result of lack of knowledge and wisdom, and this verse strongly condemns Jews and Christians for refusing to see any good whatever in the rival faith, in spite of the fact that they have a good deal in common, being the followers of the same Book—the Bible.

2:142.

Commentary:

The People of the Book are here warned that the fact that they are the descendants of God’s Prophets would not avail them in any way. Their forefathers reaped the rewards of their good deeds and won God’s favours; and if they also wish to become His favourites, they must perform similar deeds and show implicit obedience to God and complete submission to His will. The fact that they are descended from holy persons makes them all the more responsible.

3:85; 4:164.

2:284.

Commentary:

In this verse Jews and Christians have been indirectly asked how Abraham and his children would fare, if salvation were monopolized by them. If they replied that these holy persons were also Jews or Christians, it would be against all the facts of history, because they belonged to pre-Mosaic times when Jewish and Christian religions had not yet come into existence.

Some short-sighted persons attach so much importance to their own views that they begin to ascribe them to every righteous servant of God. In their discussions, Jews and Christians represented even those of their ancestors who lived before their religions came into existence as the followers of their own faiths.

This is the attitude not only of the ignorant masses, but even educated people sometimes fall a prey to this delusion. Many Christians of great learning hold the untenable belief that even those Prophets and other righteous people who lived before Jesus were saved through his alleged death on the cross. Such men should beware of God’s judgement, as He is not unaware of their deeds.

See 2:135.

Commentary:

Jews and Christians are once more warned against relying upon those of their forefathers who won the pleasure of God by their good deeds. It is their own deeds and not those of others that will save them. Their own good actions alone can bring them salvation and not the fact that they are the descendants or followers of Abraham, Jacob, Moses or Jesus. No bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another, says the Quran (6:165).

See 2:116.

Important Words:

قبلتھم (their Qiblah). The word قبلة is derived from قبل. They say قبل علی الشیء i.e. he began the thing and stuck to it. قبل المکانmeans, he came facing the house. اقبل علیه means, he advanced facing him. اقبل فلانا الشیء means, he put the thing before such a one or in front of him. قبلة means: (1) direction.; (2) direction to which a man turns while praying; (3) anything which one faces; (4) the Ka‘bah at Mecca to which Muslims turn their faces when praying (Aqrab).

Commentary:

In the preceding verses the Quran spoke of the people that have gone before, at the same time hinting at the difference between their deeds and those of the Muslims. In the present verse it introduces a subject in which the Muslims differ from other People of the Book, i.e. the subject of قبلة (Qiblah).

It is a usual practice with the Quran that it does not abruptly give any new commandment such as might appear hard to men. It generally begins by preparing the ground for the acceptance of such commandment by giving arguments in its favour and answering some objections that might possibly arise against it. See also 2:184, 185.

Similar is the case here. As the commandment regarding the change of Qiblah was likely to prove a stumbling block for some people, so the ground is prepared by making a general observation to the effect that the selection of a particular direction does not really matter. What matters is the spirit of obedience to God on the one hand and unity among the Faithful on the other. The clause, To Allah belong the East and the West, signifies that the selection of the East or the West is not of much importance, the real object being God only. The selection of a particular direction is primarily meant for the purpose of unity among the Faithful. But the direction must also be good, and God was now going to choose a good direction for the Muslims and the objections of the people would prove their own folly.

10:29-30; 16:87.

4:42; 16:85.

4:124; 6:161; 17:8; 41:47; 99:8-9.

Commentary:

The verse points to the divine law of compensation which in this life works in this way that whereas for good works God gives a reward many times greater than what the doer has earned, He punishes a bad deed with a punishment which is less than what the guilty person has incurred or at the most with a punishment proportionate to the evil deed which he has committed.

2:83; 3:58; 13:30; 22:57; 30:16; 35:8; 42:23; 47:13.

Commentary:

This verse gives a brief but very apt description of a Mujahid,—a true striver in the way of God. High and noble ideals and consistent and constant effort to carry out those ideals into actual practice is what in Islamic terminology is called Jihad, and the person who possesses these noble ideals and lives up to them is a Mujahid in the true sense of the word.

Man’s good actions are of different degrees. Some are better than others, yet some others are of the noblest quality. The expression لیجزیھم أحسن الذی کانوا یعملون signifies that God will reward all the good works of the believers whether good, better or of the highest quality as if they belonged to the last degree, i.e. He will reward the good deeds of a believer, taking the best of them as the basis of reward.

16:26.

Commentary:

The verse alludes to the leaders of disbelief to whom a reference has also been made in the preceding verse and says that they will have to suffer the punishment for deluding and misleading others in addition to the punishment for their own disbelief and sins.

2:81; 5:19.

Commentary:

Both Jews and Christians persuaded themselves to believe that they would be safe against the punishment of the Hereafter, the Jews thinking themselves immune owing to their being the favoured ones of God on account of their being the descendants of His Prophets, and the Christians deluding themselves with the idea that Jesus, "the son of God", had washed away their sins with his supposed death on the cross. The false notion of each proved their ruin.

11:70-71.

Commentary:

The verse speaks of two things: (1) the glad tidings that the messengers brought to Abraham and (2) the warning that the people of the city of Lot were about to be destroyed. The glad tidings conveyed to Abraham were about the birth of a son and the cities to be destroyed were Sodom and Gomorrah. They were situated in the neighbourhood of the Dead Sea on the road from Arabia to Syria. The road has been called سبیل مقیم (a road that still exists) in the Quran (15:77). The Dead Sea is also called the Bahr Lut.

2:62, 67; 5:61; 7:168.

2:62, 92; 3:22.

Important Words:

حبل (protection). See 3:104.

المسکنة (wretchedness) is derived from سکن i.e. he or it was or became still or silent or motionless. مسکنة means, the state of مسکین; lowliness or submissiveness; lowness, abasement or humiliation; paucity of property; evil state or condition; weakness; poverty of mind, etc. (Lane). It also means disgrace and wretchedness (Aqrab) also loss of the power of movement (Mufradat).

Commentary:

This verse contains an important and far-reaching prophecy regarding Jews. They are forever doomed to disgrace and humiliation. They have ever to live in subjection to other powers. The history of the Jewish people from the time of the Holy Prophet up to the present day bears woeful testimony to the truth of this awful prophecy. In all countries and in all ages, the present age of enlightenment and toleration not being excepted, they have been the victims of bitter persecution and have been subjected to diverse kinds of disgrace and humiliation. Their practice of usury has also made them the hated of all nations.

The word حبل rendered here as "protection" is full of significance and is applicable in almost all its different meanings, for which see 3:104. Generally speaking, the divine rope, or in other words, "protection from Allah", refers to Islam; and "protection from men" refers to the protection of non-Muslim powers. The latter may be illustrated by the Treaty of Versailles, which afforded the Jews a temporary protection, while the former was made possible through a section of them accepting the Holy Prophet. In the present age, the Promised Messiah (Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam), whom God has raised as the saviour of mankind, is the emblem of protection for the Jews. They can save themselves by accepting him.

The word مسکنة rendered as "wretchedness" also signifies, humiliation, disgrace, and loss of the power of movement. All these have been the fate of the Jews. They have often been expelled from countries, and even today in Russia there are certain districts which they are not permitted to enter. The recent persecution of the Jews in Germany and other countries of Europe is only too well-known to need a reference.

The clause, kill the Prophets unjustly, refers not only to the attempt of the Jews to crucify Jesus, but also to their plots to kill the Holy Prophet of Islam.

The verse also serves as a warning to Muslims that if they rejected the Promised Messiah, who has come in the spirit and power of Jesus as well as of the Holy Prophet, and whose duty it is to preach and rejuvenate Islam, they would also be smitten with the same disgrace which has been the lot of the Jews for their rejection of Jesus and the Holy Prophet.

28:37.

Commentary:

The expression, when they travel in the land, means, when they travel in the land in the cause of God. This meaning is supported by the context.

The idea contained in the words, so that Allah may make it a cause of regret in their hearts, is that when Muslims refused to act upon the advice of disbelievers not to fight, and instead, came forth in large numbers to fight in the way of God, the disbelievers were naturally grieved at their failure to win them over to their way of thinking.

The interpretation of the clause, and Allah gives life and causes death, would vary according to the different meanings of the words موت (death) and حیاة (life) occurring in it. If the death referred to in the verse is taken in the sense of destruction, the clause would mean that with the death of a few Muslims, Islam would not go to ruin. God has decreed to vouchsafe victory to Muslims and the death in fighting of a number of the victorious army cannot possibly result in their destruction. If, however, death is here taken to mean "disgrace", then the clause would mean that God’s votaries and true servants never meet with disgrace because all honour is in His hands and He gives it to whomsoever He pleases. Truly speaking, he who fights and lays down his life in the cause of truth can in no sense be regarded as dead, because such a one gives his life for the sake of Him Who is the controller of all life and death. Such a person can never die; for though physically he may die, spiritually he lives forever. In this connection, see also 2:155.

2:130, 152; 9:128; 62:3; 65:12.

Commentary:

The expression, by raising among them a Messenger from among themselves, is intended to awaken in the hearts of Muslims a desire to follow the example of the Holy Prophet, who was like them and one of them. The Prophet was not only a man like them but was actually one of them. If he could rise to such spiritual heights, why could not they?

All Messengers of God are raised from among human beings and they possess the same faculties and are actuated by the same desires and aspirations as other human beings, and, therefore, they can serve as true models for their fellow beings. But a so-called "Son of God" does not possess the same desires and the same faculties as we have, and cannot, therefore, be a model for us. Our model should be from our own kind. He who is not of our kind, being a divine being, free from human passions and human weaknesses, cannot be held out to us as a model for imitation.

The verse also points to the fulfilment of the prayer of Abraham contained in 2:130, in which the different functions of the Promised Prophet have been mentioned just as they are mentioned here.

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.

6:33; 47:37; 57:21.

Important Words:

حیوان (life) is infinitive-noun from حیی which means, he or it lived or was or became in the state termed حیاة. They say حیت النار (hayyat) i.e. the fire was or became alive or burning حیی الطریق (hayiya) means, the road was or became apparent or distinct. حیاة means, life; faculty of growth, the faculty of sensation, and the faculty of intellect; freedom from grief or sorrow. حیوان is synonymous with حیاة but with an intensive signification and means, everlasting life or life which will not be followed by death; much or full life; real life (Lane).

Commentary:

The verse means to say that life without hardships and privations borne for a noble cause, and without sacrifices undergone for the sake of God, is "but an amusement and a sport," a useless and purposeless existence. The purposeful life is that which is spent in the quest of a sublime object, in preparation for everlasting life for which God has created man.