Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 1-3

 
‫ُم‬ ْ ‫م ُة األ َ ْن َعا ِم إِال َّ َما ُي ْتلَى َعلَ ْيك‬ َ ‫ت لَكُم بَ ِهي‬ ْ َّ‫حل‬ ِ ‫ين آ َم ُنو ْا أَ ْوفُو ْا بِا ْل ُع ُقو ِد ُأ‬ َ ‫ يَا أَيُّ َها الَّ ِذ‬- ‫يم‬ ِ ‫ح‬ ِ ‫الر‬ َّ ‫من‬ ِ ‫ح‬ ْ ‫الر‬َّ ِ‫م هللا‬ ِ ‫س‬ ْ ِ‫ب‬
َ ‫ه َوال‬ ِ ّ ‫ش َعآئِ َر الل‬ َ ‫حلو ْا‬ ُّ ِ ‫ين آ َم ُنو ْا ال َ ُت‬ َ
َ ‫} يَا أيُّ َها الَّ ِذ‬1{ ‫م َما ُي ِري ُد‬ ُ ‫ح ُك‬ ْ َ‫م إِنَّ الل ّ َه ي‬ ٌ ‫ح ُر‬ ُ ‫م‬ َ
ْ ‫ص ْي ِد َوأن ُت‬ َّ ‫ي ال‬./‫ح ِِّل‬ ِ ‫َغ ْي َر ُم‬
‫م‬ ‫ت‬
ْ ُ َْ
‫ل‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫ح‬ ‫َا‬
‫ذ‬ ‫إ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ًا‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫ض‬
ِ َ َ ْ ِ َ ْ ِ / ِّ َّ / ِّ ‫ر‬ ‫و‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬ .
‫ِب‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ِم‬
. ً ‫ال‬ ‫ض‬
ْ َ
‫ف‬ َ‫ون‬ ‫غ‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ب‬
ُ ََْ َ َ َ‫ي‬ ‫م‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ح‬ ْ
‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ب‬ ْ
‫ل‬
َ ْ َ َ / ِّ ‫ا‬ ‫ين‬ ‫ِم‬
. ‫آ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫و‬
َ َ ِ ‫د‬ ‫ئ‬ ‫َآل‬ ‫ق‬ ْ
‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ َ ‫ال‬ ‫و‬
َ َ ْ َ‫ي‬ ‫د‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ل‬ ْ ‫ا‬ َ ‫ال‬ ‫و‬
َ َ َ‫ح‬ ‫م‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ر‬ َ ‫الش ْه َر ا ْل‬ َّ
./‫بِر‬ِّ ْ
‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ى‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫ع‬ َ ْ
‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫ن‬
ُ ‫و‬َ ‫ا‬ ‫ع‬
َ َ ‫ت‬ ‫و‬
َ ْ
‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫د‬
ُ ‫ت‬
َ ‫ع‬ْ َ ‫ت‬ ‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫م‬
ِ ‫ا‬ ‫ر‬
َ ‫ح‬
َ ْ
‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫د‬ِ ‫ج‬
ِ ‫س‬
ْ ‫م‬
َ ْ
‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ن‬ِ ‫ع‬َ ‫ُم‬
ْ ‫ك‬ ‫ُّو‬
‫د‬ ‫ص‬َ ‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫م‬
ٍ ‫و‬ْ َ
‫ق‬ ‫آن‬ُ ‫ن‬
َ ‫ش‬َ ‫ُم‬
ْ ‫ك‬ ‫ن‬
َّ ‫م‬
َ ‫ر‬
ِ ‫ج‬ْ َ ‫ي‬ َ ‫ال‬ ‫و‬
َ ْ
‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫د‬ُ ‫ا‬ َ ‫ط‬ ‫ص‬
ْ ‫ا‬ َ
‫ف‬
‫م ْي َت ُة‬ َ ‫ُم ا ْل‬ ُ ‫ت َعلَ ْيك‬ ْ ‫ َم‬./‫ح ِِّر‬ ُ }2{ ِ‫ش ِدي ُد ا ْل ِعقَاب‬ َ ‫ن َواتَّ ُقو ْا الل ّ َه إِنَّ الل ّ َه‬ ِ ‫ْم َوا ْل ُع ْد َوا‬ ِ ‫اإلث‬ ِ ‫َوال َّت ْق َوى َوال َ تَ َعا َو ُنو ْا َعلَى‬
َّ ‫الس ُب ُع إِال‬ َّ َ ‫ح ُة َو َما أَ َك‬
‫ل‬ َ ‫طي‬ ِ ‫يَ ُة َوال َّن‬./‫م َت َر ِِّد‬ ُ ‫م ْوقُو َذ ُة َوا ْل‬ َ ‫خنِ َق ُة َوا ْل‬ ُ ‫ه َوا ْل‬
َ ‫م ْن‬ ِ ِ‫ه ب‬ ِ ّ ‫ل لِ َغ ْي ِر الل‬ َّ ‫ه‬ ِ ‫ير َو َما ُأ‬ ِ ‫خ ْن ِز‬ ِ ‫م ا ْل‬ ُ ‫ح‬ ْ َ‫َوا ْل َّد ُم َول‬
ْ ‫ين َك َف ُرو ْا ِمن ِدينِك‬
‫ُم‬ َ ‫س الَّ ِذ‬ َ ِ‫م يَئ‬ َ ‫ق ا ْليَ ْو‬ ٌ ‫س‬ ْ ِ‫ُم ف‬ ْ ‫ا بِاأل ْزال َ ِم َذلِك‬.ْ‫مو‬ َ ُ ‫س‬ ِ ‫س َت ْق‬ ْ َ‫ب َوأن ت‬ َ ِ ‫ص‬ ُ ‫ح َعلَى ال ُّن‬ َ ِ‫م َو َما ُذب‬ ْ ‫َما َذ َّك ْي ُت‬
‫م ِدي ًنا‬ َ
َ ‫سال‬ ْ ‫اإل‬ َ َ َ َ ْ ْ َ ْ ْ َ‫َفال َ ت‬
ِ ‫م‬ ُ ‫يت ل ُك‬ ُ ‫ض‬ ِ ‫متِي َو َر‬ َ ‫ُم نِ ْع‬ ْ ‫ت َعل ْيك‬ ُ ‫م‬ ْ ‫م‬ َ ‫ُم َوأ ْت‬ ْ ‫ُم ِدي َنك‬ ْ ‫ت لك‬ ُ ‫مل‬ َ ‫م أك‬ َ ‫ن اليَ ْو‬ ِ ‫ش ْو‬ َ ‫اخ‬ ْ ‫م َو‬ ْ ‫ه‬ ُ ‫ش ْو‬ َ ‫خ‬
}3{ ‫م‬ ٌ ‫حي‬ ِ ‫ور َّر‬ ٌ ‫ْم َف ِإنَّ الل ّ َه غَ ُف‬ ٍ ‫ف إِّل ِ ث‬ ٍ ِ‫جان‬ َ ‫ة غَ ْي َر ُم َت‬ ٍ ‫ص‬َ ‫م‬ َ ‫خ‬ ْ ‫ط َّر فِي َم‬ ُ ‫ض‬ ْ ‫نا‬ ِ ‫م‬ َ ‫َف‬
In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. - {1} O you who believe! fulfill the
covenants. The cattle quadrupeds are made lawful for you except that which is recited to you, not
violating the prohibition against game when you are under pilgrimage restrictions; surely Allah
orders what He desires. {2} O you who believe! do not violate the signs appointed by Allah nor
the sacred month, nor the offering, nor the symbolic garlands, nor those going to the Sacred
House seeking the grace and pleasure from their Lord. And when you are free from (the
restrictions of) the pilgrimage, then (you may) hunt; and let not hatred of a people - because they
hindered you from the Sacred Mosque - incite you to exceed the limits. And help one another in
righteousness and piety, and do not help one another in sin and aggression; and fear Allah; surely
Allah is severe in punishment. {3} Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself, and blood, and
flesh of swine, and that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, and the
strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that killed by being
smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you slaughter and what
is sacrificed on stones set up (for idols) and that you divide by arrows; that is a transgression.
This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me.
This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for
you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then
surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
 

General Comment
If we meditate on the beginning and end of this chapter and ponder on the general verses which
have been revealed in it and look at the admonitions and the stories which it contains, we will
find that the general theme of the chapter is to call the people to fulfill the covenants and to
uphold the valid agreements whatever they might be. It warns against breach of agreement and
cautions those who take the covenants lightly. It shows that Allah has made it His habit to deal
with mercy and lighten the burden of those who guard themselves against evil and believe, and
then again guard themselves against evil and do good work. On the contrary, He deals harshly
with those who commit outrage, exceed the limit and overstep the bounds by throwing away the
collar of obedience and going out of the boundary of covenants which have been made in the
religion.

That is why you will see that the chapter contains many laws concerning legal punishment and
retribution; there are stories of the dinner table, of questioning of the Messiah and of the incident
of the two sons of Adam; it also points to a lot of injustices of the Israelites and how they broke
the covenants which were taken from them; also there are many verses in which Allah describes
His Grace on the people in various matters like perfecting the religion, completing His favor,
making the good things lawful to man and legislating the ways of purification without putting the
people into any difficulty and hardship.

This was in conformity with the time when the chapter was revealed. All reporters agree that it
was the last detailed chapter which was revealed to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) nearing the
end of his life. It has come in both sects' traditions that it is the abrogating chapter, not the
abrogated; and it was proper in this background to emphasize the admonition to fulfill and
safeguard the agreements which Allah has taken from His servants, and to remain firm on it.

Commentary
QUR'AN: O you who believe! fulfill the covenants: al-'Uqud is plural of al-'aqd, and it means to
tie two things together in such a way that it becomes very difficult to separate one from the other.
For example, tying a rope or thread with a similar rope or thread. Obviously, both adhere to each
other and remain tied. First, this word was used for such phenomenon which could be perceived
by the senses; then it was used metaphorically for abstract things like the offer and acceptance in
trade or employment, etc. It covers all the covenants and agreements. All these things are called
'al-aqd because the effect of the 'tying' is present there, that is, adherence to each other.

al-'Aqd, that is covenant, is used for all the religious covenants which Allah has taken from His
servants, like monotheism and all the fundamental cognition and perception, the acts of worship
and the laws which were laid down anew or were allowed to continue from previous times,
including the proposal and acceptance in trade, etc. The verse contains the word al- 'uqud which
is plural of al-'aqd having al which signifies comprehensiveness; therefore, this word in this
verse encompasses all which could be called 'aqd (tie, covenant).

The above explanation shows the weakness of what various exegetes have written in its
interpretation. Some have said that the covenants refers to those agreements or contracts which
people make one with another, like trade deal, marriage and promise or which man binds himself
with like oath.

Likewise, some others have said that it refers to those agreements which the people of the Days
of Ignorance had contracted with one another that they will help and support each other against
those who would proceed against them with evil intention or transgress against them. It means
the pact or treaty which was common in those days.
Similarly, some others have said that it refers to the covenants taken from the People of the Book
that they would follow what was written in the Torah and the Gospel. All these interpretations
are without any support from the wording of the verse. Moreover, as we have said that a plural
joined with 'a/1 and the common usage of the word al-'aqd for every type of covenant, renders
all such explanations inappropriate. Therefore, the word should be taken in its comprehensive
and general meaning.

A Discourse on the Meaning of Al-'Aqd

The Qur'an manifestly orders man to honor the covenants as is clear from the Divine words,
"fulfill the covenants". Apparently, the order is general and covers all affairs which could be
called a covenant, fulfilling which is necessary. al-'Aqd is every deed or word which is
analogous to the literal tying - a sort of connecting one thing with another in such a way that they
become inseparable; the tie of trade deal which attaches the merchandise to the buyer giving it
into his ownership with full authority to do with it whatever he likes, and the seller after that deal
loses the right of ownership and management of the merchandise; or like the 'aqd of marriage
which binds the woman with the man giving him the right to establish sexual relations with her
and the woman has no right to allow another man to touch her for this purpose; or like an
agreement in which one man binds himself to do for the other party the work agreed upon and he
has no right to dishonor that agreement.

The Qur'an has emphatically exhorted the people to fulfill the covenant and agreement (with all
its meanings and applications), and has put utmost emphasis on it. It has condemned those who
break the agreements and threatened them very severely; it has praised those who fulfill their
covenants when they make it; there are a lot of verses of this connotation, which need not be
quoted here.

The said verses have referred to the covenants without defining them in so many words; it shows
that the meaning of covenant was understood by the people with their natural wisdom. It is so,
because covenant and its fulfillment are the things which man cannot do without in his life; this
essentiality of fulfillment of covenant effects individuals and societies both. If we ponder upon
human beings' social life, we will find that all the privileges which we enjoy and all the rights
which we take for granted are based on general social covenant and the resulting agreements
which spring from it. All the duties towards the society which we feel ourselves bound to fulfill
and all the rights which we think we have over the society are based on a practical covenant
(even if we have not put it into words). If a man were to break an agreement which he had made
with his own free will - merely because now he has power or authority or strength to break it -
the first victim would be the social justice, while this justice is the first principle on which man
relies for freeing himself from exploitation and servitude.

That is why Allah has highly emphasized the importance of fulfilling the covenant. He says: And
fulfill the promise; verily promise shall be questioned about (17:34). This verse covers individual
agreements a man makes with another person (like most of the verses which praise fulfilling the
agreement and condemn its breach) as well as collective agreements like the ones made between
two nations or two people; rather fulfilling inter-communal agreements is more important in the
eyes of religion than the individual ones, because it has more effect in completing the justice;
and the disadvantages of their breach will be more pronounced.

We find that the Divine Book forbids very clearly breaking a covenant even in such a place and
in such circumstances where it would have been very easy to break it. Allah says:

(This is a) renouncement by Allah and His Messenger towards those of the idolaters with whom
you made an agreement. So move about in the land for four months and know that you cannot
weaken Allah and that Allah will bring disgrace to the unbelievers. An announcement from Allah
and His Messenger to the people on the day of the great pilgrimage that Allah and His
Messenger are free from all responsibilities towards the idolaters; therefore if you repent, it will
be better for you, and if you turn back, then know that you will not weaken Allah; and announce
painful punishment to those who disbelieve. Except those of the idolaters with whom you made
an agreement, then they have not failed you in anything and have not backed up any one against
you, so fulfill their agreement to the end of their term; surely Allah loves those who are careful
(of their duty). So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever
you find them (9:1-5).

The verses, as the context shows, were revealed after the conquest of Mecca when Allah had
humiliated the idolaters, destroyed their power and crushed their valor. These verses obliged the
Muslims to cleanse the land which they had conquered from the impurity of polytheism, and
encouraged them to spill the blood of the polytheists without any restriction or condition, except
if they come into the fold of Islam. In spite of that, the same verses make exception for those
polytheists with whom the Muslims had a valid agreement of non-aggression; the verses do not
allow the Muslims to attack them even when they have been weakened and lost their power,
even when they have no way of defending or protecting themselves. All this was done to uphold
the sanctity of the agreement and out of regard for piety.

Of course, if somebody breaks a covenant after its confirmation, he shall be requited exactly as
he had done. Allah says: How can there be an agreement for the idolaters with Allah and with
His Messenger; except those with whom you made an agreement at the Sacred Mosque? So long
as they are true to you, be true to them; surely Allah loves those who are careful (of their duty)...
They do not pay regard to ties of relationship nor those of covenant in the case of a believer;
and these are they who go beyond the limits. But if they repent and keep up prayer and pay zakat
they are your brethren in faith; and We make the communications clear for a people who know.
And if they break their oaths after their agreement and revile your religion, then fight the leaders
of unbelief - surely their oaths are nothing - so that they may desist (9:7-12). Also He
says: ...whoever then acts aggressively against you, inflict the like aggression on him as he has
inflicted on you; and fear Allah... (2:194); again He says: ...and let not hatred of a people -
because they hindered you from the Sacred Mosque - incite you to exceed the limits. And help
one another in righteousness and piety, and do not help one another in sin and aggression; and
fear Allah... (5:2).

In short, Islam believes in sanctity of covenant and obliges man to fulfill it without reservation; it
makes no difference whether the said man benefits from that covenant or is harmed by it once
the pact has been made. After all, consideration of the social justice is more compulsory and
obligatory than the consideration of a private or personal benefit. Of course, if one of the parties
breaks his agreement, then the other party can break it to the same extent and act aggressively
against him to the same degree. This principle liberates the society from servitude and
exploitation; after all the main purpose of religion is to erase the arrogance of the powerful.

By my life! this is one of the lofty teachings brought by Islam for the guidance of the people, that
they should pay attention to the human nature and preserve the social justice on which the human
society is based; and that they should remove the injustice of subjugation and exploitation. The
Mighty Book has made it clear and the Prophet (s.a.w.) proceeded on the same path throughout
his noble life. The discourse is related to the Qur'an, otherwise, we would have written for you
some of his stories. If you want to know in detail, you should study his biographies.

Compare how Islam had preserved the sanctity of covenant with the behavior of civilized and
less civilized nations nowadays - especially what we see and hear everyday concerning the
dealings of the powerful nations with the weaker ones in their agreements and pacts, and how
they fulfill the agreements so long as it is beneficial to them or supports their national interests
and break them unhesitatingly when it goes against their interest, offering for it lame excuses -
then you will see the difference between the two systems and realize who pays regard to the truth
and serves the reality.

That is more appropriate for the religion and this suits these people's selfish behavior. We find
two types of logic here: one says that the truth and reality must be preserved with all possible
means as only in this way the society will prosper; and the other says that the national interest
must be protected by any possible means even if it crushes the truth and reality. The first is the
logic of religion; and the second, the logic of all other societies, be they barbaric or civilized, be
they dictatorial, democratic or communist, etc.

You must have understood from the above that Islam in its determination concerning agreement
and pact is not restricted to the legal agreements only; its decree encompasses all those things on
which an edifice is built be it explicit or implicit; Islam admonishes the Muslims to pay full
attention to it. There are some other points concerning this theme which you will come across as
you read on, God willing.

QUR'AN: The cattle quadrupeds are made lawful for you except that which is recited to you:
al-Ihlal (to make lawful); al-bahimah (quadruped from terrestrial and marine animals), as has
been explained in Majma'u'l-bayan. Accordingly, the genitive construction, relating quadruped
to the cattle, relates the species to its classes, as we say human species, animal genus. Some have
said that al-bahimah is the foetus of the cattle. In any case, the sentence; "the cattle quadrupeds
are made lawful for you", means that eating the meat of eight pairs is made lawful to you. The
words, "except that which is recited to you", point to the law described later: Forbidden to you is
that which dies of itself...

QUR'AN: not violating the prohibition against game when you are under pilgrimage
restrictions;...: It is a circumstantial clause related to the second person pronoun in the word, are
made lawful for you, and it indicates that even this lawful category will become unlawful if it
was hunted in the condition of ihram; for example, if one hunts wild deer, cow or zebra in that
condition. Some people have said that the said circumstantial clause is related to the word
'fulfill'; others have said that it is related to the second person pronoun in the words: except that
which is recited to you. as-Sayd (to hunt) is a verbal noun used here in the meaning of passive
participle, that is, hunted game; al-hurum is plural of al-haraam giving here the meaning of
active participle, that is, he who puts himself under restriction of pilgrimage.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! do not violate the signs appointed by Allah nor the sacred month,
nor the offering, nor the symbolic garlands, nor those going to the Sacred House seeking the
grace and pleasure from their Lord: The believers are addressed again in this verse to indicate
importance of maintaining the respect of the things sanctified by Allah. It was explained earlier
that al-ihlal means to make lawful; as this idea is closely connected to indifference towards
respect or honor of the thing made lawful, therefore, it is metaphorically used here in the sense of
violating. Its specific meaning will be decided in the contexts of the second construct of the
genitive; the signs and symbols appointed by Allah are violated if one does not pay respect to
them or neglects them, a sacred month is violated if one begins fighting in it, and so on.

ash-Sha'air is plural of ash-sha'irah (sign). Probably here it refers to the guide posts of hajj and
its rites. The sacred months are those lunar months in which fighting has been prohibited by
Allah; they are al-Muharram, Rajab, Dhi 'l-qi'dah and Dhi 'l-hijjah. al-Hady refers to goat, sheep,
cow and camels that are taken to the pilgrimage. al-Qalaid is plural of al-qaladah; it refers to the
garland of shoes, etc. which is put in the neck of a sacrificial animal to show that it is meant for
sacrifice, in order that nobody should appropriate it. al-Ammeen is plural of al-amm which is the
active participle of amma (he headed to); here it refers to those who are on their way to the
pilgrimage of the Sacred House "Seeking the grace" is the circumstantial clause to "those going";
al-fadl (grace) refers to property or material profit. The same is the connotation of the Divine
words: So they returned with favor from Allah and (His) grace; no evil touched them (3:174).
There are other verses too of the same meaning; also it may mean the reward of hereafter; or it
may have a meaning encompassing the both senses. The exegetes have given several other
meanings of the words used here like ash-sha'air and al-qalaid; what we have mentioned is
more appropriate in the context, and no purpose will be served by mentioning other
interpretations.

QUR'AN: And when you are free from (the restrictions of) the pilgrimage, then (you may) hunt:
When an imperative comes after prohibition, it only indicates that now the thing or action is
allowed and the prohibition is lifted. al-Hall and al-ihlal same meaning, that is, becoming free
from the restrictions of ihram.

QUR'AN: and let not hatred of a people - because they hindered you from the Sacred Mosque -
incite you to exceed the limits: Jarama means 'he carried it', 'he bore it'; that is why disobedience
and sin is called al-jarimah because the culprit bears its responsibility; this word is also used for
monetary fine because it is borne by the culprit. ar-Raghib says that its real meaning is 'to cut'.
ash-Shan'an (hatred, enmity); an saddukum (because they prevented you); it is an explicative
apposition or appositional substitute for 'hatred'; the meaning: and let not hatred of a people they
hindered you from the Sacred Mosque - incite you to exceed the limits when you have
vanquished them.

QUR'AN: And help one another in righteousness and piety, and do not help one another in sin
and aggression; and fear Allah;...: The
meaning is clear. This is the foundation of Islamic culture and ethics. Allah has explained
righteousness in His Book as belief and doing good in the acts of worship and in mutual
dealings, as we have explained under the Divine words: ...but righteousness is the one who
believes in Allah and the Last Day... (2:177). at-Taqwa (to be on one's guard regarding orders
and prohibitions of Allah). To cooperate with one another in righteousness and piety means to
join together in true faith and good deeds on the basis of the fear of Allah; it is the collective
good and piety. Its opposite is cooperating with one another in sin and aggression; sin is the evil
action which brings regression in a blissful life; aggression is usurping peoples' genuine rights,
giving rise to a feeling of insecurity for their lives, honor or property. We have explained this
topic under the Divine words: O you who believe! be patient and help each other in patience and
remain lined up; and fear (the wrath of) Allah, that you may be successful, (3:200), in the fourth
volume (Arabic version) of this book.

Then Allah has emphasized the prohibition of joining together in sin and aggression by saying:
and fear Allah; surely Allah is severe in punishment. Actually, it is an emphasis over emphasis.

QUR'AN: Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that
on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked: These four were prohibited in the
revelations sent long before this chapter. See, for example, in the chapters of "Cattle" and "The
Bee", both of which were revealed in Mecca and in the chapter of "The Cow" which was the first
detailed chapter revealed in Medina. Allah has said: Say: "I do not find, in that which has been
revealed to me, anything forbidden for an eater to eat of except that it be -what has died of itself,
or blood poured forth, or flesh of swine -for that surely is unclean - or that which is a
transgression, other than (the name of) Allah having been invoked on it; but whoever is forced
(to it), not revolting nor exceeding the limit, then surely your Lord is Forgiving, Merciful"
(6:145); and He has said: He has only forbidden to you what dies of itself, and blood, and flesh
of swine, and that over which any other (name) than (that of) Allah has been invoked; but
whoever is forced (to it), not revolting, nor exceeding the limit, no sin shall be upon him; surely
Allah is Forgiving, Merciful (2:173).

As you see, all these verses forbid the four things mentioned in the beginning of this verse and
the exception too is similar to this verse where it says: but whoever is compelled by hunger, not
inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. So, this verse's only purpose is
to emphasize the previously and repeatedly revealed prohibition of the four items. In fact, this
prohibition and especially of the first three items, (that which dies of itself, blood and flesh of
swine) was promulgated long before the revelation of the chapters of "Cattle" and "The Bee" (of
Meccan period) because the verse of the chapter of "Cattle" explains the reason of prohibition
that "it is unclean"; it shows that eating unclean things was forbidden; and Allah says in the
ch.74: And uncleanness do shun [vr.5]. This chapter was revealed in the early Meccan period. [It
was the second chapter revealed.]

And the strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that killed by
being smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten: Actually it is not a new
legislation, because all these come under "that which dies of itself, (as may be understood from
the exception, except what you slaughter); yet they have been mentioned separately to describe
various types of dead animals.

Likewise, the words of Allah, and what is sacrificed on stones set up (for idols) and that you
divide by arrows; that is a transgression, forbid these two items for the first time in this chapter,
but Allah has given the reason of their prohibition (or that of the second item) that it is a
transgression, and He had before that prohibited transgression in the verse of the chapter of
"Cattle". Also, the following words: not inclining willfully to sin, show that the things mentioned
here have been forbidden because they are sins; and many verses revealed before it say that sin is
prohibited. For example, the verse 173 of the chapter "The Cow", says: but whoever is forced (to
it), not revolting, nor exceeding the limit, no sin shall be upon him. Also, He says: And abandon
open and secret sin (6:120); Say: "My Lord has only prohibited indecencies, those of them that
are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and sin..." (7:33)

Now, it is clear that the verse with this list of forbidden items has not promulgated any new order
which was not given in previously revealed verses of the Meccan or early Medinite period which
had listed the forbidden meats.

QUR'AN: and the strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that
killed by being smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you
slaughter: al-Munkhaniqah is the cattle which dies as a result of strangulation. It makes no
difference whether it was accidental or intentional; also, the instrument of strangulation has no
effect on this ruling; may be a rope was tied around its neck and becoming tight, it chocked
breathing or its neck was pressed between two rods; this and similar methods were common in
the Days of Ignorance, al-Mawqudhah is an animal which is beaten until it dies, al-
Mutaraddiyah is an animal which falls from a high place like a mountaintop or well, and so on.
an-Natihah is an animal which dies as a result of being gored with horns or tusks of another
animal, "and that which wild beasts have eaten", that is, a beast of prey has eaten some of its
flesh resulting in its death. A beast of prey indicates carnivorous animals like lion, wolf, tiger,
etc.

"except what you slaughter", this exception applies to all the five groups mentioned before that.
If any of these animals shows some signs of life like breathing or twitching of its tail, etc., and it
is at once slaughtered according to the rules of the shari'ah (i.e., its four jugular veins are cut),
then it is allowed to be eaten. As mentioned just now, the exception covers all five groups and
not only the last one. The five groups are included in the term al-maytah (that which dies by
itself). Animals killed by a fall or gored by another animal with horns are forbidden when they
die as a result of that fall or those wounds. It may be understood from the exception "except what
you slaughter". Obviously, they will not be eaten when they are alive; but when the soul goes out
then they can be eaten. Now, either they were slaughtered according to shari'ah or not; and Allah
has excepted the slaughter. Therefore, they will only be unlawful when they die as the result of
the fall or the said wound without being slaughtered. If a goat, for example, falls into a well and
is taken out alive and uninjured and then after a short or long time it dies by itself or is
slaughtered then it will not be called an animal that was killed by a fall. The context shows that
only such animals are forbidden which are killed or die because of the causes mentioned in the
verse.
These groups of dead animals have been singled out here to remove any possible
misunderstanding that probably they were not included in the word, al-maytah because they are
not common types of dead animals while the mind generally looks at the common types.
Therefore, Allah mentioned these rare types with their names in order that there should be no
confusion and the prohibition remains clear.

QUR'AN: and what is sacrificied on stones set up (for idols): ar-Raghib says in Mufradatu'l-
QUR'AN: "an-Nasb of a thing means setting it down in a projecting position like setting a spear
or stone; an-naseeb is a stone which is set on something in a projecting manner. It's plural is an-
nasaib and an-nusub. " [This latter is used in this verse.] The Arabs had various stones which
they worshipped and on which they slaughtered sacrifices. Allah says: ...as if they were
hastening unto a signpost (70:43); and He has said, "and what is sacrificed on stones set up (for
idols)"; also its plural comes as al-ansaab. Allah says: ...(dedication of) stones (i.e. idols) and
(divination by) arrows... (5:90). an-Nusb and an-nasb = trouble, exertion.

The verse forbids eating the flesh of an animal slaughtered on stone; in this way, it prohibits
adoption of the customs of the Days of Ignorance. They had set up around the Ka'bah stones
which they venerated and over which they offered sacrifices. It was a custom of idolatry.

QUR'AN: and that you divide by arrows;...: al-Azlam (arrows without head). The division by
arrows was done in this way: A camel or another animal was taken and its shares divided; then,
the arrows were used to identify the one who would get a share and the one who would not have
any; also, the number of shares a man would get was decided by the same arrows. It was a clear
gambling and we have given the details under the verse: They ask you about intoxicants and
games of chance... (2:219) in vol.2 of this book.

ar-Raghib says: "al-Qism (setting apart the shares). It is said: I divided such and such thing in
parts; division of inheritance or war-booty means dividing them to the rightful persons. Allah
says: ...for each gate there shall be a separate party of them (15:44); And inform them that the
water is shared between them (54:28). Istaqsamtuhu ('I asked him to divide'); also, sometimes it
is used in the meaning of division itself, as Allah says: and that you divide by arrows."

COMMENT: To say that istaqsamah is used here for division is correct in practical application,
but the literal meaning still remains the same, that is, to want to divide through arrows, which
were used as tools of this game; using the tools is in itself a demand for getting the intended
result. Therefore, using the arrow is in itself asking for the division. However, the verse, as the
context shows, forbids using the arrows for the camels, etc. to get an apportioned share of the
meat.

Some people have said that this phrase forbids using the arrows for divination to find out the
good or bad of a course of action and to distinguish a beneficial deed from the harmful one, as
for example, when someone wants to go on a journey or to marry or to begin a new work, etc.,
and uses the arrows to find out whether it is beneficial for him or not. They said that it was a well
established custom among the Arabs in the Days of Ignorance; it was a sort of forecasting with
omens and its details will be mentioned in the coming traditions.
COMMENT: The context does not allow the use of this phrase for this meaning. The verse
describes and counts the prohibited items of food and has pointed to this in the beginning when it
said: The cattle quadrupeds are made lawful for you except that which is recited to you; then it
goes on giving the list of ten forbidden food items: that which dies of itself, blood, flesh of
swine, an animal on which any other name than that of Allah is invoked, the strangled one, the
one beaten to death, or killed by fall, or as a result of being smitten with the horn, or that which
wild beasts have eaten and what is sacrificed on stones set up for idols; then it mentions al-
istiqsam hi 'l-azlam which can be used in two meanings: i) Dividing meat by gambling, and ii)
Divination of good or evil in the future. How can anyone think, after this clear context and the
repeated associations, that this phrase in this verse does not denote dividing the meat through
arrows? Can anyone who knows the styles of speech entertain any doubt about its meaning?

Let us look at another similar example, al-'umrah is a verbal noun which denotes construction,
and it has another meaning, that is, pilgrimage of the Sacred House. If this word is used in
relation to a house, both meanings can be applied; but when it comes to the Divine words: And
complete the hajj (pilgrimage) and 'umrah for Allah (2:196), then only the second meaning can
be applied. There are many such example.

The indicative in, "that is a transgression," may be pointing to the whole list, or to the last two
items described after the words, except what you slaughter (because the exception has separated
the two groups), or to the last item. Probably, the middle view is the best of all.

QUR'AN: This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and
fear Me. The positioning of this speech in the midst of this verse, and then its connotation are
truly amazing. If you ponder on the beginning of this verse, that is: Forbidden to you is that
which dies itself, and blood…that is a transgression, and then join to it the end part, but whoever
is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful,
you will see that it is a complete sentence and does not depend for completion of its meaning and
explanation of its theme to this part of the verse at all. If you take out these sentences, then the
remaining part will perfectly correspond with previously revealed verses in the chapters,
"Cattle", "The Bee" and "The Cow", which give the list of the forbidden items. The verse in the
chapter of "The Cow" says: He has forbidden to you what dies itself, and blood, and flesh of
swine, and that over which any other (name) than (that of) Allah has been invoked; but whoever
is forced (to it), not revolting, nor exceeding the limit, no sin shall be upon him; surely Allah is
Forgiving, Merciful (2:173). Similar wordings are found in the chapters of "Cattle" and "The
Bee".

It is clear that the Divine words, "This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your
religion…" is a parenthetical speech placed in the midst of this verse, yet the main verse does not
depend on it for its exposition or explanation. We may say that this speech was actually revealed
in the middle of this verse separating the preceding part from the following one; or that the
Prophet (s.a.w.) himself ordered the scribes to put this speech in this place even though it had no
connotation with this verse, and was not even revealed at the same time; or that the compilers put
it in this place at the time of compilation although both the parts were revealed at totally different
times. None of these probabilities can affect the view we have just mentioned that it is a
parenthetical speech.
This view is strengthened by the fact that most, if not all the traditions describing the reason of
its revelation - and there are a lot of such traditions - particularly talk about the words of Allah,
"This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion…", without hinting even once to
the beginning of the verse, that is: Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself…This proves that
the Divine words, "This day have those who disbelieve…", were independently revealed and
have no connection with the preceding or the following verses. Thus, the present positioning of
this speech in the middle of the verse will have to be attributed either to the Prophet (s.a.w.) or to
the compilers of the Qur'an after him.

A tradition in ad-Durru'l-manthur somewhat supports this view. It is narrated from 'Abd ibn
Hamid from ash-Sha'bi that he said, "This verse: This day I have perfected for you your
religion…, was revealed to the Prophet (s.a.w.) while he was in 'Arafat, and when any verses
much pleased him, he used to put them in the beginning of the chapter." He also said, "Jibril used
to teach him how to do it."

The two sentences, that is: This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion…, and:
This day have I perfected for you your religion…, have identical themes and no one can have
any doubt that the meaning of both are connected with each other. There is very close connection
between the despairing of the disbelievers from the Muslims' religion and the perfection of the
Muslims' religion; both connotations are joined together in a single theme, both sentences are
interconnected and their sides are combined with one another. Add to it the singularity of context
in these two sentences.

Further support of this view can be found in the convention of the ancient and modern exegetes -
right from the companions of the Prophet and their followers to our contemporaries in these
days. All of them take the two sentences jointly as if one completes the other. This unanimous
way of explanation shows that all of them believed that these two sentences were revealed
together and both of them jointly describe one meaning.

It appears from the above that this parenthetical verse: "This day have those who disbelieve
despaired of your religion…", and: chosen for you Islam as a religion, is a single speech and its
parts are inter-connected and the whole speech leads to a single theme  which is reflected in the
two sentences jointly. It makes no difference whether we say that this speech is connected with
the preceding and following sentences or not. The two sentences will remain as one speech; they
can never be treated as two talks having two separate aims. Also, it is clear that the word "this
day" repeated in both sentences refers to a single day when the believers were despaired and the
religion was perfected.

To which day does the adverb, "this day", refer in these two sentences?

1. Does it refer to the time when the Prophet (s.a.w.) was commanded to call the people to Islam?
Does it mean that Allah sent to you the Islam, perfected the religion for you, and completed His
favors on you and made the disbelievers despaired of your religion?

COMMENT: It cannot be. The context shows that the Muslims already had a religion which the
disbelievers were eager to change or destroy altogether, while the Muslims were afraid of them
concerning their religion, but Allah deprived the disbelievers of their nefarious goal and made
the Muslims secure and safe; that religion was imperfect and Allah made it perfect on that day
and completed His favors on them. But the Muslims had no religion of their own before the
advent of Islam, so, where was the question of the disbelievers having some hope of destroying
that religion or of Allah perfecting it and completing His favors on them? Moreover, if that
interpretation is taken seriously, then the sentence: This day I have perfected for you your
religion… should have preceded the sentence: This day have those who disbelieve despaired of
your religion… Only in this way, could literary perfection be achieved.

2. Or does "this day" refer to the era after the conquest of Mecca? Because on that day, Allah had
nullified the intrigues of the Qurayshite polytheists and destroyed their power; their religion was
uprooted and their idols shattered; in this way they lost all hope of standing on their feet to
prevent the spread of Islam and to fight against it.

COMMENT: This cannot be too. The verse announces that on the day under discussion, the
religion was perfected and the Divine favors completed; but the religion was yet incomplete in
the year 8 AH when Mecca was conquered; there were many obligatory laws

Apart from that, "those who disbelieve" covers all the idolaters of Arabia and not all of them had
despaired of the Muslims' religion. There were many covenants still valid which obligated the
Muslims and many disbelieving tribes not to stand against each other; they still performed the
hajj of jahiliyyah according to the custom of the idolaters; their women still performed hajj
completely naked. This had continued until the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) sent 'Ali (a.s.) with
the verses of the chapter of "Repentance" and thus the remnants of the customs of the Days of
Ignorance were erased.

3. Or does "this day" refer to the period after the revelation of the chapter of "Repentance" (end
of the year 9 AH)? Because Islam had spread to almost all areas of the Arabian Peninsula; the
customs of the Days of Ignorance were wiped out and the signs of polytheism obliterated. Now,
the Muslims did not encounter any polytheist during the hajj rituals and their life was free from
the shadow of disbelief; Allah had given them peace and order (while before that they were
scared and afraid), they worshipped Allah and ascribed none to Him.

COMMENT: This too cannot be. Although the idolaters of Arabia had despaired of the
Muslims' religion after the revelation of the chapter of "Repentance" when the customs of the
jahiliyyah were wiped out and polytheism had gone out of the Peninsula, yet the religion was not
completed at that time. A lot of rules and regulations were revealed after that, including the
chapter of "The Table" which, all agree, was revealed during the last days of the Prophet (s.a.w.)
and this chapter contains a lot of laws about lawful and unlawful things, penal code and
retribution.

It is now clear that the adverb "this day" cannot be taken to mean a long period, which might be
apparently relevant to the connotation of this verse, for example, the era of the advent of Islam,
or the time of the conquest of Mecca or after the revelation of the verses of "Repentance". The
only alternative is to say that "this day" refers to the particular day when this verse was revealed.
Does it mean the day when Mecca was conquered or the day when the chapter of "Repentance"
was revealed? The objections which we have raised against the second and the third possibilities
above are enough to refute these suggestions altogether.

Or does it mean the day of ninth Dhi'l-hijjah of the last pilgrimage (10 AH) as claimed by many
exegetes and shown in some traditions? If so, then we will have to decide how the unbelievers
had despaired of the Muslims' religion on that day. Does it mean that the polytheists of Quraysh
had lost all hope of overpowering the Muslims' religion? But this had happened on the day
Mecca was conquered in the year 8 AH and not on 9th Dhi'l-hijjah 10 AH. Or does it refer to the
despairing of the polytheists of the whole of Arabia? But this had already happened at the time of
the revelation of the chapter of "Repentance" in the year 9 AH. Or does it relate to the despairing
of the disbelievers - the Jews, the Christians, the fire-worshippers and others? (And this all-
inclusive meaning is more in keeping with the unrestricted phrase "those who disbelieve".) But
those people had not yet despaired of overcoming the Muslims because Islam had not acquired
any foothold or power beyond the Arabian Peninsula on the day of 'Arafah in the year 10 AH.

Looking from another angle, we should again ponder on this day (9th Dhi'l-hijjah 10 AH): What
importance it had which could be in keeping with the Divine words: This day have I perfected
for you your religion and completed My favor on you.

1. It may probably be said that it means perfecting the rituals of hajj in the presence of the
Prophet (s.a.w.) himself there, as he practically taught them the manasik of hajj and gave verbal
explanations.

COMMENT: Merely teaching the manasik of hajj cannot be called perfection of religion by any
stretch of imagination. First of all, he had ordered them to do hajju 't-tamattu' and not many years
had passed that it was discontinued. Secondly many important pillars of religion had been
established long before that, like prayer, fast, hajj, zakat, jihad, etc. How can teaching an
obligatory ritual of the religion be called perfection of that obligatory thing? And how can
teaching one obligatory part of religion be called perfection of the whole religion?

Moreover, this view cuts the connection between the first sentence (This day have those who
disbelieve…) and the second one (This day have I perfected for you your religion…). And what
is the relevance of despairing of the disbelievers to teaching the people hajju 't-tamattu'?

2. It may be said that the perfection of the religion points to the revelation of all pending lawful
and unlawful things "this day" in the chapter of "The Table"; after that there came no new halal
or haram. And with perfection of religion the disbelievers were overwhelmingly despaired and
its signs appeared on their faces.

COMMENT: First we have to decide who were the disbelievers described by the phrase "those
who disbelieve". If it refers to the disbelievers of Arabia, then Islam had already engulfed them
and there was nobody who did not publicly declare to be a Muslim. So, who were the despairing
disbelievers?

And if it is taken to refer to the non-Arab disbelievers who lived around Arabia, then we have
described earlier that they had not despaired on that day of overpowering the Muslims.

Then the claim that the door of legislation was closed on the day of 'Arafah is nonsense. There
are a lot of traditions, which mention revelations of rules and regulations after that day. See, for
example, the verse of the 'summer' (the verse of al-kalaalah at the end of chapter "Women") and
the verses of 'interest'. It has been narrated from 'Umar that he said inter alia in a sermon:
"Among the last verses of the Qur'an to be revealed is the verse of interest; the Messenger of
Allah died without explaining it to us. Therefore leave  whatever you feel doubtful about and go
to that which you have no doubt." Also, al-Bukhari has narrated in his Sahih from ibn 'Abbas that
he said, "The last verse revealed to the Prophet (s.a.w.) was the verse of interest." There are
many similar traditions.

Nobody should say that these traditions are weak; therefore the verse should have precedence
over them; because the verse doesn't explicitly say which day it talks about. The day of 'Arafah is
just a possibility and for the definite identification of the day, first all the possibilities have to be
discarded; and these traditions offer at least opposing views.

3. Somebody may say that the perfection of the religion points to the fact that the Sacred House
had exclusively come into their hands and the polytheists were banished from it, the Muslims
performed their hajj and there was no polytheist to mingle with them.

COMMENT: We have already said that this happened one year before the day of 'Arafah. Then
why should it be restricted with the adverb "this day" in the verse: This day have I perfected for
you your religion… Even if we accept that this exclusive hold on the Ka'bah was the completion
of the Divine favor, it cannot be said that it was the perfection of religion. Why should the
exclusive possession of the Ka'bah be called perfecting the religion, when religion is nothing but
a collection of beliefs and regulations? Religion could only be perfected if some parts or chapters
were added to it. That the environment became conducive for the implementation of the rules of
religion and the snags and hurdles were removed from practicing it is not called perfecting of the
religion. Moreover, the difficulty concerning the despair of the disbelievers remains in its place.

4. A writer has tried to combine the above hypothesis, which we are giving here in short before
commenting on it: <<He says that perfecting the religion means that Allah has described these
forbidden items of food in detail in order that the Muslims may follow it without being afraid of
the disbelievers, because the disbelievers have despaired of the Muslims' religion and Allah has
given strength and power to the Muslims and made them victorious over the infidels. Why did
Allah mention only the four forbidden things (that which dies of itself, flesh of swine and that on
which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked) in the early days of Islam in some
chapters of the Meccan period? And why did He delay giving the details of what comes within
its circle, which Islam does not like the Muslims to use until Mecca was conquered? It was done
to promulgate the prohibition of these filthy things gradually and to show their intense
undesirability. It was the same policy which was used in prohibition of liquor step by step, so
that the Arabs should not have an aversion to Islam and should not find it intolerable; and would
continue hoping that their property-ridden folks (who constituted the majority of the early
converts to Islam) would return to their original infidelity. This detailed description of the
forbidden things was revealed after Islam gained strength and Allah gave the Muslims wealth
and power. This was after the polytheists had lost hope that the Muslim would never turn away
from Islam, they had realized that they could not defeat the Muslims nor could they make them
renounce their religion under duress. Now, the believers were in a position where they were not
afraid of the disbelievers about their religion or their lives and had no need to deal with them
politely. Thus the adverb "this day" means the day of 'Arafah in the year of the last pilgrimage. It
was the day when this verse was revealed which describes whatever laws had remained
undisclosed until now; through these laws, Islam nullified the remnants of the abasements, evils
and superstitions of the Days of Ignorance. This verse brought the good news to the Muslims that
they have gained the upper hand over the polytheists, who were now despaired of the Muslims'
religion; now the Muslims did not have any need to deal with them in soft manners or any fear of
their reprisals. Thus Allah informs them in this verse that the disbelievers themselves are
despaired of their religion; and now that Allah has changed their weakness to power, their
apprehension to tranquility and their poverty to riches, the Muslims should not be afraid of
anyone other than Allah and should refrain and abstain from using the things forbidden in detail
in this verse because in this lies the perfection of the religion.

COMMENT: This writer wanted to gather together several of the previously mentioned
hypotheses in order to dispel the objections leveled against one possibility with the help of
another possibility. But he became embroiled in all the perils together and in the process he
corrupted the words and meaning of the verse completely.

He failed to realize that if the disbelievers' despair refer to that despair, which had resulted from
the victory and power of Islam, then it happened on the day Mecca, was conquered or, let us say,
when the verses of the chapter of "Repentance" were pronounced. Therefore, it would not be
correct to announce on the day of 'Arafah in the year 10 AH: This day have those who disbelieve
despaired of your religion, because they had despaired of it one or two years before. Had it been
the case, the verse should have said: Those who disbelieve have already despaired of your
religion (as this writer had himself used the wording while giving his explanation). Or
alternatively, it could be said: They are despaired.

Also, he seems oblivious of the fact that if this supposed gradual prohibition of various food
items (for which he has mentioned the analogy of prohibition of the intoxicant) means that some
food items were prohibited after some others, then you have seen that this verse does not
mention any other prohibited items than the previously revealed verses of prohibition had done,
that is, the verses of the chapters of "The Cow", "Cattle" and "The Bee"; keeping in view that
strangled animals, etc, are merely the details of dead animals.

And if he means that the previous descriptions were general and this verse gives the details, and
it was done because there was a possibility of people refusing to follow the rules, then it is out of
place; what was explicitly mentioned in the previous chapters, that is, "the dead animal, blood,
flesh of swine and that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked", were
more commonly used in the society, and people should have revolted against that rule more
readily than against the rule about strangled animal and that beaten to death, etc., because these
situations occur very rarely. If there was any danger of opposition, then the first mentioned four
things should not have not have been prohibited so explicitly; and when they were prohibited
without any fear, why should there be any hesitation in relatively unimportant examples.
Moreover, even if we accept his interpretation, it could not be called perfection of religion. How
can legislation of some rules be named 'religion'? And how can its promulgation and explanation
be called perfection of religion? Even if we accept it, it would be perfection of a small part of
religion and completion of some of the favors, rather than the whole religion and all the favors;
while Allah says: This day have I perfected your religion and completed My favor on you; here,
the perfection and completion are all-encompassing without any restriction.

Moreover, Allah had legislated a lot of rules and laws during all preceding years. What was the
specialty of this rule on this day that its legislation or explanation should be called perfection of
religion and completion of grace?

Or does the perfection of religion mean that Allah perfected it by closing the door of legislation
after revealing this verse, which gives the details of forbidden food items? Then what will be
said about those rules, which were revealed after revelation of this chapter and before the death
of the Prophet (s.a.w.)? Rather, what will be said about all the rules, which were revealed in this
very chapter of "The Table" after this verse? Think over it.

Until now, we have left the last clause untouched: and chosen for you Islam as a religion, which
means: This day I have chosen for you Islam as a religion. If the speech ends at describing the
favors of Allah on the Muslims by detailing the forbidden food on the day of 'Arafah in the year
10 AH, then what will be the relevance of this clause? What special thing happened on that day
that Allah chose Islam as their religion. There was nothing, most of the objections leveled
against the preceding interpretations apply to this too; and there is no need to repeat them here.

Or does "This day" point to any particular day between the day of 'Arafah and the arrival of the
Prophet (s.a.w.) at Medina when the disbelievers were despaired and the religion was perfected.
But again the objections described earlier against other interpretations would be leveled against
this, with the same details.

Up to here we have discussed this verse looking at what has been or could be said about it
regarding its interpretation. Now we shall look at it in the way that is more consistent with the
special style of this book.

"This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me:
Despair and disappointment is opposite of hope; and the religion was sent down gradually. In
this backdrop, this sentence indicates that disbelievers in the early days of Islam had some hope
regarding the Muslims' religion, expecting it to somehow die with the passage of time. This idea
of theirs posed a great threat against Islam from time to time and such a situation necessitated for
the believers to be always on guard and live in fear. In this background, the words, "so fear them
not" reassure the believers that Allah would protect them from the danger which was facing them
and which had caused them such a fear. Allah says: A party of the People of the Book desire that
they should lead you astray (3:69); also He says: Many of the People of the Book wish that they
could turn you back into unbelievers after your faith, out of envy on their part, (even) after the
truth has become manifest to them. But pardon and forgive (them) until Allah should bring about
His command Surely Allah has power over all things (2:109). The disbelievers were not waiting
for something to happen to the Muslims except because of their religion, and they were not angry
with them and their hearts were not burning against them but for one reason: The religion of
Islam posed a challenge to their supremacy and was ruining their dominance. It puts hindrance
against their indulging in the pleasures they were inclined to, and to which they were accustomed
all their lives; it was putting a stop to their unrestricted debauchery and wanton behavior.

What they hated was the religion, not the followers of the religion. Of course, they disliked the
Muslims, but it was because of their acceptance of the Divine religion. The reason why they
wanted to annihilate the Muslims and destroy their society was their intention to put out the
Light of Allah; they wanted to re-strengthen the pillars of polytheism, which had been shaking
because of the impact of Islam. They hoped against hope that they would one day turn the
believers into disbelievers, as has been described in the Divine words: that they could turn you
back into unbelievers; and He has said: They desire to put out the light of Allah with their
mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, though the unbelievers may be averse. He it is Who sent
His Messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, so that He may make it triumph over
the religions, though the polytheists may be averse (61:8-9); Therefore call upon Allah being
sincere to Him in religion though averse be the unbelievers (40:14).

In short, their only plan was to cut this blessed tree from its root and demolish this lofty structure
from its foundation; they tried to ensnare the believers in various ways, spreading hypocrisy in
their midst and creating doubts in their hearts in order to corrupting their religion.

In the beginning, they tried to weaken the determination of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and enfeeble his
resolve for religious da'wah (call) by offering him worldly riches and honor; as the Divine words
point to it: And the chief persons of them break forth, saying: "Go and steadily adhere to your
gods; this is most surely a thing sought after" (38:6). Alternatively, they tried flattery and
friendly intercourse, as may be seen in the following verses: They wish that you should be pliant
so they (too) would be pliant (52:9); And had it not been that We had already firmly established
you, you would have been near to incline to them a little (17:74); Say: "0 unbelievers! I do not
worship that which you worship. Nor do you worship Him Whom I worship. " (109:1-3), as is
understood from the traditions giving the reasons of their revelation.

The last thing, which they hoped would bring downfall to Islam, and toll the death bell of the
da'wah was the idea that Islam would certainly die with the death of its Prophet (s.a.w.) as he did
not have a male offspring. In their eyes, the Prophet wanted to establish a kingdom in the guise
of Prophethood, and begin his reign in the name of Divine call and Messengership. When he died
or was killed, his traces would be erased, his memory would die and his religion would be
forgotten. After all, this is what generally and habitually happens with kings and despotic rulers;
no matter how great a power they acquire, how much arrogance they show, their memory dies
with their death, and their laws and codes which had kept the people in their bondage are buried
with them in their graves. The chapter of "Abundance" refers to this ultimate hope of theirs when
it says: Surely your enemy is the one who shall be without posterity (108:3), as is clear from the
reason of its revelation.

These and similar expectations had kept their hope alive, and they believed that one day they
would extinguish the light of the religion. They were under erroneous impression that this pure
Divine call was merely a fiction whose falsity will become obvious in the coming days; and the
passage of time will erase its tracks and finish it. But gradually, the Islam overcame all its
adversaries - the false religions and their believers; the fame of Islam spread far and wide, and
the religion acquired strength and power to defeat its enemies; these developments rooted out
their hopes, they became despaired as they knew that they could not spoil the determination of
the Prophet, nor could they diminish his zeal; and they had found earlier that he could not be
bought by wealth or honor.

Islam's strength and power engulfed them with despair and pessimism; all the endeavors for
defeating the Prophet had proved futile; yet one hope was still alive: The hope that he did not
have any male offspring who could succeed him in his mission, to keep the religious da'wah
alive as he was doing; so they hoped that his religion would die with him. It was self-evident that
a religion, however perfect it may be in its shari'ah and ideology, could not protect itself in the
absence of a protector. Clearly, any established tradition and any religion with all its followers
could not maintain its purity and freshness by itself, no matter how much its fame had spread in
the world and how many people had entered into its fold. It needed someone who could protect it
from deterioration and pollution. Also, 'it was clear that a religion could not be obliterated or
annihilated by force or coercion, threats or mischief; or torture and things like that. It could die
only with the death of its protectors and those who were appointed to manage its affairs.

All this shows that the total despair of unbelievers could take place only if Allah was to appoint
someone who would stand in the place of the Prophet for protection of religion and management
of its affairs, in order that he could properly lead the Muslim ummah on the right path. This was
sure to bring in its wake the disappointment and despair of the disbelievers concerning the
Muslims' religion. Then the enemies would realize that the religion has already developed and
reached the stage where it is not dependent on the person of the Prophet alone; rather it is placed
under the care of a group who are true successors of the Prophet. This would be the perfection of
the religion as it would discard the transient nature and acquire continuity and eternity; and this
would be the completion of the Divine favor. Let us look at the Divine words: Many of the
People of the Book wish that they could turn you back into unbelievers after your faith, out of
envy on their part, (even) after the truth has become manifest to them. But pardon and forgive
(them) until Allah should bring about His command. Surely Allah has power over all things
(2:109). Very probably, the words: until Allah should bring about His command, point to this
very theme.

This explanation supports what has been narrated in the traditions that the verse was revealed on
the day of Ghadir Khumm, the 18th day of Dhi 'l-hijjah the year 10 AH, regarding the
successorship of 'Ali (a.s.). In this way, the two sentences will be very clearly connected with
each other, and none of the objections mentioned earlier could be leveled against this
explanation.

Now, that you have understood the meaning of desperation in this verse, you will appreciate that
"this day" in the Divine Speech, "This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion",
is an adverb of time related to the verb "have despaired". The adverb has been placed at the
beginning of the sentence in order to show this day's importance and grandeur; as it was on this
day that the religion passed the stage of personal guardianship of the Prophet and entered into the
stage of collective guardianship of the Imams; in this way, it rose from transience to permanence
and eternity.

On going ahead, we shall find a similar construction in the verse: This day (all) the good things
are allowed to you... (5:5). But the verse under discussion cannot be compared with this verse,
because the contexts of the two verses are totally different. The verse: This day have those who
disbelieve despaired of your religion, is a sort of expostulation against the unbelievers, while the
verse: This day (all) the good things are allowed to you, begins a new subject. Also, the
connotations are different. The former is a creative decree, which contains good news on one
side and warning on the other, while the latter is a legislative decree and describes the Divine
grace and favor to the Muslims. This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion,
shows the grandeur of the day because it brought a very highly beneficial good to the Muslims,
that is, desperation of the unbelievers regarding the Muslims' religion. "those who disbelieve"
refers to all the disbelievers, be they idol-worshippers, Jews, Christians or others, because the
clause is unrestricted, as we had described earlier.

The prohibition in the Divine words: so fear them not, and fear Me, is advisory, not obligatory.
The connotation is that now that those who until now had posed as a danger to you have
despaired, you have no reason to fear them; a man does not spend his energies for something
when he has lost all hopes of attaining it; so now you are safe from their side and you should not
fear them concerning your religion; therefore, "fear them not, and fear Me".

The words, "fear Me" in this context show that the Muslims should now fear Allah in the matter
concerning which they until then were afraid of the disbelievers, because now they cannot
deprive you of your religion. It is clear that this is a sort of warning to the Muslims; and that is
why we have not taken this verse as a statement of favor. This explanation gets strengthened if
we remember that the fear of Allah is obligatory in any case. It is not that it is wajib (obligatory)
in this state but not in that; or with this condition and not with that; therefore, there was no
reason to add "and fear Me" after the clause, "fear them not" if it does not indicate a very special
fear in a particular situation.

These sentences should not be compared with the Divine words: ...so do not fear them, and fear
Me if you are believers (3:175); because the order to fear Allah in this verse is made conditional
to believing; the order is obligatory and the connotation is that the believers are forbidden to fear
the disbelievers regarding their safety; rather, they are obliged to fear Allah alone. The verse,
therefore, forbids them to do what was not proper for them, that is, their fearing the disbelievers
concerning their own selves; it makes no difference here whether they are told to fear Allah or
not. That is why the order to fear Allah has been made conditional to their being the believers,
and this condition also expounds the reason of this order.

But the Divine words in the verse under the discussion, "so fear them not and fear Me", are not
like that. The believers' fear in this verse was the fear concerning their religion; and Allah did not
dislike such a fear, because in reality it meant the pursuit of the Divine pleasure. When Allah
forbids this fear, it is because the reason causing that fear was no more. They feared the
disbelievers because the disbelievers had not despaired of their religion yet; but now that the
situation has changed, they no more needed to fear them. Thus, the prohibition here is advisory;
and consequently, the order to fear Allah also is in advisory capacity. The connotation, in short,
is that it is necessary that you should be cautious and fearful in the matters of religion; but the
cause of fear until now had come from disbelievers and you were afraid of them because till
today they had hoped to divert you from your religion; but today they have despaired, and now
the cause of fear emanates from Allah. Therefore, you should be afraid of Him alone. Ponder on
it.

The verse because of the words, "so fear them not, and fear Me", gives a hint of a warning and
threat, because it orders the believers to have a special fear. It is not the general fear, which is
obligatory for the believers in all, conditions and at all times. Let us think on the specialty of this
fear and find out why it has been made obligatory.

There is no doubt that the two sentences of this verse, that is: This day have those who
disbelieve... ; and, This day have I perfected for you your religion, are inter-related and express
the same theme, as we have explained before. The religion which Allah had perfected this day
and the bounty which He had completed this day (in reality both are the same thing) was the
thing regarding which the disbelievers had entertained all those hopes and because of which the
believers were afraid of them; now Allah made the disbelievers despaired of that religion,
perfected it and completed it and then forbade the believers to fear the disbelievers in this
respect. Now when He orders them to fear His Own self, it must refer to the same type of fear,
that is, about the religion; they should remain on guard lest Allah takes away the religion from
their hands and remove this gifted favor from them.

Allah has made it clear that He does not take away any favor except when the recipient of that
favor shows ingratitude; and He has threatened the ungrateful person very severely: This is
because Allah does never change a bounty which He has conferred upon a people until they
change their own condition,- and because Allah is Hearing, Knowing (8:53);... and whoever
changes the favor of Allah after it has come to him, then surely Allah is severe in requiting (evil)
(2:211). And Allah has set a general parable for its bounties and how it changes when people
become ungrateful. He says: And Allah sets forth a parable: (consider) a town safe and secure to
which its means of subsistence come in abundance from every quarter, - but it became ungrateful
to Allah's favor, therefore Allah made it to taste the utmost degree of hunger and fear because of
what they wrought (16:112).

The verse beginning from "This day have those who disbelieve", and ending at "Islam as a
religion", announces that the religion of the Muslims is completely secured against the
disbelievers and is safe from every danger which could come from that side; and no corruption or
destruction can infiltrate into it except from the Muslims themselves. That would happen if the
Muslims showed ingratitude towards this perfect Divine bounty and rejected this complete
religion chosen by Him; then Allah would take away His favor from them and change it to
retribution and affliction and would make them taste the utmost degree of hunger and fear.
Unfortunately, the Muslims have done it and Allah has made them suffer the consequences.

If anyone wants to understand how true is the prophecy of tribulation and trial (which is inferred
from the Divine words: fear them not, and fear Me), he should ponder on the condition of the
Islamic world today, then he should go back analyzing the historical events until he reaches at
the roots of these misfortunes and afflictions.

The verses of al-wilayah (guardianship, mastership) in the Qur'an are fully connected with the
threat and warning contained in this verse. Allah has not cautioned His servants of Himself
except when it concerns the wilayah; and has said in this respect, time and again: ...and Allah
cautions you of Himself... (3:28 & 3:30). To go more deeply in this subject will take us out of the
scope of this book.

QUR'AN: This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and
chosen for you Islam as a religion: al-Ikmal (to perfect) and al-itmam  (to complete) are near to
each other in meaning. ar-Raghib has said: "A thing is called perfect when it serves the purpose
which it is intended for; and it becomes complete when it reaches a stage where it doesn't need
anything extra; a thing is called incomplete when it needs something more."

You can differentiate the meaning of the two words in another way: Effects of the things are of
two kinds; some effects spring from it when all its parts and ingredients are in place; if any of its
ingredients or conditions is missing, the effect will not take place. We can take the example of
the fast; if any of its conditions is violated even for a very small part of the day the fast will be
void. Such things are described with the word "completion". Allah says: ...then complete the fast
till night... (2:187); And the word of your Lord has been completed truly and justly... (6:115).

On the other hand, there are the effects, which spring from a thing without waiting for
completion of all its ingredients. When one part is found, its related effect will appear; if all
ingredients are present the desired effect will appear in its entirety. This is described as
perfection. Allah says: ...but he who cannot find (any offering) should fast for three days during
the hajj and for seven days when you return; these (make) ten (days) perfect... (2:196);... and that
you should perfect the number... (2:185). The effect of some parts of this number is seen, as are
the effects of the whole number. Arabs say: His affairs are complete and his understanding is
perfect; but they do not say: His understanding is complete and his affairs are perfect.

There is a difference between al-ikmal and at-takmil as there is between al-itmam and at-tatmim.
It is the difference between the paradigms of al-if'al and at-taf'il. al-If'al basically shows
instantaneousness of a work while at-taf'il shows graduality. However, in a wider sense or as a
result of literary evolution, the meanings in both paradigms change; sometimes, they become
very different from the meaning of the root word, e.g. al-ifrat (excess) and at-tafrit (negligence),
etc. Actually, these meanings were attached to such words at some particular occasions and then
regular usage made them inseparable and they became like actual meanings.

It appears from the above discourse that the sentence, "This day have I perfected for you your
religion and completed My favor on you", shows that something has been added to the religion,
(which is a collection of beliefs, ideologies and laws) today making it perfect; and the Divine
bounty and favor (which was something spiritual) was incomplete and without effect until today
when it was completed and now the expected effect is going to result from it.

The favor and bounty is the thing, which has affinity with nature of the recipient of that bounty.
All the things are interconnected with each other because they are parts of the system of Divine
management and in the long run all have affinity with one another; and most, rather all of them
are Divine bounties when they are put parallel to each other, as Allah says: ...and if you count
Allah's bounties you will not be able to number them... (14:34);... and made complete to you His
favors outwardly and inwardly... (31:20).

However, Allah has described some of these favors naming them as evil, vile, game and play and
using similar adjectives which are not praiseworthy as He says: And let not those who disbelieve
think that Our granting them respite is good their souls; We grant them respite only that they
may increase in sins; and they shall have a disgraceful chastisement (3:178); And this life of the
world is nothing but a sport and a play; and as for the next abode, that most surely is the life...
(29:64); Let it not deceive you that those who disbelieve go to and fro in the cities (fearlessly). A
brief enjoyment! then their abode is hell, and evil is the resting place (3:196-7). There are many
other verses like these.

All these verses show that the things, which are counted as bounties and Divine favors, would
really be bounties when they conform with the Divine purpose for which they were given to
man. They have been created to serve as the Divine help to man in order that the man could use
them in the way of his real felicity; in other words, when they help the man to be nearer to Allah
through worship and submission to His Mastership. Allah says: And I have not created the jinn
and the human beings except that they should worship Me (51:56).

All the things and faculties, which the man uses with the aim of attaining nearness to Allah and
seeking Divine pleasure, are the bounties and favors. Otherwise, they will become an affliction
and trial. It means that the things in themselves are neutral. They become favor and bounty
because they have in themselves the spirit of servitude and with that praiseworthy usage they
come under the Divine wilayah. This wilayah results in Divine management of the servants'
affairs. It follows that the favor in reality is the Divine wilayah (mastership, guardianship); and a
thing will become bounty when it contains something of that wilayah. Allah says: Allah is the
guardian (master) of those who believe; He brings them out of the darkness into the light...
(2:257); That is because Allah is the Master of those who believe, and because the unbelievers
have no master for them (47:11); and He says about His Messenger (s.a.w.): But no! by your
Lord! they do not believe until they make you a Judge of that which has become a matter of
disagreement among them, and then do not find any straitness in their hearts as to what you have
decided and submit with total submission (4:65). You may find other similar verses in the
Qur'an.

Islam is a religion because it is a collection of what was sent down from Allah for guidance of
His servants, so that they may worship Him properly; and it is a Divine favor and bounty
inasmuch as practically it contains in itself the wilayah of Allah, the wilayah of His Messenger
and of those vested with authority (ulu'l-amr) after him.

The wilayah of Allah (i.e., His management of the servants' affairs through the religion) cannot
be complete except through the wilayah of His Messenger; nor will the wilayah of His
Messenger be complete without the wilayah of those vested with authority after him; and that
wilayah means their management of the religious affairs of the ummah with Divine permission.
Allah says: 0 you who believe! obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those vested with
authority from among you (4:59), we have fully explained this verse before. Again, Allah says:
Only Allah is your guardian and His Messenger and those who believe, those who keep up
prayers and pay the zakat while they bow (5:55); and we shall explain the verse, God willing, in
its place.

Thus, the verse means as follows: Today, and it is the day when those who disbelieve have
despaired of your religion, I have perfected for you the whole religious perceptions (which I had
revealed to you before) by making the wilayah obligatory for you; and I have completed My
bounty on you, and it is the wilayah which means management of the religious affairs with
Divine guidance. Until now, you were under the wilayah of Allah and His Messenger only; but it
could work only up to the time the revelations would be coming down from Allah; it could not
work later when the revelation would be cut off, when the Messenger would not remain among
the people to safeguard the Divine religion and defend it. It was essential that somebody should
be appointed to carry on this responsibility and be vested with the authority after the Messenger
of Allah (s.a.w.), to act as the overall authority in the affairs of the religion and the ummah.

The wilayah is a single project; it was incomplete until it was completed with appointment of the
one, who was vested with the authority after the Prophet.

Now that the religion has became perfect in its legislation and the bounty of wilayah is
completed, I have chosen for you the Islam as religion, which is the religion of monotheism, in
which no one is worshipped except Allah and no one is obeyed (and obedience is a sort of
worship) except Allah and those whose obedience He has made obligatory for you, that is, the
Messenger and the waliyy.

The verse makes it clear that the believers are today enjoying the security after they were afraid
before, and that Allah has chosen for them that they should devotedly adhere to Islam, the
religion of monotheism. It is compulsory for them that they should worship Allah without
associating anything with Him; they have only to obey Allah or him whose obedience has been
ordered by Allah. Now, ponder on the Divine words: Allah has promised to those of you who
believe and do good that He will most certainly make them successors in the earth as He made
successors those before them, and that He will most certainly establish for them their religion
which He has chosen for them, and that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them
security in exchange; they shall worship Me, not associating aught with Me; and whoever
disbelieves after this, these it is who are the transgressors (24:55). Then place it parallel to the
verses under discussion: This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear
them not, and fear Me. This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor
on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion. You will at once appreciate that this verse is the
fulfillment of the promise given in the chapter of "Light"; the words: they shall worship Me, not
associating aught with Me, describe the real purpose of this exercise as may be understood also
from the end sentence: and whoever disbelieves after this, these it is who are the transgressors.

The chapter 24, "Light", was revealed long before the chapter of "The Table" as it contains the
story of slander, the verse of flogging, and that of hijab (veil) and other such commandments.

QUR'AN: but however is compelled by hunger, not inclining wilfully to sin, then surely Allah is
Forgiving, Merciful. al-Makhmasah (hunger); at-tajanuf (to incline); it denotes inclination of the
feet to the outer side; its opposite is at-tahanuf which denotes their inclination to the inner side.
The verse, in this context, shows three things:

1. This order is secondary, meant only for emergencies.

2. The permission to take unlawful food is limited to that small amount which removes the pangs
of hunger and averts the emergency.

3. The Divine forgiveness and mercy is used in relation to the sins which make one liable to
punishment; and likewise, it may be used in connection with the source of those sins, that is, the
law contravening which results in sin and brings punishment in its wake.

A Discourse on Slaughter of Animals

1. Various Views Concerning Eating of Meat:

There is no doubt that man, like all other animals and vegetables, has been provided with
alimentary system with which he ingests those material ingredients which he can process to
make them a part of his body and thus keep himself alive. So far as the nature is concerned, there
is nothing to prevent him from eating whatever he can chew and swallow, the exceptions being
the things which bring harm to him or create aversion.

As for harmfulness, the realization comes when he recognizes that the thing which he wants to
eat is harmful to his body as, e.g., it is poisonous or things like that; then he restrains himself
from eating it; or when he finds that eating it will cause him spiritual harm, like the things which
are forbidden in various religions. This self-restraint is ideational.

As for aversion, it emanates from odiousness and dirtiness which repulses man from the thing; a
man does not eat his feces because by nature he thinks it is dirty (although some children and
insane persons have been seen eating it). To this natural repulsion is added what results from
religious beliefs or various customs prevalent in different societies. For example, the Muslims
treat pork as dirty and unclean while the Christians enjoy eating it. In the same way, the Western
people eat many animals which the Orientals treat as unclean, like crabs, frogs and rats, etc. This
type of aversion results from acquired disposition which we call second nature.

It shows that so far as eating of meats is concerned, mankind is divided in numerous categories.
The spectrum shows on one side total prohibition and on the other unrestricted indulgence. When
he uses some meats he follows the dictates of nature, and when he refrains from some items, it
emanates from some ideology, or is a result of his second nature.

The Buddhist system prohibited use of all animals altogether. This is one extreme, and its
opposite is the excess which was prevalent among uncivilized people, in Africa and elsewhere,
who had no hesitation in eating any meat, even the flesh of man.

The Arabs used to eat the meat of quadrupeds and other animals, even rats and lizards; they ate
all types of dead cattle which they killed by slaughtering or which died by itself, was strangled or
beaten to death; they ate what died as a result of a fall, or by being gored by another animal, or
which was killed by beasts of prey. They ridiculed the Muslims saying: Why is it that you eat
what you kill yourselves and do not eat what has been killed by Allah? Many people offer
similar objections even today. Some people say: What is the difference between one flesh and
the other, when the human body does not get any harm from, especially if it is hygienically
prepared, because the digestive system does not differentiate between this and that?

The Arabs also used to eat blood; they filled the intestine with blood, roasted it and offered it to
the guests. During famine days, they used to wound their camels with arrows and drank the
blood which came gushing out. Even today, eating of blood is common among many non-
Muslims communities.

The Chinese Buddhists are more liberal than the ancient Arabs; reportedly, they eat all types of
animals including dogs and cats, even the worms, sea-shells and all types of insects.

Islam has charted a middle course, and has allowed the meats which are agreeable to the normal
human nature. It has selected in quadrupeds the catties like sheep, goats, cows and camels (also
horse and donkey, although with dislike); among the birds, it disallowed the birds of prey and
allowed those other birds which have craw and those which flap their wings more often and do
not have talon; in marine animals, it has allowed some categories of fish, details of which may be
found in books of shari'ah.

Even while allowing the above-mentioned animals, it has prohibited its blood and that which has
died of itself and on which the name of Allah has not been invoked. The purpose behind these
rules is to revitalize the natural canon, inasmuch as the man naturally likes to eat meat. Together
with it, Islam respects the correct thinking and normal nature as these too are repulsed from
eating those things which may prove harmful to human being or which the human nature thinks
odious and unclean.

2. How Allah Allowed Killing of Animals When the Mercy Rejects it?:

It may be asked: The animal has a spirit which is endowed with feelings similar to that which a
man has: man hates the torture of slaughtering, the bitter taste of death and is endowed with the
natural love of self. These are the feelings which incite a man to flee from every disliked and
dangerous situation. This realization of our own feelings demands from us that we should look
with respect and mercy on other human beings, because they too feel the same pain as we do,
and all souls are equal. The same argument can be advanced for animal species. How can we
inflict on animals the sufferings which we ourselves do not accept? How can we exchange their
sweet life with bitter death? What right do we have to deprive them of the bounty of life which is
the best of the bounties? Allah is the most Merciful of all. How can His Mercy allow us to kill an
animal for enjoying its meat when both of us are equally His creatures?

Reply: This question gives precedence to the feelings over the realities. Legislation follows the
real good of humanity and not the emotional feelings. We may expound it as follows: Look
minutely at all the things which you find around yourselves; you will see that all of them in their
creation and continuity follow the law of continuous change. All things without exception do
change to other things; and those other things in their turn do change into these things - directly
or indirectly. Nothing comes into being unless another thing loses its existence in the process.
Nothing continues living on this earth without something else going out of existence. This
material world is the world of change and exchange; or you may say, the world of the eater and
the eaten. The earthly compounds eat the earth itself by absorbing its chemicals and changing
them to their own images; then after sometime, the earth again eats and destroys them. Again,
the vegetable world gets its nourishment from the earth and absorbs the air, then later the earth
eats it and break it down to its original ingredients, the first elements: and this cycle continues.

How come the animal world which gets its nourishment from vegetables, water and air. Some
animals feed themselves on other animals, like the wild beasts which eat the meat of their prey;
and likewise predatory birds eat the pigeons and sparrows. The digestive systems of these
carnivorous animals and birds do not accept any other food. The small birds in their turn feed on
grain, flies, fleas, insects and mosquitoes, while the mosquitoes feed on blood of man and other
animals. Then, finally, the earth devours them all.

Clearly, the system of creation which has overall control on all the creatures, has ordained that
man should get nourishment from meats, etc.; then it has guided the various parts of existence
towards it. It is the system which has created in human beings the ability to get sustenance from
both animals and vegetables. He has in the front of his alimentary system the teeth some of
which are made to cut, the others to break, some to tear and others to grind; they are called
canines, molars, premolars and incisors; man is not like goat or cow which cannot cut or tear
apart, nor is he like beasts of prey which cannot grind or incise.

The faculty of taste with which his mouth is equipped finds the taste of meats pleasant; then
other organs of his digestive system likewise find the meats delicious, and long for it. All this is a
part of creative guidance which proves that the Creator has given him permission to use and eat
various meats. How can we separate this creative guidance from lawfulness of the work which
this guidance leads to.

Islam is a natural religion. Its only aim is to revive the tracks of nature which the human
ignorance has obliterated. It is bound to declare lawful what the creation guides to and the nature
decrees. Islamic legislation revives this natural commandment; and in the same way it restores
other arrangements which the Creator has ingrained in our nature. We have already mentioned
that it confirms the decree of reason that one should abstain from such meats which are harmful
physically or spiritually; and it strengthens the inner feelings by prohibiting what the normal
human nature dislikes or feels aversion from. These two principles ultimately are based on the
Divine management of the creation; and Islam has given credence to them. It has prohibited that
which harms the growth of body and has forbidden that which is injurious to the well-being of
human society; for example, that which has been slaughtered in the name of other than Allah or
that which has been obtained through gambling and dividing with arrows and so on; and it has
prohibited those repulsive things which the nature abhors.

As for the idea of mercy which prevents one from torturing or killing other living beings, there is
no doubt that mercy is a fine gift of Allah which has been ingrained in the human nature, and in
many animals as well, as we have sometimes observed. But the Creator has not given it the status
that it should enjoy absolute power over all affairs, or should command unqualified obedience.
The creation itself has not given the mercy free rein; otherwise, there would not have been in this
world any trace of grief, disease, suffering and various types of tortures and oppressions.

Moreover, human mercy in itself is not like justice, inasmuch as it is not an absolute noble
characteristic which admits no restriction. Had it been so, then it would not have been proper to
punish an oppressor for his oppression or to penalize a criminal for his crime; nor would we have
been allowed to confront a transgression with similar action. If mercy means this, then the earth
and all that is on it would perish.

However, Islam has not neglected the demands of mercy altogether, because it is among the
creation's gifts. It has ordered us to deal with the animals with mercy. It has forbidden us to
torture the animal at the time of slaughter; it doesn't allow to dissect the limbs of the slaughtered
animal before it has died, nor is it allowed to skin it while it is alive. The prohibition of
strangling an animal or beating it to death comes under this category of rules. Also, it has
forbidden to slaughter an animal with another one looking at it. At the time of slaughtering,
many rules based on mercy have been laid down, as for example, the animal should be given
water before slaughtering, and so on, details of which can be seen in books of jurisprudence.

When all is said and written, the fact remains that Islam is a religion of reason, not of sentiments;
it does not give precedence to the dictates of sentiments over the rules which are meant to bring
reform in the human society. It accepts only that sentiment which is accepted by the reason; so in
the end, that too becomes the dictate of reason.

As for the talk of Divine Mercy and His being the most Merciful of all, do they think that Allah
is a tender-hearted being? Or that His senses are influenced and He feels pity on some things?
Obviously, these are material and physical characteristics and Allah is far above such things. The
Divine Mercy means that Allah bestows good on someone who deserves it as much as he
deserves it. That is why sometimes what we think is punishment turns out to be the Mercy from
Him, and vice versa. Consequently, according to the reason, it is not good to neglect or discard a
beneficial action by listening to what is suggested by our false mercy. Nor is it allowed to be
negligent in legislating the shari'ah, keeping in view the realities of the creation.

It appears from the above, that Islam follows 'the dictates of nature when it allows eating of
meat, and enforces the conditions for that, or explains the rules which it has laid down: ...the
nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is
the right religion, but most people do not know (30:30).

3. Why Does Islam Insist on Slaughter?

It is another question branching from the previous one: We accept that eating meats is allowed
by the human nature. Then why did not Islam restrict it to that meat which comes into hand after
an animal's death? It could have allowed that meat which is obtained when an animal dies by
itself. Such a rule would have reconciled the creative order of lawfulness of meat with the
demand of Mercy which forbids man to torture an animal by killing or slaughter; there was no
need to lay down special rites of slaughtering.

Its reply is clear from what we have said in the preceding question. Mercy in this meaning is not
to be necessarily pursued; in fact, following the dictates of such mercy will nullify the norm of
realities. However, as explained earlier, Islam has not spared any effort to deal with the animals
mercifully, as much as was possible in this respect; it has been done in response to this fine
human instinct.
Moreover, if we restrict the lawfulness of meat to the one obtained from a dead body, the only
result will be the spread of diseases and physical harm which in itself is against the demands of
mercy. Such an order will create a critical situation in general which the reason says must be
avoided.

Traditions I
'Ikrimah narrates from Ibn 'Abbas that he said, "No verse was revealed (with the words): O you
who believe! but 'Ali is its chief and its head. Allah has admonished the companions of
Muhammad (s.a.w.) in more than one place, but He has never mentioned 'Ali except with good
(words)." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

The author says: The same hadith up to the words "its head" has been narrated in Tafsiru'l-
burhan from Muwaffaq ibn Ahmad from 'Ikrimah from Ibn 'Abbas; al-'Ayyashi also has narrated
it from 'Ikrimah; and we have quoted this hadith earlier from ad-Durru 'l-manthur. Some
traditions quote ar-Rida (a.s.) as saying: "There is not in the Qur'an: O you who believe! except
about us." This hadith is based on the flow of the Qur'an or describes the esoteric meaning of the
revelation.

'Abdullah ibn Sinan says, "I asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about the words of Allah: O you who
believe! fulfil the covenants. He said, '(It means) agreements' " (ibid.)

The author says: al-Qummi has also narrated it in his at-Tafsir from him.

ash-Shaykh at-Tusi narrates through his chain from Muhammad ibn Muslim that he said, "I
asked one of the two (i.e., the 5th or the 6th Imam, a.s.) about the words of Allah, the Mighty, the
Great: The Cattle quadrupeds are made lawful for you. The Imam said, 'The fetus in the womb
of its mother when hair or wool grows on its body, then its mothers' slaughter is also its slaughter
and this is what Allah has meant (here).' " (at-Tahdhib)

The author says: This hadith is narrated in al-Kafi and al-Faqih from Muhammad ibn Muslim
from one of the two (a.s.); al-'Ayyashi in his at-Tafsir has narrated this theme from Muhammad
ibn Muslim from one of the two, and from Zurarah from as-Sadiq (a.s.); and al-Qummi has also
narrated it in his at-Tafsir; and at-Tabrisi has narrated it in Majma'u'l-bayan from Abu Ja'far and
Abu 'Abdillah (peace be on them).

al-Qummi writes in his at-Tafsir under the words of Allah: O you who believe! do not violate the
signs appointed by Allah... : The signs: Ihram, tawaf, prayer in the place of Ibrahim, running
between Safa and Marwa and other rituals are all among the signs appointed by Allah. Also, it is
among the signs that when a man drives his sacrifice for hajj and puts some signs on it, as for
example, if he wounds the camel's hump or some other part of its skin or puts a garland (of old
shoes) on its neck in order to make the people know that it was a sacrificial animal so that
nobody would meddle with it. This is called ash-sha'air (sign, indications) because it indicates to
the people its purpose. The words: nor the sacred month, indicate here the month of Dhi 'l-hijjah
which is one of the sacred months; nor the offerings, points to the animal which is driven by the
pilgrim after he wears ihram; nor the symbolic garlands - the garland is made of the shoes in
which he has prayed; nor those going to the Sacred House -those who go for pilgrimage of the
House. (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi)

at-Tabrisi says, "Abu Ja'far al-Baqir (a.s.) said, 'This verse was revealed concerning a man from
Banu Rabi'ah who was called al-Hutam.' " at-Tabrisi goes on to say, "as-Suddi has said, 'al-
Hutam ibn Hind al-Bakri came until he reached the Prophet alone, and he had left his group
outside Medina; then he asked, "To what do you call (us)?" - The Prophet (s.a.w.) had already
told his companions, "Today will come to you from Banu Rabi'ah (a man) who speaks with the
tongue of Satan" - When the Prophet (s.a.w.) replied, he said, "Give me some time; probably I
will accept Islam; and there are people whom I should consult." Then he went out. The
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said, "Surely he entered with a kafir face and went out with a
treacherous back." Then, al-Hutam passed by some camels of Medina which were left to pasture,
and he took all of them and went away; and he was singing (the following lines):

Tonight Hutam rolled up with animal drivers, He is not a herdsman of camels nor a shepherd.
Nor is he a butcher working on a butcher s block,
They all were asleep, but the son of Hind did not sleep,
The night was passing and a young man was enduring it who is straight like an arrow, With
well-developed legs and smooth feet.

" 'Then, next year he came for hajj and had put symbolic garlands on the neck of (those) camels.
The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was thinking of sending some people to him. Then this verse
was revealed: nor those going to the Sacred House.' " (Majma'u'l-bayan)

at-TabrisT further says, "Ibn Zayd has said that it was revealed on the day Mecca was conquered
about those polytheists who were coming to the House and saying talbiyah of 'umrah. The
Muslims said, 'O Messenger of Allah! These too are polytheists like these (Meccans). Let us aid
them.' Then Allah revealed this verse."

The author says: at-Tabari has narrated the first story from as-Suddi and 'Ikrimah and the
second one from Ibn Zayd; ad-Durru 'l-manthur narrates the second story through Ibn Abl Hatim
from Zayd ibn Aslam and there it is said that it was on the day of al-Hudaybiyyah; but neither
story conforms with what is almost unanimously agreed by the exegetes and the narrators that
the chapter of "The Table" was revealed in the last pilgrimage. In other words, the Divine orders:
...the idolaters are nothing but unclean, so they shall not approach the Sacred Mosque after this
(very) year... (9:28); ...then slay the idolaters wherever you find them... (9:5), were already
revealed before the Divine words: nor those going to the Sacred House. So, there is no reason
why should this last order be taken to forbid confronting the idol-worshippers when they go to
the Sacred House, [because they had already ceased to visit it].
Probably, something from these two or similar stories was the reason of the traditions narrated
from Ibn 'Abbas, Mujahid, Qatadah and ad-Dahhak that the words: nor those going to the Sacred
House, are abrogated by the words: then slay the idolaters -wherever you find them, and the
words: the idolaters are nothing but unclean, so they shall not approach the Sacred Mosque
after this (very) year, al-Qummi also has written about this abrogation in his at-Tafsir and it
seems that that too is a tradition. But all these traditions should be discarded because the chapter
of "The Table" was the last to be revealed and it has been narrated from the Imams of Ahlu'l-
bayt (a.s.) that this chapter is abrogating not abrogated. Moreover, the Divine words: This day
have I perfected for you your religion..., totally refute the idea that some of its verses would be
abrogated. Keeping all this in view, the words: nor those going to the Sacred House, may be
taken to be an explanation of the words which follow: and let not the hatred of a people —
because they hindered you from the Sacred Mosque - incite you to exceed limits. You should not
violate the sanctity of the House by confronting those who go there for hajj or 'umrah just
because they had in the past hindered you from the Sacred House; nor should you commit
transgression against those who had hindered you from the Sacred Mosque before; don't commit
any sin like murder against them, nor any lesser transgression and injustice; rather you should
cooperate with each other in righteousness and piety.

Ahmad and 'Abd ibn Hamid have narrated about the verse: and help one another in
righteousness and piety; and al-Bukhari has narrated in his at-Tarikh - all from Wabisah that he
said: "I came to the Messenger of All3h (s.a.w.) and I had intended that I would not leave any
item of righteousness and sin without asking him about it. (The Prophet) said to me: 'O Wabisah!
Should I tell you what you have come to ask about or you would ask?' I said, 'O Messenger of
Allah! You tell me.' He said, 'You have come to ask about righteousness and sin.' Then the
Prophet joined his three fingers and kept poking them at my chest and he was telling, 'O
Wabisah! Ask your heart, ask your heart, righteousness is which the heart gets tranquility and
you get peace of mind, and the sin is that which upsets (your) heart and creates uncertainty -
even if people give you rulings over rulings.'" (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

Ahmad, 'Abd ibn Hamid, Ibn Hibban, at-Tabaram, al-Hakim (and he has said that it is correct)
and al-Bayhaqi have narrated from Abu Amamah (that he said), "A man asked the Prophet
(s.a.w.) about sin. The Prophet said: 'Whatever makes your soul restless, leave it.' He said: Then
what is iman?' The Prophet said, 'Whoever is grieved for his evil (deed) and is pleased with his
good (deed) is a believer.' " (ibid.)

Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ahmad, al-Bukhari (in al-Adab), Muslim, at-Tirmidhi, al-Hakim and al-
Bayhaqi (in his Shu'abu'l-iman) have narrated from an-Nawwas ibn Sam'an that he said, The
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was asked about righteousness and sin. He said, 'Righteousness is
good behavior and sin is that which keeps your soul restless and you do not like that people
should come to know about it.'" (ibid)

The author says: As you see, these traditions are based on the words of Allah: And the soul and
Him who made it perfect, then He inspired it to understand what is wrong for it and right for it
(91:7-8); and they support what we have written earlier about the meaning of sin.
at-Tabrisi has written: There is a difference of opinion about it (i.e. the Divine words: nor those
going to the Sacred House). It has been said that it is abrogated by the words of Allah: then slay
the idolaters wherever you find them, and this has been written by most of the exegetes; on the
other hand, it is said that nothing from this chapter has been abrogated nor from this verse,
because it was not lawful to start fighting with the polytheists in the sacred months except when
they start it. Then he has said that it is narrated from Abu Ja'far (a.s.).

as-Saduq narrates through his chain from Aban ibn Taghlib from Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn 'Ali
al-Baqir (blessings of Allah be on them) that he said: "Dead body, blood and flesh of swine is
known: that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, that is, what has been
slaughtered on idols. As for the strangled (animal), the fire-worshippers did not eat slaughtered
animals rather they ate dead ones; they used to strangle cow and sheep, and when it died, they ate
it; and that beaten to death: they used to tie its legs and beat it until it died and then they ate it;
and that killed by a fall: they used to blindfold it and throw it from a roof, when it died, they ate
it; and that killed by being smitten with the horn: they made the rams fight each other and when
one of them died, they ate it; and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you slaughter:
they used to eat what was killed by wolf, lion and bear; so Allah, the Mighty, the Great,
prohibited it; and what is sacrificed on stones set up (for idols): they (the Zoroastrians) used to
sacrificed animals in their fire-temple; and the Qurayshites used to worship trees and stones and
slaughtered animals on them; and that you divide by arrows; that is a transgression:" He said:
"They used to take an animal and divide it into ten parts, then they gathered and took out the
arrows (and they gave it to a man) and there were ten arrows, seven of which had got shares and
three were without any share. Those with shares were: al-fadhdh, at-taw'am, al-musbil, an-nafis,
al-hils, ar-raqib and al-mu'alla, al-fadhdh had one share, at-taw'am two, al-musbil three, an-
nafis four, al-hils five, ar-raqib six and al-mu'alla had seven shares. Those without share were
as-safih, al-munih and al-waghad; and the animal's price was paid by those who did not get any
share; and it was gambling, therefore, Allah prohibited it." (Man la yahduruhu'l-faqih)

The author says: The meanings given in the tradition in explanation of the strangled animal,
that beaten to death and that killed by a fall, aim at explaining the verse through examples (as is
clear from the next tradition). Also, the exception of except what you slaughter, attached to and
that which wild beasts have eaten, and likewise the words, that is a transgression, which
qualifies and that you divide by the arrows, do not mean that this exception or qualification is
limited to these single items.

'Ayyuq ibn Qasut narrates from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) concerning these words, that he said, "The
strangled animal is that which is strangulated in the neck; that beaten to death is such a sick
animal which doesn't feel the pain of slaughter, it does not agitate its limbs nor blood comes out
of it; that killed by a fall is that animal which falls down from roof, etc.; that killed by being
smitten with the horn is that which is gored by another animal." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

al-Hasan ibn 'Ali al-Washsha' narrates from Abu'l-Hasan ar-Rida (a.s.); he says, "I heard him
saying that the animals which fall from high place, those smitten with the horn and those which
wild beasts have eaten, if you get chance of slaughtering it, then (you may) eat it. "(ibid.)

Muhammad ibn 'Abdillah narrates from one of his companions that he said, "I said to Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.), 'May I be made your ransom! Why did Allah forbid the dead animal, blood and
flesh of swine?' He said, 'Verily when Allah, the Blessed, the High, prohibited these to His
servants and made the other things lawful to them, it was not because Allah liked these
prohibited things for Himself, Blessed and High is He, nor did He dislike other things so allowed
His servants to use it. The fact is that He created the creatures and knew what would sustain their
bodies and keep them in good health. Therefore, He made it lawful for them as a favor from
Himself for their own well-being; and He knew what would be harmful to them, so He forbade it
to them and made it unlawful; yet He allowed it for those facing emergencies, and made it lawful
to him when his body could not be sustained otherwise; so He ordered him to partake from it to
that amount which would avert the emergency, but not anymore.' Then the Imam (a.s.) said, 'As
for the dead body, nobody goes near it or eats it but his body becomes weak and thin, and his
strength is lost and his generation is discontinued; and one who (habitually) eats dead body will
not die but unexpectedly. As for blood, it creates burning thirst and hard-heartedness,
mercilessness unkindness; one cannot be sure that he would not kill his child or parents; he
cannot be trusted about his friends or companions. As for the flesh of swine, verily Allah had
transformed some groups in various forms, resembling swine, monkey, bear and other such
animals; then He prohibited (His servants) to eat the animals of similar shapes in order that they
should not be polluted by it and should not take the Divine punishment lightly. As for
intoxicants, Allah has made it unlawful because of its effect and disorder.' Then he (a.s.) said,
'Verily the one addicted to liquor is like the idol-worshipper; it creates in him tremor and takes
away his radiance; it destroys his sense of honor, and incites him to indulge in unlawful activities
like bloodshed and fornication; when he is intoxicated, there is no guarantee that he would not
assault sexually the women who are within his prohibited degree [like mother, daughter or sister]
without being aware of it. The liquor does not lead the drinker except to every type of evil.'"
(ibid.)

Traditions II
Abu'l-Muayyad Muwaffaq ibn Ahmad [al-Khwarazmi] has written in his book Fadail 'Ali; he
says, "Informed me the chief of the memorizers Shahrdar ibn Shirwayh ibn Shahrdar ad-Daylami
among what he wrote to me from Hamadan, informed us Abu'l-Fath 'Abdus ibn 'Abdillah ibn
'Abdus al-Hamadani in writing, narrated to us 'Abdullah ibn Ishaq al-Baghawi, narrated to us al-
Husayn ibn 'Alil al-Ghanawi, narrated to us Muhammad ibn 'Abdu 'r-Rahman az-Zarra', narrated
to us Qays ibn Hafs, narrated to us 'Ali ibn al-Husayn, narrated to us Abu Hurayrah from Abu
Sa'id al-Khudri, 'Verily, the day the Prophet (s.a.w.) called the people to Ghadir Khumm, he
ordered so that the thorns under the trees were swept aside, and that was a Thursday, when he
called the people to 'Ali and holding his arm, he lifted it until people were looking at the
whiteness of his armpits; then both did not separate from one another until this verse was
revealed: This day have I perfected for you your religion and have completed My favor on you
and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said,
"Allahu Akbar! for perfecting the religion and completing the bounty and for pleasure of the
Lord with my Messengership and the wilayah of 'Ali." Then he said, "O Allah! Love him who
loves him ('Ali) and be enemy of him who has enmity with him ('Ali) and help him who helps
him ('Ali) and forsake him who forsakes him ('Ali)."'
"Hassan ibn Thabit said, 'Do you allow me, O Messenger of Allah! to compose some lines of
poetry?' He said, 'Say it, Allah will send it down (to you).' So, Hassan ibn Thabit said:

On the day of Ghadir their Prophet was calling them, At Khumm, and how loud was the Prophet
as a caller!
That verily I am Your Mawla, Yes, and your Waliyy, So they all said and did not show there any
blindness:
Your God is our Mawla and you are our Waliyy.
And you will not find anyone in the creation disobeying this order.
So he said to him, 'Stand up O 'Ali  because surely,
I am pleased for you to be the Imam and Leader after me.' " (Ghayatu'l-maram)

al-Hafiz Abu Nu'aym has narrated a similar hadith through his chains from Qays Ibn Rabi from
Abu Harun al-' Abdi from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri; and he has added four lines more at the end of
the poem:

So whomsoever I am the Master then this is his Master, Therefore you must be his true helpers
and lovers.
Then he prayed (saying): "O Allah! be friend of his lover and be the enemy of him who has
enmity towards 'Ali." (Nuzulu'l-Qur'an fi Amiri 'l-Mu'mimn 'Ali ibn Abi Talib)

Also, he narrates through his chains from 'Ali ibn 'Amir from Abu'l-Hajaf from al-A'mash from
'Addah that he said: "This verse came down to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) about 'Ali ibn Abi
Talib: O Messenger! deliver what has been revealed to you from Your Lord...; and (also) Allah
has said: This day have I perfected for you your religion and have completed My favor on you
and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." (ibid.)

Ibrahim ibn Muhammad al-Hamawayni said, informed me ash-Shaykh Taju 'd-Din Abu Talib
'Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn 'Uthman ibn 'Abdillah al-Khazin; he said, informed us al-Imam Burhanu
'd-Din Nasir ibn Abi 'l-Makarim al-Matrazi through ijazah; he said, informed us al-Imam Akhtab
Khwarazm Abu'l-Muayyad Muwaffaq ibn Ahmad al-Makki al-Khwarazmi; he said, informed me
the Chief of the memorizers in what he wrote to me from Hamadan; informed us ar-Ra'is Abu'l-
Fath in writing; narrated to us 'Abdullah ibn Ishaq al-Baghawi; informed us al-Hasan ibn 'Aqil
al-Ghanawi; informed us Muhammad ibn 'Abdillah az-Zarra'; informed us Qays ibn Hafs, he
said, narrated to me 'Ali ibn al-Husayn al-'Abdi from Abu Harun al-'Abdi from Abu Sa'id al-
Khudri (and he narrated like the first tradition), (ibid.)

al-Hamawayni has also narrated from the Chief of the memorizers and Abu Mansur Shahrdar ibn
Shirwayh ibn Shahdar ad-Daylami; he said informed us al-Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn al-Hasan al-
Haddad al-Muqri' al-Hafiz from Ahmad ibn 'Abdillah ibn Ahmad; he said, informed us
Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn 'Ali; he said, informed us Muhammad ibn 'Uthman ibn Abi Shaybah;
he said, informed us Yahya al-Hammam; he said, informed us Qays ibn ar-Rabi from Abu Harun
al-'Abdi from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (and narrated like the first tradition), (ibid)

al-Hamawayni has said after this tradition: "This tradition has many paths to Abu Sa'd  ibn Malik
al-Khudn  al-Ansari."

as-Sayyid ar-Radi (r.a.) has narrated from Muhammad ibn Ishaq from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) from his
father, from his grandfather that he said, "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) returned from
the Last Pilgrimage, he came down at a place called Dawjan; then this verse came down: O
Messenger! deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you
have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people (5:67). When it was
revealed that he would be protected from the people, he (ordered to) call: The prayer in
congregation! So, the people gathered near him. He said, 'Who has more authority on you than
you have yourselves?' All of them cried out and said, 'Allah and His Messenger.' So he held the
hand of 'Ali ibn Abi Talib and said, 'Whomsoever I am the Master, 'Ali is his Master. O Allah!
befriend him who befriends him, and be enemy of him who is his enemy, and help him who
helps him, and forsake him who forsakes him; because he is from me and I am from him, and his
status with me is like that of Harun with Musa except that there is no prophet after me.' It was the
last obligation which Allah, the High, imposed on the ummah of Muhammad (s.a.w.). Then
Allah, the High, revealed to His Prophet: This day have I perfected for you your religion and
have completed My favor on you and have chosen for you Islam as a religion."

Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said, "So they accepted from the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) all the obligations
that Allah had imposed on them: the prayer, fast, zakat and hajj, and confirmed his truthfulness
in all these things."

Ibn Ishaq said, "I said to Abu Ja'far (a.s.), 'When was that?' He said, 'On 19th Dhi 'l-hijjah 10 AH
during his return journey from the last pilgrimage and there were between that and [the death of]
the Prophet (s.a.w.) 100 days, and had heard the Messenger of Allah at Ghadir Khumm twelve
(men).' " (al-Manaqibu'l-fakhirah)

Author's note: In al-Burhan it says 17th of Dhi 'l-hijjah (but the correct date is 18th).

Ibnu'l-Maghazili narrates through his chains from Abu Hurayrah that he said, "Whoever will fast
on the 18th day of Dhi 'l-hijjah, Allah will write for him the fast of sixty months; and that is the
day of Ghadir Khumm. At that place, the Prophet took (from the Muslims) the bay'ah of 'Ali ibn
Abi Talib and said, 'Whomsoever I am the Master 'Ali is his Master, O Allah! befriend him who
befriends him, and be enemy of him who is his enemy, and help him who helps him.' Then 'Umar
ibn al-Khattab said to him, 'Congratulations! Congratulations! to you, O son of Abu Talib! you
became my mawla and mawla of every believing man and woman.' Then Allah, the High, sent
down the verse: This day have I perfected for you your religion and have completed..." (al-
Manaqib)

There are traditions like the first one narrated from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri in al-Manaqib of Ibn
Marduwayh and in Saraqatu 'sh-shi'r of al-Marzubani.

The author says: as-Suyuti has narrated in ad-Durru 'l-manthur the two traditions from Abu
Sa'id al-Khudri and Abu Hurayrah, and has said that the chains of narrators of both are weak.
And it has been narrated through many chains that end at the companions like 'Umar ibn al-
Khattab, 'Ali ibn Abi Talib, Mu'awiyah and Sumrah that the verse was revealed on the day of
'Arafah in the Last Pilgrimage and it was a Friday. The reliable among these traditions is that
which has been narrated from 'Umar. (as-Suyuti) has narrated it from al-Hamidi, 'Abd ibn
Hamid, Ahmad, al-Bukhari, Muslim, ar-Tirmidhi, an-Nasa'i, Ibn Jarir, Ibnu'l-Mundhir, Ibn
Hibban and al-Bayhaqi (in his as-Sunan) from Tariq ibn Shahab from 'Umar; and has narrated
from Ibn Rahawayh (in his al-Musnad) and 'Abd ibn Hamid from Abu'l-'Aliyah from 'Umar; and
also, from Ibn Jarir, from Qubaysah ibn Abi Dhuayb from 'Umar; and also from al-Bazzaz from
Ibn 'Abbas and apparently, he narrates from 'Umar.

As for the weakness of the chains of narrators of the two traditions, it will not help him at all in
proving the weakness of the text of the tradition. We have explained clearly in the foregoing
Commentary that the theme of the noble verse does not fit on any hypothesis except the event of
Ghadir. All other meanings claimed for it are clearly off the mark. Therefore, the two traditions
and others of the same meaning conform to the Book of Allah - contrary to all other traditions -
therefore, only these traditions have to be accepted.

Moreover, these traditions which show that the verse was revealed on the subject of al-wilayah -
there are more than twenty traditions from the Sunni and Shi'ah chains - are closely related to the
traditions describing the reason of revelation of the Divine words: O Messenger! deliver what
has been revealed to you from your Lord... (5:67) - and there are more than fifteen such
traditions narrated by both the sects - and all this together is connected with the tradition of
Ghadir: 'Whomsoever I am the Master, 'Ali is his Master;' and it is a mutawatir tradition narrated
by a huge number of the companions and a great many scholars of both sects have accepted that
it is mutawatir.

And it is agreed upon that this had happened when the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was returning
from Mecca to Medina; and this wilayah (if it is not to be taken as a jest or joke) is an obligatory
order like loving the friends of Allah and keeping aloof from His enemies, which have been
explicitly ordered in many verses of the Qur'an. Keeping all this in view, it is not possible to say
that this obligatory order of wilayah was revealed after the revelation of the verse: This day have
I perfected for you your religion... Obviously, this verse must have been revealed after the
legislation of al-wilayah. If there are traditions which show something different from this reality,
then they are not to be relied upon.

You have already seen what is the position of the tradition which as-Suyuti has narrated from
'Umar. However, there is one thing to which attention should be drawn. If we look at the two
noble verses: O Messenger! deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do
it not, then you have not delivered His Message, and Allah will protect you from the people (as
we shall describe its meaning later on), and: This day have I perfected for you your religion...,
together with the traditions written about them by both sects, and the mutawatir traditions of
Ghadir; and then we study the internal condition of the Islamic Society during the last days of the
Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.), and deeply ponder on all this phenomenon, we will feel certain that the
order of al-wilayah was already revealed some days before the day of Ghadir, but the Prophet
(s.a.w.) was hesitating to announce it before the masses, fearing that people would not accept it
or would confront the Prophet with evil intentions, which would result in damaging his mission;
he was postponing its announcement from today to tomorrow until the Divine order came: O
Prophet! deliver what has been revealed to you..., and this did not leave him any room for
delaying.

Accordingly, it may be surmised that Allah had revealed a major part of this chapter including:
This day have I perfected for you your religion..., together with the order of al-wilayah; and all
this happened on the day of 'Arafah; but the Prophet (s.a.w.) postponed the announcement of al-
wilayah up to Ghadir Khumm, although he recited the verse referring to it on the day of 'Arafah.
As for the traditions which show its revelation on the day of Ghadir, it is not improbable that the
idea sprang because the Prophet (s.a.w.) had recited this verse at the time when he announced the
order of al-wilayah as the verse was revealed for the same purpose.

If we accept this hypothesis, then there would not remain any contradiction between those
traditions which say that the verse was revealed about al-wilayah and those which say that it was
revealed on the day of 'Arafah, as has been narrated from 'Umar, 'Ali, Mu'awiyah and Sumrah.
There would have been contradiction if one group of the traditions had said that it was revealed
on the day of Ghadir Khumm and the other had said that it was revealed on the day of 'Arafah.

As for those traditions which take the verse to mean that the religion was perfected by hajj, etc.,
these are merely the narrators' own interpretations. They are supported neither by the Book of
Allah nor by any reliable explanation of the Prophet (s.a.w.).

The hypothesis given above may be inferred from the tradition narrated by al-'Ayyashi in his at-
Tafsir from Ja'far ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Khuza'i from his father that he said, "I
heard Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) saying, 'When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) reached 'Arafat on
Friday, Jibril came to him and said, "Verily Allah sends you salutations and tells you: 'Say to
your ummah: "This day I have perfected your religion with wilayah of 'Ali ibn Abi Talib and
completed on you My favor and chosen for you Islam as a religion; and I will not descend on
you people after this. I have brought for you the prayer, zakat, fast and hajj and this is the fifth
obligation and I shall not come to you after these four except with that (fifth one).""""

Apart from that, there is another difficulty in the tradition narrated from 'Umar regarding the
revelation of this verse on the day of 'Arafah. All these traditions together describe that some
People of the Book - and some name him as Ka'b - said to 'Umar, "Verily there is a verse in the
Qur'an if like that would have been revealed on us, the Jews, we would have taken the day of its
revelation as an 'eid (feast) and the verse is: This day have I perfected for you your religion..."
'Umar said to him, "By Allah! Surely I know the day and it was the day of 'Arafah during the
Last Pilgrimage."

The wording of the tradition as narrated by Ibn Rahwayh and 'Abd ibn Hamid from
Abu'l-'Aliyah is as follows: He says, "They were near 'Umar and mentioned this verse. A man
from the People of the Book said: 'Had we known on which day this verse was revealed we
would have taken it as an 'eid.' 'Umar said, 'All praise is for Allah who has made it 'eid for us and
also the next day; it was revealed on the day of 'Arafah and the next day is the day of sacrifice;
thus He perfected the affairs for us; and we understood that the affairs after this will go on
deteriorating.' "

The theme mentioned at the end of this tradition has been narrated in another way. It is written in
ad-Durru'l-manthur from Ibn Abi Shaybah and Ibn Jarir from 'Antarah that he said, 'When the
verse was revealed: This day have I perfected for you your religion... - and it was the day of the
great hajj - 'Umar started weeping; the Prophet (s.a.w.) said to him, 'Why are you weeping?' He
said, The thing which has made me weep is that we were (until now) enjoying the increase in our
religion. Now that it has become perfect then nothing ever becomes perfect but starts
deteriorating.' The Prophet said, 'You are right.' "

There is another tradition resembling a little with the above which is narrated in ad-Durru'l-
manthur from Ahmad from 'Alqamah ibn 'Abdillah al-Muzni who said, "Narrated to me a man
who said, 'I was in the gathering room of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab. 'Umar said to one of those
present, "How did you hear the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) describing Islam?" He said, "I heard
the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) saying, 'Verily Islam started [and grew as a camel grows from] a
newborn calf, then it grows two teeth, then four, then six and then it reaches its peak strength
with last set of teeth.' 'Umar said, "Then there is nothing after completion except deteriorating." '
"

As you see, these traditions are intended to show that this verse of "Perfection of Religion" was
revealed on the day of 'Arafah for a specific purpose. According to them, it wanted to draw the
attention of the people to what they were witnessing of triumph of the religion and its
independence at Mecca during hajj season.

They want to interpret the perfection of religion and completion of Divine favour as the
cleanness of Meccan atmosphere from pollution of polytheism, as all the affairs had come under
the Muslims' control; on that day there was no religion there except Islam; and the Muslims had
no need to fear their enemies or to remain on guard.

In other words, perfection of religion and completion of the bounty means perfection of what
they had been given; they acted upon it without their being any enemy to mingle with them.
According to this interpretation, the religion here does not refer to the shari'ah which was laid
down by Allah and which contained tenets, ideologies, beliefs and the religious laws; and
likewise, Islam in this verse refers to that Islam which was in their hands and which they
followed. We may say that according to these traditions, religion means the form of the religion
which could be witnessed in their actions and the same will be the status of Islam. It is this
phenomenon which could be subjected to deterioration after reaching its peak; but as for the
basic ideologies, faith and the laws laid down by Allah, they cannot deteriorate after perfection
(the idea which is inferred from 'Umar's words: 'nothing ever becomes perfect but starts
deteriorating'). Surely it is the system prevalent in the creation throughout the human history; and
the society too is governed by this law; but the religion cannot come under the sway of these
social laws. Of course, we are not talking here with those who believe that the religion too is a
social phenomenon which is subject to change and evolution like other social formulas.

When you ponder on these matters, you will realize that this interpretation of 'Umar is not free
from short-comings:

First: What he understood about the meaning of perfection of religion is not applicable to the
Divine words: This day have I perfected for you your religion..., as we have explained earlier.

Second: How is it possible that Allah should count the religion, in the form with which it
appeared to the people, as perfect and could ascribe it to Himself as a matter of benevolence, just
because the land was free from apparent idol-worshippers and the society was apparently made
up of the Muslims and cleansed from the polytheist enemies - while the very society contained
those who were more harmful then the polytheists and more undermining to the Islamic system.
They were the hypocrites who had their own secret societies and had infiltrated the inner circle
of Islam. They sabotaged the system, turned the affairs upside down, created doubts in the
believers' hearts and surreptitiously put in the religion un-Islamic ideas. They posed a greater
threat to Islam; and a great number of Qur'anic verses and chapters had warned the Muslims of
their machinations; as for example, the chapter of "The Hypocrites", and the warnings given in
the chapters of "The Cow", "Women", "The Table", "The Spoils". "Repentance" and "The
Confederates" and so on.
I wish I knew where did their gang go? How their fire died out? By which strategy their plots
were thwarted? And how their falsity was obliterated? When they were present among the
Muslims, how was it possible for Allah to remind the Muslims of His Benevolence just because
the exterior of religion had been perfected and apparent bounties had been completed for them?
How could He be pleased by the apparent features of Islam merely because He had banished
their idol-worshipping enemies from Mecca, while the hypocrites were more inimical towards
the Muslims, their danger was greater and it has left bitter results after the Prophet. All this may
be confirmed from the words of Allah when He addresses His Prophet about them: They are the
enemy, therefore beware of them (63:4).

How could Allah portray it as His Benevolence to the Muslims and describe as perfect the
appearance of religion whose inner reality was this? Or praise His Bounties as complete when
they were mixed with afflictions? Or announce His pleasure with the shape of an Islam whose
reality was such? Allah, the High, the Great, has said: Nor could I take those who lead (others)
astray for aiders (18:51); and He has said about hypocrites - but if you are pleased with them,
yet surely Allah is not pleased with the transgressing people (9:96). (In this verse, the displeasure
of Allah is exclusively related to their hypocrisy.)

The verse under discussion is absolutely general and no word has been restricted in any way; it
speaks about unconditional perfection, completion and pleasure and unrestricted religion, bounty
and Islam.

Objections: The verse, as mentioned earlier, is the fulfillment of the promise given in the
chapter of "Light": Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good that He will
most certainly make them successors in the earth as He made successors those before them, and
that He will most certainly establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them, and
that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them security in exchange; they shall worship
Me, not associating aught with Me; (24:55).

This verse, as you see, promises them to establish for them their religion which He has chosen
for them. Parallel to that, we find in this verse: I have perfected for you your religion, and, I have
chosen for you Islam as a religion. Thus, perfection of their chosen religion means establishing it
for them, i.e. cleansing it from mingling of the polytheists. As for the hypocrites, their problem
was different, not connected with this mingling. It is the connotation to which those traditions
point which say that it was revealed on the day of 'Arafah. That is why it is said that it refers to
the fact that the religious rites, and the Muslims who performed it, had been rescued from
mingling of the polytheists.

Reply: There is no doubt that: This day I have perfected..., points to the fulfillment of the
promise given in the verse: Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good...
(24:55); Also, it is accepted that: perfected for your religion is parallel to the words: most
certainly establish their religion which He has chosen for them; but the verse of the chapter of
"Light" begins with the words: Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good.
Obviously, it was a selected group of the Muslims; appearance of whose deeds fully tallied with
their realities, their exterior was one with their inner condition their religious actions were
parallel to the religion which was ordained by Allah. Therefore, establishment of their chosen
religion meant perfecting that chosen religion which was in the knowledge, and under the decree,
of Allah, by molding it in the mould of legislation and gathering all its parts together for them, in
order that they should worship Allah according to that religion, when the unbelievers had
despaired of their religion.

That is, as we had said earlier, that perfection of religion means that Allah perfected it from the
point of legislation; now no new obligation was to be revealed after this verse. It does not mean
that their actions and particularly their hajj was cleansed from the rites and hajj of the idol-
worshippers. In other words, perfection of religion did happen when Allah raised it to the highest
level of development until there was no question of its ever getting deteriorated after completion.

al-Qummi says: "Narrated to me my father from Safwan ibn Yahya from al-'Ula' from
Muhammad ibn Muslim from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said, The last obligatory order which Allah
revealed was al-wilayah; thereafter no obligatory order was revealed; then was revealed: This
day have I perfected for you your religion... at Kura' al-Ghamim; and the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) established (announced) it at Juhfah. After that, no obligatory order was revealed.' " (at-
Tafsir, al-Qumml)

The author says: This theme has been narrated by at-Tabrisi in Majma'u'l-bayan from al-Baqir
and as-Sadiq (a.s.); and al-'Ayyashi has narrated it in his at-Tafsir from Zurarah from al-Baqir
(a.s.).

ash-Shaykh has narated through his chain from Muhammad ibn Ja'far ibn Muhammad from his
father Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) from the Commander of the Believers 'Ali (a.s.) that he said, "I heard
the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) saying, The foundation of Islam is on five characteristics, on the
two shahadahs and two associates.' He was told, 'As for the two shahadahs, we know them, but
what are the two associates?' He said, The prayer and the zakat, because one of them will not be
accepted without the other; and the fast and the pilgrimage of the House of Allah upon the one
who can afford the journey to it; and he completed it with al-wilayah; then Allah, the Mighty,
the Great, revealed: This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on
you and have chosen for you Islam as a religion.'" (al-Amali)

There is in Rawdatu'l-wa'izin (by al-Fattal) a tradition from Ibnu'l-Farisi from Abu Ja'far (a.s.).
The tradition narrates the story of the journey of the Prophet (s.a.w.) to pilgrimage and then his
appointing 'Ali for al-wilayah at the time of the return journey to Medina and revelation of this
verse; that tradition contains the speech of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) on the day of Ghadir,
and it is a very lengthy speech.

The author says: A similar tradition has been narrated by at-Tabrisi in al-Ihtijaj through a well
connected chain from al-Hadrami from Abu Ja'far al-Baqir (a.s.); also, al-Kulayni in al-Kafi and
as-Saduq in al-'Uyun have narrated on revelation of the verse of al-wilayah, both through their
chains from 'Abdu'l-'Aziz ibn Muslim from ar-Rida (a.s.). The same theme has been narrated by
ash-Shaykh in his al-Amali through his chain from Ibn Abi 'Umayr from al-Mufaddal ibn 'Umar
from as-Sadiq (a.s.) from his grandfather, the Commander of the Believers (a.s.). Also , it has
been narrated by at-Tabrisi in Majma'u'l-bayan through his chain from Abu Harun al-'Abdi from
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri; also, by ash-Shaykh in his al-Amali through his chain from Ishaq ibn
Isma'il an-Naysaburi from as-Sadiq from his father from al-Hasan ibn 'Ali (peace be on them
all). We are not quoting those traditions for the sake of brevity. Whoever wants to see them
should consult the books referred to. And Allah is the Guide.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 4-5

 
‫ُم‬ ُ ‫مك‬ َ َّ‫ما َعل‬ َّ ‫ن ِم‬ َّ ‫مونَ ُه‬ ُ ./‫ين ُت َع ِِّل‬ َ ‫ارحِ ُم‬
َ ‫ ِب‬./‫ك ِِّل‬ ِ ‫ج َو‬ َ ‫ن ا ْل‬َ ‫ِم‬./ِّ ‫م ُتم‬ ْ َّ‫ات َو َما َعل‬ ُ َ‫ب‬./‫م الطَّ ِِّي‬ُ ‫ل لَ ُك‬َّ ‫ح‬ ِ ‫ُل ُأ‬ْ ‫مق‬ ْ ‫ل لَ ُه‬ َّ ‫ح‬ ِ ‫ك َماذَا ُأ‬ َ َ‫سأَلُون‬ ْ َ‫ي‬
‫م‬ َ ‫} ا ْليَ ْو‬4{ ِ‫ساب‬ َ ‫ح‬ ِ ‫يع ا ْل‬ ُ ‫س ِر‬ َ ‫ه َواتَّ ُقو ْا الل ّ َه إِنَّ الل ّ َه‬ ِ ‫ه َعلَ ْي‬ ِ ّ ‫م الل‬ َ ‫اس‬ْ ‫ُم َوا ْذك ُُرو ْا‬ ْ ‫ْن َعلَ ْيك‬ َ ‫سك‬ َ ‫ما أ ْم‬َ َّ ‫الل ّ ُه َف ُكلُو ْا ِم‬
ِ‫م ْؤ ِم َنات‬ ْ
ُ ‫ن ال‬ َ ‫ات ِم‬ ُ ‫ص َن‬ َ ‫ح‬ ْ ‫م‬ ْ
ُ ‫م َوال‬ ْ ‫ل لَّ ُه‬ ُّ ‫ح‬ ِ ‫ُم‬ ْ ‫ُم َوط َعا ُمك‬ َ ْ ‫ل لَّك‬ ٌّ ‫ح‬ ِ ‫اب‬ ْ ْ
َ ‫ين أو ُتوا الكِ َت‬ ُ َ
َ ‫ات َوط َعا ُم الَّ ِذ‬ ُ َ‫ب‬./‫م الطَّ ِِّي‬ ُ ‫ل لَ ُك‬َّ ‫ح‬ ِ ‫ُأ‬
َ ‫ين َوال‬ َ ‫ح‬ ِ ِ‫ساف‬ َ ‫ين غَ ْي َر ُم‬ َ ِ‫صن‬ ِ ‫ح‬ ْ ‫ن ُم‬ َّ ‫ه‬
ُ ‫جو َر‬ ُ ‫ن ُأ‬ َّ ‫ه‬ُ ‫مو‬ ُ ‫ُم إِذَا آتَ ْي ُت‬ ْ ‫اب ِمن َق ْبلِك‬ َ ‫ين ُأو ُتو ْا ا ْلكِ َت‬َ ‫ن الَّ ِذ‬ َ ‫ات ِم‬ ُ ‫ص َن‬ َ ‫ح‬ ْ ‫م‬ُ ‫َوا ْل‬
َ ‫ن ا ْل‬ َ ‫حبِطَ َع‬ َ ‫ن َفق َْد‬ َ
}5{ ‫ين‬ َ ‫س ِر‬ ِ ‫خا‬ َ ‫خ َر ِة ِم‬ ِ ‫ه َو فِي اآل‬ ُ ‫م ُل ُه َو‬ ِ ‫ما‬ َ ‫اإلي‬ِ ِ‫ن َو َمن يَ ْك ُف ْر ب‬ ٍ ‫خ َدا‬ ْ ‫خ ِذي أ‬ ِ ‫ُم َّت‬
{4} They ask you as to what is made lawful for them. Say: "The good things are made lawful for
you and what you have taught the beasts of prey, training them to hunt - you teach them of what
Allah has taught you - so eat of that which they hold for you and mention the name of Allah over
it; and fear Allah; surely Allah is swift in reckoning". {5} This day have been made lawful for
you (all) good things; and the food of those who have been given the Book is lawful for you and
your food is lawful for them; and the chaste (ones) from among the believing women and the
chaste (ones) from among those who have been given the Book before you (are lawful for you),
when you have given them their dowries, taking (them) in marriage, not fornicating nor taking
them for paramours in secret; and whoever denies faith, his work indeed is forfeited, and in the
hereafter he shall be one of the losers.
 

Commentary
QUR'AN: They ask you as to what is made lawful for them. Say: "The good things are made
lawful for you: It is a general question which has been answered with a general reply; and it lays
down an overall principle for differentiating between lawful and unlawful; that a thing using of
which is considered good is a good thing. The word, "good", is also used without any condition
or restriction and it means that the judge for identification of its goodness should be the normal
intellect; whatever normal intellect considers good is good, and every good is lawful. We have
explained lawfulness and goodness in general terms putting reliance on normal intellect, because
according to the fundamentals of jurisprudence that is how generality is explained.

QUR'AN: "and what you have taught the beasts of prey, training them to hunt - you teach them
of what Allah has taught you - so eat of that which they hold for you and mention the name of
Allah over it;...": It is said that this sentence is in conjunction with "good things" i.e. and also
lawful for you is what you have taught the beasts of prey i.e. the prey of those beasts which you
have taught. This explanation supposes that a word, "prey of, is omitted here but understood. But
apparently, the sentence is in conjunction independently with the preceding sentence, and the
word, "what", is a preposition of condition and the clause: "so eat of that which they hold for
you", gives the result of that condition; so there is no need to suppose omission of any word in
the sentence.

al-Jawaarih is plural of al-jaarihah, which denotes such a bird or beast, which is used for
hunting or preying, like hawk, falcon, dog and cheetah. Mukallibin is the active participle of the
verb at-taklib (to teach and train dogs for preying; to keep hunting dogs and releasing them for
this purpose). The sentence is restricted with the word mukallibin and this may be a sort of
indication that the order is reserved for hunting dog and does not cover other preying beasts.

The words: "of that which they hold for you". The restriction, "for you", clearly shows that the
lawfulness is limited to that case where the dog preys for its owner, not for itself. The words:
"and mention the name of Allah over it", complete the conditions of lawfulness: the prey should
be taken by the beasts of prey according to the given training and the beast should hold it for the
hunter and the name of Allah should be mentioned over it.

The sentences, in short, indicate that the beasts trained for hunting, i.e. the hunting dogs, when
they are properly trained and they catch for you any wild animal (eating of which is lawful when
it is slaughtered according to the shari'ah) and you have mentioned the name of Allah at the time
of releasing the dog, then you may eat from it if the dog kills it before you reach there (that
earlier recitation of Divine name will be counted as the proper slaughter). If the dog doesn't kill
it, then you will have to slaughter it properly reciting the name of Allah; but that doesn't come
under this rule.

Then the verse ends on the words: and fear Allah; surely Allah is swift in reckoning. It clearly
shows that one should fear Allah while hunting wild animals. Hunting should not result in
excessive loss of life, nor should it be done merely for game, arrogance, or amusement because
Allah is swift in reckoning and He requits transgression and oppression in this world before the
hereafter. Such oppressions and transgressions where people indulge in indiscriminate killings of
poor animals inevitably lead one to a very shameful end as we have often seen.

QUR'AN: This day have been made lawful for you (all) good things; and the food of those who
have been given the Book is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them: Repetition of
lawfulness of good things (although it was mentioned in the immediately preceding verse) and
beginning of the verse with the adverb, "This day", aims at showing the favor of Allah on the
believers by making lawful for them the food of the People of the Book and their chaste women.

Probably, the clause: "have been made lawful for you (all) good things", has been added to the
clause: "and the food of those who have been given the Book is lawful for you ..." to create
reassurance in the hearts of the believers by adding a definite order with an order in which there
might be room for some doubt; this addition would remove perplexity and uneasiness. For
example, a master says to his servant, 'You are the owner of all that I have gifted to you earlier in
addition to this and these extra items.' Mentioning previously gifted things will give the servant
full confidence concerning the ownership of the later additions. In a way, the same may be the
explanation of the following two verses: For those who do good is good (reward) and more (than
this);... (10:26). Therein they shall have whatever, they will; and with Us there is yet more
(50:35).

It looks as though the believers' hearts were very perturbed and they felt doubts concerning the
lawfulness of the food of the People of the Book, especially in view of the very strict admonition
regarding their friendship - they were strictly forbidden to mix with them and have friendly
relations with them. In this background, the order concerning their food was joined with the
order of lawfulness of good things without any reservation. Now, they could be sure that the
Jews' and the Christians' food is like other lawful good things, and their hearts will be at ease.
The same is the explanation of the verse: and the chaste (ones) from among the believing women
and the chaste (one) from among those who have been given the Book before you (are lawful for
you).

The Divine words: "and the food of those who have been given the Book is lawful for you and
your food is lawful for them", have not laid down two separate rules. Obviously, it is one speech
with a single connotation. The words: "and your food is lawful for them", have not ordained any
order for the People of the Book. Even if we say that disbelievers are obliged to follow the orders
of Islamic shari'ah, yet they do not believe in Allah and His Messenger or his Prophethood. They
do not listen to the Prophet nor do they accept his commandments; and it is not the style of
Qur'an to address some people or give any order to them when it is clearly known that such a talk
will have no effect on them, and that address will avail nothing. (Of course, if such a talk
becomes necessary for some reasons, Allah turns the address from those people to the Prophet or
uses some other modes of speech like that. For example, Allah says: Say, "O People of the Book!
Come to a word between us and you..." (3:64). Say: "Glory be to my Lord; am I aught but a
human messenger?" (17:93); there are other many such verses.)

In short, the clauses are not meant to legislate two separate laws: one, allowing the food of the
People of the Book to the Muslims, and the other, making the food of the Muslims lawful for the
People of the Book Rather, the whole speech gives one order and that is the lawfulness of food
for both groups. There is no restriction in between on either side. It is like the Divine words:
...then if you find them to be believing women, do not send them back to the unbelievers; neither
are these (women) lawful for them, nor are those (men) lawful for them... (60:10). In other
words, there is no lawfulness on any side.

at-Ta'am according to philology refers to all that is eaten and taken as nourishment. But it is said
that it is used to wheat and other such grains only. Lisanu'l-'Arab says: "When the people of
Hijaz use the word at-ta'am without any restriction or association, they mean wheat exclusively."
He further says: "al-Khalil has said, "In high Arab language at-ta'am is wheat in particular." The
same meaning has been given by Ibnu'l-Athir in an-Nihayah. It is for this reason that in most of
ahadith narrated from the Imams of Ahlu 'l Bayt (a.s.) it has been declared that at-ta'am in this
verse means wheat and other grains, although a few traditions give another meaning; and we
shall talk about it under "Traditions".

In any case, this permission does not cover those animals whose meat is forbidden and
slaughtering them can make no difference like pig, nor does it cover those lawful animals, which
have not been slaughtered properly like the one over which the name of Allah has not been
recited and which has not been slaughtered according to Islamic rules. Allah has counted the
above-mentioned unlawful items in the verses of prohibition (that is, the four verses in the
chapters of "The Cow", "The Table, "Cattle" and "The Bee") describing them as uncleanness,
transgression, and sin, as we have explained earlier. Far be it from Allah to allow what He has
called uncleanness, transgression, and sin and then to mention it as a favor to the believers.

Moreover, these forbidden things have been enumerated in this very chapter a few lines before
this verse. And nobody can claim abrogation in such cases and especially in the chapter of "The
Table" about which the traditions say that it is an abrogating chapter, not abrogated.

QUR'AN: and the chaste (ones) from among the believing women and the chaste (ones) from
among those who have been given the Book before you (are lawful for you): The description of
the group using the verb (i.e. among those who have been given the Book), instead of saying,
from the Jews and the Christians or even saying, from the People of the Book, points in a way to
the reason of the law; because Allah wants to show His favor and to ease the burden from the
believers. The meaning: We have done you a favor by easing the burden by removing the
prohibition of marriage between your men and the chaste women of those who have been given
the Book before you, because they are nearest to you of all the non-Muslim communities, as they
were given the Book and they had believed in One God and the prophets, in contrast to the Idol-
worshippers and polytheists who disbelieve in the prophets. Probably, it is for this reason that
"those who have been given the Book" is followed by the words "before you"; it clearly indicates
a mixing and intermingling.

Be as it may. The verse describes the favor of Allah and relaxation of rule; such a law cannot be
made subject to abrogation. There are two verses which seem to contradict this relaxed law: And
do not marry the idolatress until they believe (2:221); and hold not to the ties of marriage of
unbelieving women (60:10). But these two verses cannot abrogate the verse under discussion
because the first verse is in the chapter of "The Cow" and it was the first detailed chapter which
came down in Medina long before the chapter of "The Table"; and the second one is in the
chapter of "The Woman Tested" and it was revealed in Medina before the conquest of Mecca,
that is, more than two years before the revelation of the chapter of "The Table". Therefore, the
earlier revealed verses cannot abrogate a verse revealed later. Moreover, the traditions say that
the chapter of "The Table" was the last chapter revealed to the Prophet (s.a.w.); it has abrogated
some previous laws but nothing has abrogated this chapter. Apart from that, you have seen in the
exegesis of the verse 2:221 that these two verses (of "The Cow" and "The Woman Tested") are
not concerned at all with the subject of the marriage with a Christian or a Jewish woman.

If one were to claim that the verse of "The Woman Tested" somehow showed unlawfulness of
such a marriage, and if one were to say that the tone of the verse of "The Table", showing Divine
favor and relaxation proved that such a marriage was previously forbidden - otherwise there was
no place for showing favor and relaxation - then this verse of the chapter of "The Table" will
abrogate the verse of the "The Woman Tested", and not vice versa. We shall further talk under
"Traditions" about this second verse.

al-Muhsanat has been translated here as "the chaste ones". Chastity is one of the meanings of al-
ihsan. The clause, "and the chaste (ones) from among the believing women and the chaste (ones)
from among those who have been given the Book before you", clearly shows that these women
are unmarried, and putting together these two groups of the People of the Book and the believers
demands that the word al-muhsanat should have the same meaning in both places. It means that
al-ihsan here cannot be interpreted as Islam, because of inclusion of the women of the People of
the Book. Also, the word cannot be interpreted as the free women because the Divine favor
would remain incomplete if it were confined to the free women and excluded the slave girls.
Thus, we see that no connotation of the word, al-ihsan, can fit on this verse except chastity.

The verse explicitly shows the lawfulness of the chaste women of the People of the Book for the
believers without mentioning permanent marriage or the mut'ah; the only condition is that the
believers should give them their dowries and the relationship should be of marriage, not
fornicating nor taking them for paramours in secret. It means that the believers are allowed to
marry them paying them their dowries and not indulging in illicit relations with them, without
mentioning any condition regarding permanency or temporariness of the marriage; and we have
described under the Divine words, Then as to such of them with whom you have mut'ah that
mut'ah, is a marriage like the permanent one. Its details should be seen in the books of fiqh.

QUR'AN: when you have given them their dowries, taking (them) in marriage, not fornicating
nor taking them for paramours in secret:
It is the same theme that we had seen in the verse. "And lawful for you is (all) besides that, that
you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) with decency, not committing fornication"
(4:24). This sentence indicates that the verse is speaking about lawfulness of the marriage with
chaste women of the People of the Book and does not cover slave girls.

QUR'AN: and whoever denies faith, his work indeed is forfeited and in the hereafter he shall be
one of the losers: al-Kufr actually means to hide, to cover. For covering to take place there must
be an object that is covered. A hijab (veil) cannot be hijab unless there is something to be veiled.
al-Kufr may be of Divine favors, of Divine signs or of Allah and His Messenger and the Last
Day.

al-Kufr (denial, covering) of Iman demands that there should be in the beginning a firm iman
(belief, faith). It is an attribute, which is firmly, rooted in the believer's heart, that is, the correct
and true beliefs, which give rise to the good deeds. In this light, denial of faith means not acting
on what one knows to be right and truth. For example, if one neglects the pillars of religion like
prayer, zakat, fast and hajj although he knows that they are the pillars of religion, or keeps
friendship with the polytheists, mingling with them and taking part in their activities, although
knowing that only Islam is the truth.

This is the significance of the denial of the faith. However, there is a fine point here al-kufr
denotes hiding and the human mind do not accept that an established thing has been covered and
hidden unless it is perpetually kept out of sight. Therefore, a man will be accused of denial of the
faith only if he continues to neglect the demands of his faith and does not act according to his
knowledge and belief. If he goes against the demands of his faith only once or twice without
persisting in that behavior, then the word al-kufr will not be used for him. He will be said to have
committed fisq (sin).

It appears from the above that "whoever denies faith" actually means whoever persists in
denying faith, although the sentence uses the verb instead of adjective. In other words, whoever
does not adhere to what he knows to be truth and does not hold fast to the pillars of religion, he is
the disbeliever in the faith and all his good deeds are forfeited as Allah Says: "his work indeed is
forfeited".

This verse fully corresponds with the following verses of the chapter of "The Battlements":
...and if they see the way of rectitude they do not take it for a way, and if they see the way of
error, they take it for a way; this is because they rejected Our signs and were heedless of them.
And (as to) those who reject Our signs and the meeting of the hereafter, their deeds are forfeited.
Shall they be rewarded except for what they have done? (7:146-7). In this verse, Allah mentions
them as taking the way of error and leaving the way of rectitude after seeing the both, i.e. even
after knowing them, then further attributes to them rejection of the signs, and the signs are called
signs when it is known what they indicate; finally, it is explained as rejection of the hereafter
because if he does not reject the hereafter the knowledge that it was certainly to come should
have prevented him from deviating from the truth; as a result, their deeds are forfeited.

Similar is the theme of the Divine words: Say: "Shall We inform you of the greatest losers in
(their) deeds? (These are) they whose labor is lost in this world's life and they think that they
were acquiring good by their deeds. These are they who disbelieve in the signs of their Lord and
His meeting, so their deeds become forfeited, and therefore We will not set up balance for them
on the Day of Resurrection..." (18:103-5). It can easily be seen how these verses fit the theme of
denial of faith as described above.

If we ponder on the above explanations, we will see how the sentence: "and whoever denies
faith, his work indeed is forfeited," becomes connected with the preceding sentences. It in fact
completes the preceding statements. The idea is to warn the believers of the danger that would
face them if they became lax in sincerely following the commands of Allah. They should not
freely mingle with disbelievers. Allah has allowed them the food and the chaste women of the
People of the Book to bring some ease in the believers' lives in order that it should become a
means of spreading piety; hopefully it would cause the pure Islamic morality to seep into the
non-Muslim society. It would create beneficial knowledge and propagate good deeds.

This is the main purpose of this legislation. It was not meant for the Muslims to tumble down the
pitfalls of debauchery and descend into the valleys of lechery and lewdness. They should not be
beguiled in their desires nor should they be infatuated with their beauty, lest they gain the upper
hand and their culture and their people's culture dominate the Muslim society; then their
misconduct will vanquish the Islamic righteousness. This, in its turn, will bring a greater
calamity and the believers will become victims of degradation and retrogression. Consequently,
this Divine favor will become a devastating tribulation and this relaxation turn into a curse
instead of a blessing. That is why Allah warned the believers - after describing lawfulness of
their food and chaste women - that they should not rush headlong into taking advantage of this
relaxed rule in such a way that it leads them to the denial of faith and neglect of the pillars of
religion; otherwise, it would cause nullification of all their good deeds and in the hereafter all
their deeds will be forfeited.

The exegetes while explaining these two verses have plunged into unknown waters and come up
with astonishing explanations which are neither supported by the Qur'anic wordings, nor are in
keeping with the context.

For example, one has said that the clause: The good things are made lawful for you, refers to
bahirah, saibah, wasilah and hami. Another has said that the words: the food of those who have
been given the Book is lawful for you, denote that in basic principle the food of the People of the
Book is lawful for the believers, Allah has never forbidden it; and that the animals' meat too is
lawful even if it had been slaughtered according to their own custom. A third one said that the
verse shows that you may eat with them on one table. Someone wrote that the clause: and the
chaste (ones) from among those who have been given the book before you, shows that these
chaste women were lawful to the believers from the beginning, they were never forbidden before
because the clause: and lawful for you is (all) besides that (4:24), was enough to make them
lawful. Another one said that the sentence: "and whoever denies faith his work indeed is
forfeited", sounds a warning to the believers that they should not reject the order allowing them
the food of the People of the Book and their chaste women.

They have written these and other similar meanings some of which are sheer foolhardiness and
others are arbitrary; still others are totally against the context and do not look at the adverb "This
day" nor at the favor and relaxation. What we have described earlier in the Commentary is
enough to show the invalidity of such interpretations. The claim that the clause: and lawful for
you is (all) besides that (4:24), shows the lawfulness of marriage with women of the People of
the Book, is clearly invalid because the verses 4:23-24 aim at describing the lawfulness and
unlawfulness of women because of consanguinity and marriage. They are not concerned with
difference of religion.

Traditions
as-Suyuti writes under the verse: They ask you as to what is made lawful for them ... Ibn Jarir has
narrated from 'Ikrimah: "Verily the Prophet (s.a.w.), sent Abu Rafi' to kill the dogs. He killed
them until he reached al-'Awali. Then 'Asim ibn 'Adiyy, Sa'd ibn Khaythamah and 'Uwaym ibn
Sa'idah came (to the Prophet) and said, 'What has been made lawful for us, O Messenger of
Allah?' So, this verse was revealed: They ask you as to what is made lawful for them... (ad-
Durru'l-manthur)

Again he says, "Ibn Jarir has narrated from Muhammad ibn Ka'b al-Qarazi, 'When the Prophet
(s.a.w.), ordered killing of the dogs, they said: "O Messenger of Allah! What has been made
lawful for us from this group?" Then the verse was revealed: They ask you as to what is made
lawful for them...'" (ibid)

The author says: The two traditions explain each other. The theme is that they had asked what
categories of dogs they were allowed to keep and use in various activities like hunting, etc.

But the Divine words: They ask you as to what is made lawful for them. Say: "The good things
are made lawful for you, ..." do not tally with this theme because the question was restricted and
the verse is general.

Moreover, these two traditions as well as the next one apparently show that, the clause: and what
you have taught the beasts of prey, is in conjunction with: the good things, and that it means: It
has been made lawful to you what you have taught. That is why some exegetes have said that the
word: prey of, is omitted, but understood in this sentence. But we have already explained that:
what you have taught the beasts of prey, is a conditional clause, which is completed by the
clause: so eat of that which they hold for you.

According to these traditions, the group about which the question was asked refers to dogs.

Also, he says, "al-Fariyabi, Ibn Jarir, Ibnu'l-Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, at-Tabarani and al-Hakim
(who has said that the tradition is correct) and al-Bayhaqi have narrated from Abu Rafi' that he
said, 'Jibril came to the Prophet (s.a.w.), and asked permission to enter. The Prophet gave him
permission but he tarried (in entering). The Prophet took his cloak, came out, and said, "We have
already given you permission." (Jibril) said, "Yes, but we do not enter a house wherein there is a
dog or a picture." They looked around and lo! There was a puppy in one of their houses.’

"Abu Rafi' said, Then he (the Prophet) ordered me to kill every dog in Medina, and this I did.
People came and said, "O Messenger of Allah! What is allowed to us from this group, which you
have ordered to be killed?" The Prophet (s.a.w.) was silent. Then Allah revealed: They ask you
as to what is made lawful for them. Say: "The good things are made lawful for you and what you
have taught the beasts of prey, training them to hunt..." Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a. w.a.)
said, "When a man releases his dog and recites the name of Allah and it holds the prey for him
then he should eat what the dog has not eaten." '"(ibid)

The author says: What the tradition describes about the coming down of Jibril is very strange.
Moreover, it does not stand on sound footing because it shows that Jibril did not come to the
Prophet because there was a puppy in one of their houses. But the story does not tally with the
apparent meaning of the verse where both the question and its reply are unrestricted. More
probably, the tradition is a forged one.

Also he says, '"Abd ibn Hamid and Ibn Jarir have narrated from 'Amir that the said, "Verily
'Adiyy ibn Hatim at-Ta'i came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and asked him about the prey
of dogs; the Prophet did not know what to say until Allah revealed to him this verse in the
chapter of "The Table": you teach them of what Allah has taught you.'" (ibid.)

The author says: There are other traditions of the similar meaning and the objections mentioned
earlier apply to all of them. Apparently, these and similar traditions are an attempt to fit some
events on the verse; but the attempt is inconclusive and defective. What is clear is that they had
talked to the Prophet (s.a.w.) about hunting with dogs and then asked him about a comprehensive
principle to distinguish the lawful from the unlawful. So, Allah mentioned their question in the
verse and replied to them by giving a comprehensive principle in this respect. Then the reply was
given to their specific question about dogs. This meaning is clear from the verse (and it does not
need any such tradition to make its meaning clear.)

al-Kulayni has narrated through his chains from Hammad from al-Halabi from Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.) that he said, "It is written in the book of ‘Ali (a.s.), about the Divine word: what you have
taught the beasts of prey, that it refers to dogs." (al-Kafi)

The author says: al-'Ayyashi has narrated it in his at-Tafsir from Sama'ah ibn Mihran from the
same Imam (a.s.).

Also, he has narrated through his chains from Ibn Muskan from al-Halabi that he said, "Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.), said, 'My father used to give fatwa and he practiced taqiyyah and we were afraid
of (giving actual ruling) about the prey of eagles and falcons; but now we are not afraid. Its prey
is not lawful except when you get the chance to slaughter it. Because it is written in the book of
'Ali (a.s.) that Allah has revealed this sentence: what you have taught the beasts of prey training
them to hunt, about the dogs.' " (ibid.)

Also, he narrates through his chains from Abu Bakr al-Hadrami from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.). He
says, "I asked the Imam about the prey of eagles, falcons, cheetahs and dogs. The Imam said, 'Do
not eat except what you slaughter except the prey of dogs.' I said, 'If it (dog) kills it.' The Imam
said, 'Eat it because Allah says: what you have taught the beasts of prey, training them to hunt -
you teach them of what Allah has taught you - so eat of that which they hold for you.' Then he
said, 'Every beast of prey holds the prey for itself except the trained dog, for it holds it for its
owner.' He further said, 'And when you release the dog mention the name of Allah over it, that is
its dhabihah.'" (ibid.)

al-'Ayyashi narrates from Abu 'Ubaydah from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about a man who releases a
trained dog and mentions the name of Allah at the time of release. The Imam said, "He shall eat
from what the dog has held for him even if he has killed it. And if there was found an untrained
dog with it, then don't eat from it." "I asked, 'And (what about) falcons and eagles?' The Imam
said, 'If you get chance to slaughter it then eat from it; otherwise don't eat it.' I said, 'So, cheetah
is not like dog?' He said, "No. Nothing is called mukallab except the (kalb) dog.'" (at-Tafsir,
al-'Ayyashi).

Abu Basir narrates from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about the Divine words: what you have taught the
beasts of prey, training them to hunt — you teach them of what Allah has taught you - so eat of
that which they hold for you and mention the name of Allah over it, that he said, "There is no
harm in eating what the dog has held when he has not eaten from it; but if the dog has eaten from
it before you reach there, then do not eat it." (ibid.)

The author says: The various particular orders mentioned in the traditions like restriction of
lawfulness to the prey of dog because of the Divine word: mukallibin and: which they hold for
you, and the condition that no untrained dog should join in the hunt, all this is inferred from the
verse and we have mentioned them before.

Hariz narrates from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he was asked about a dog of a Magian (adherent of
Mazdaism) which a Muslim trains and mentions the name of Allah on releasing it. The Imam
said, "Yes, it is a trained dog. There is no harm when Allah's name is mentioned over it." (ibid.)

The author says: The hadith is based on the generality of the word: what you have taught to the
beasts of prey. as-Suyuti narrates in ad-Durru'l-manthur from Ibn Abi Hatim from Ibn 'Abbas
that he was asked about a Muslim who takes a trained dog of a Magian or his falcon or eagle
which has been trained by its owner and the Muslim releases it and it catches a prey. Ibn 'Abbas
said, "Don't eat it even if you have invoked the name of Allah because that animal or bird was
taught by the Magian while Allah says: what you have taught the beasts of prey, training them to
hunt - you teach them of what Allah has taught you." But the weakness of the hadith is obvious
because although the speech: you teach them of what Allah has taught you, is addressed to the
believers but what Allah has taught the Muslims regarding the training of dogs is not different
from what He has taught to the people of other religions and this connotation helps the reader
understand that it does not restrict the dogs' training to the believers. There is no difference when
a dog is trained, whether a Muslim or a non-Muslim trained it, or whether a Muslim or a non-
Muslim owned it.

al-'Ayyashi narrates from Hisham ibn Salim from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said explaining the
Divine words: and the food of those who have been given the Book is lawful for you. It refers to
lentils, grains, and similar things of the People of the Book. (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi).

The author says: ash-Shaykh has narrated it in at-Tahdhib from the same Imam and the
wording there is, "lentils, chickpeas, etc."

There are traditions from 'Ammir ibn Marwan and Sama'ah from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) explaining
what is lawful from the food of the People of the Book. The Imam said, "Grains." (al-Kafi; at-
Tahdhib)
al-Kulayni narrates through his chain from Ibn Muskan from Qutaybah al-A'sha that he said, "A
man asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), and I was present there. He said to the Imam, 'A Jew or a
Christian releases (a dog) on goats or sheep and it attacks it, then it is slaughtered. Should his
dhabihah (slaughtered animal) be eaten?' Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said, 'Do not enter its price in your
property and don't eat it because it is the (Divine) name (which is important) and no one can be
trusted in this matter except a Muslim.' That man said to the Imam (a.s.), 'Allah has said: This
day have been made lawful for you (all) good things and the food of those who have been given
the Book is lawful for you.' Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said, 'My father used to say that it refers to
grains, and similar things. (al-Kafi)

The author says: This tradition has been narrated by ash-Shaykh in at-Tahdhib and by
al-'AyySshi in his at-Tafsir from Qutaybah al-A'sha from the Imam (a.s.).

As you see, the traditions explain the lawful food of the People of the Book as being confined to
grains, and similar items. It is the meaning that is understood from the word: at-ta'am (food)
when it is used without any contextual restriction as it appears from the traditions and the stories
narrated from the early days of Islam. That is why a great majority of our 'ulama' believes that
the lawfulness is confined to the grains, and similar things and the food prepared from them.

Some people (Rashid Rida in Tafsiru'l-manar) have forcefully rejected this interpretation, saying
that it is against the usage of the Qur'an concerning the word: at-ta'am. He further says, "In the
Qur'anic language, cereal grain is not the overwhelming meaning of at-ta'am. Allah has said in
this very chapter: Lawful for you is the game of the sea and its food, a provision for you and for
the travelers (5:96); and nobody can claim that the food of the sea means wheat and grain. Also,
Allah says: All food was lawful to the Children of Israel - except that which Israel had forbidden
to himself (3:93), and no one has said that the word food here means wheat or grain, because
nothing of it was forbidden to the Children of Israel - neither before the revelation of the Torah
nor after it. at-Ta'am basically refers to all that is tasted or eaten. Allah says narrating the story of
the stream that Talut had said: whoever then drinks from it he is not of me, and whoever does not
taste of it (lam Yat'amhu), he is surely of me (2:249). Also, Allah says: when you have taken the
food (ta'imtum), then disperse (33:53)."

COMMENT: Would that I could know what he understood from the sentence: at-ta'am when
used without any contextual restriction refers to the grain, and similar things? It is amusing that
he has tried to refute it with the verbs yat'amhu and ta'imtum while the scholars had talked about
the noun at-ta'am and not about the verbs derived from that root. Another of his argument is
based on the genitive construction "food of the sea" and this construction itself is a clear context,
which shows that it doesn't refer to cereal grain because wheat or barley does not grow in the sea.
Another argument is based on the sentence: All food was lawful to the Children of Israel, and he
himself says that wheat or cereal grains were not forbidden in their religion. This context clearly
shows that the talk is not about cereal grains. He should have found out from the Qur'an the
examples where the word: at-ta'am is used in its generality without contrary context and then he
should have spoken; like the Divine words: redemption by feeding a poor man (2:184); the
expiation (of it) is the feeding of the poor (5:95); And they give food out of love for Him (76:8);
Then let man look to his food (80:24). (In all these verses the noun at-ta'am has been used free
from contextual restrictions and it all refers to the food prepared from cereal grains.)

He further says, "There was no confusion regarding cereal grains whether they were lawful or
not. The question arose only about meat when something happens to create doubt about its
lawfulness, e.g. if the animal dies a natural death or if it is slaughtered as an offering to the idols
or without invoking the name of Allah. That is why Allah has said: Say: 'I do not find in that
which has been revealed to me anything forbidden for an eater to eat of except that it be what
has died of itself or blood poured forth...' (6:145); and all this is related to animals. It clearly
shows that unlawfulness is restricted to this group only and unlawfulness of other things requires
similar clear declaration."

COMMENT: This talk is more amusing than the previous one. He says that cereal grains are not
the subject of doubt that it is lawful or not; the doubt occurs about the meat only. We should ask
him: Which time is he talking about? Is he looking at these times of ours when people are
familiar with Islam and its general regulations since so many centuries or is he talking about the
times when the Qur'an was being revealed and the religion was just a few years old? Does he not
know that the people had asked the Prophet (s.a.w.) about the subjects, which were clearer than
the rules of cereal grains? Allah has quoted some of their questions. For example: They ask you
as to what they should spend (2:215). 'Abd ibn Hamid has narrated from Qatadah that he said,
"We have been told that some people had said: 'How can we marry their women and they are on
a (different) religion and we are on a (different) religion.' Then Allah sent down the verse: And
whoever denies faith, his work is indeed forfeited..." You will find similar questions and
objections in the traditions as we have quoted some in the subject of hajju 't-tamattu', etc.

When they could raise such objections after the verse was revealed allowing the marriage with
chaste women of the People of the Book, then what was there to prevent them, before the verse
was revealed, from asking about eating together with the People of the Book or to eat the cereal
grains purchased from them or the meals prepared from it like bread or other dishes; or other
items prepared from cereal grains when these things were made by the People of the Book,
because: they have their own religion and we follow a different religion! Especially so when
Allah had warned the believer in so many verses against establishing friendship and close
relation with the People of the Book and inclining towards them.

Rather, we can turn the table against him when he says, ‘There is a chance of confusion about
meat whether it was lawful or not.’ Fine. But how could they ask about it when Allah had
described the general unlawful items of meat in the chapter of "Cattle": Say: "I do not find in
that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden for an eater to eat of except that it be
what has died of itself, or blood poured forth, or flesh of swine for that surely is unclean - or that
which is a transgression other than (the name of) Allah having been invoked on it" (8:145); and
then in the chapter of "The Bee". Both these chapters are of Meccan period. Then details have
been given in the chapter of "The Cow" which was revealed in Medina long before the chapter of
"The Table". And even in this chapter, before this verse, forbidden meat has been described. And
this preceding verse according to Rashid Rida explicitly shows that the animals slaughtered by
the People of the Book are not forbidden. Now, we may ask: How could they entertain any doubt
about the lawfulness of the animals slaughtered by the People of the Book when verse after verse
of Meccan as well as Medinite period was revealed declaring that it was lawful; and the Muslims
were memorizing these verses and reciting them and teaching them and putting them into
practice?

He has claimed that the verse of the chapter of "Cattle" confines the unlawful things to what has
been mentioned therein; accordingly, unlawfulness of animals slaughtered by the People of the
Book will require a clear proof. Well, there is no doubt that every rule needs a proof to support it
and his claim clearly shows that this exclusive confinement will be valid only when there is no
other proof to show that some other things too are forbidden.

Now, if he wants proof from traditions then those who say that the animals slaughtered by the
People of the Book are unlawful rely on the traditions, which are narrated in explanation of this
verse, and we have quoted some of them earlier.

And if he wants proof from the Qur'an, then, first of all it is an unjustifiable arrogance, because
tradition is the companion of the Qur'an and they are not separate from each other in being
authoritative sources of the law. Secondly, we shall ask him what are his views about the animals
slaughtered by unbelievers other than the People of the Book like Idol-worshippers and atheists.
Will he say it is unlawful because it is a dead body, which has not been slaughtered according to
the shari'ah? In that case, let us look at two slaughtered animals: On one of them the name of
Allah was not invoked at all and it was not slaughtered facing the qiblah; and the other was not
slaughtered in the Islamic way. What is the difference between the two? Allah is not pleased
with either, both are unclean in the eyes of the religion, and Allah has forbidden the unclean
things. Allah Says: (Who) enjoins them good and forbids them unclean things (7:157); and He
has said in the preceding verse: They ask you as to what is made lawful for them. Say: "The good
things are made lawful for you." This question and answer is a clear proof that lawfulness is
confined to the good things and even in this verse, the words: This day have been made lawful
for you (all) good things, point to this exclusiveness especially when they describe the favor of
Allah on the believers.

If he says that the animals slaughtered by those unbelievers are unlawful because they invoke on
it the names of other than Allah, like their deities, then there is no difference whether a name of
other than Allah is invoked on it or the name of Allah is invoked but in a way which has been
abrogated and with which Allah is not pleased.

Rashid Rida further says, "Allah has very forcefully forbidden the Muslims to follow the
idolaters of Arab in eating dead animals of all different categories mentioned earlier and
sacrificing animals on their idols. It was done in order that the early Muslims should not treat it
as an easy matter according to their earlier habit. As for the People of the Book, they were far
from eating dead bodies or sacrificing for idols."

He has forgotten that the Christians among the People of the Book eat pork and Allah has
mentioned and forcefully condemned it. In fact, they eat all things the Idol-worshippers eat
because atonement of Jesus Christ has made all things lawful for them. In any case, this is an
absurd reasoning that should not be used in exegesis of the Book of Allah or in understanding the
laws of His religion.

Finally, he says, "It was the policy of Islam to deal very strictly with polytheists of Arabia in
order that everyone in the Arabian Peninsula should feel compelled to enter into the fold of
Islam; but it was very lenient to the People of the Book. Then he quotes the rulings of a few
companions who believed that the animals sacrificed in synagogues or churches were lawful to
eat.

The basic idea lurking behind this speech is, as appears from some traditions, that Allah had
chosen the Arabs over other nations and the Arabs were superior to others. That is why they used
to call non-Arabs as al-mawali (plural of al-mawla; clients) but the Qur'anic verses apparently
do not agree with it. Allah has said: O you people! Surely We have created you of a male and a
female and made you nations and tribes that you may recognize each other. Surely the most
honorable of you with Allah is the one among you who is most pious... (49:13); a lot of ahadith
giving this connotation have been narrated from the Imams of Ahlul 'l-Bayt (a.s.).

Islam while calling people to the right path had not put the Arabs on one side and the non-Arabs
on the other. It had put the polytheists - be they Arab or non-Arab - on one side, and they were
given no choice except that they should accept Islam; and it had put the People of the Book,
Arabs and non-Arabs alike, on the other side and if they did not enter in Islam, they were given
an option to come under the protection of Islam by paying jizyah. All that can be seen in this
treatment is some leniency shown to them; but it doesn't mean that their slaughtered animals
should become lawful to the Muslims when they have killed it according to their own custom
and ritual. As for the practice of fatwa of some companions, it has no authority at all in Islam.

It is clear from the above discussion that this verse does not show that the animals slaughtered by
the People of the Book are lawful when killed in un-Islamic way; nor is there any other proof to
prove it. If anyone insists on lawfulness of the animals slaughtered by them (because of the
generality of the verse), then we have to restrict it to the case when it is known that the animal
was slaughtered according to the rules of Islamic sharl'ah, as may be inferred from the words of
as-Sadiq (a.s.) quoted above from al-Kafi and at-Tahdhib: "It is the (Divine) name which is
important) and no one can be trusted in this matter except a Muslim." Further details may be
seen in the books of fiqh.

al-'Ayyashi narrates from as-Sadiq (a.s.) about the Divine words: and the chaste (ones) from
among those who have been given the Book before you (are lawful to you), that he said, "It (al-
muhsanat) means the chaste ones." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi).

The same book narrates from the same Imam (a.s.) about the words: and the chaste (one) from
among the believing women, that he said, "It means the Muslim women."

al-Qummi narrates from the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he said, "Verily the marriage is allowed with
only those People of the Book who pay jizyah; marriage with others is not lawful." (at-Tafsir, al-
Qummi).

The author says: It is because without payment of jizyah they will be counted among kafir
harbi.

al-Baqir (a.s.) said, "Verily it is lawful to marry only the simple-hearted women from among
them." (al-Kafi; at-Tahdhib)

as-Sadiq (a.s.) was asked about a believing man who marries a Christian or a Jewess. The Imam
said, "When he can get a Muslim woman then what will he do with the Jewess or Christian
woman?" It was said to him, "He is inclined towards her." He (a.s.) said, "If he does, then he
should stop her from drinking liquor and eating flesh of swine, and know that there must be a
deficiency in his religion." (Man la yahduruhu'l-faqih).

as-Sadiq (a.s.) said, "There is no harm if a man does mut'ah with a Jewess or a Christian woman
while he has got a free (Muslim) woman." (at-Tahdhib).

al-Baqir (a.s.) was asked about a Muslim man, "Can he marry a Magian?" He (a.s.) said, "No;
but if he has got a Magian slave girl, then there is no harm if he establishes sexual relations with
her; he should practice coitus interruptus and should not seek a child from her." (Man
layahduruhu'l-faqih)

al-Kulayni narrates through his chain from 'Abdullah ibn Sinan from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he
said inter alia in a hadith, "And I don't like a Muslim man to marry a Jewess or a Christian
woman lest his child becomes a Jew or a Christian." (al-Kafi).
Also, he narrates through his chains from Zurarah, and al-'Ayyashi from Mas'adah ibn Sadaqah,
that he said, "I asked Abu Ja'far (a.s.), about the words of Allah: and the chaste (ones) from
among those who have been given the Book before you." The Imam (a.s.) said, "It is abrogated
by the words: and hold not to the ties of marriage of unbelieving women" (60.10). (al-Kafi).

The author says: It is a problematic hadith, because the chapter 60 was revealed long before the
chapter of "The Table" and abrogating verse cannot come before the abrogated one. Moreover, it
is accepted and confirmed in the traditions that the chapter of "The Table" is the abrogator and
not the abrogated as we have mentioned repeatedly. Another proof to show that it is not
abrogated may be seen in the foregoing tradition that mut 'ah with a woman from the People of
the Book is allowed and people have acted upon it; and it was described in the verse of mut'ah
that mut'ah is a nikah and marriage.

Another tradition says the verse is abrogated by: And do not marry the idolatress until they
believe (2:221); and we have already mentioned the objections on this tradition. Details can be
seen in the books of fiqh.

al-'Ayyashi narrates from Aban ibn 'Abdu 'r-Rahman about the words of Allah: and whoever
denies faith his work indeed is forfeited, that he said, "I heard Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), saying, The
least that throws a man out of Islam is that he has an opinion against the truth and (even after
realizing his error) he holds fast to it.’ The Imam (a.s.) then recited the verse: and whoever
denies faith, his work indeed is forfeited. Then he (a.s.) said, 'He who denies faith does not
accomplish what Allah has ordered and is not pleased with it.'" (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

Muhammad ibn Muslim narrates from one of the two (fifth or sixth) Imam that he (a.s.) said, "It
is not implementing (the commandments of Allah) until he discards the whole lot." (ibid.)

The author says: What we have described earlier is enough to explain the fine points of these
traditions.

'Ubayd ibn Zurarah said, "I asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), about the words of Allah: and whoever
denies faith, his work indeed is forfeited. He said, 'It is not implementing what he had
acknowledged (to do); an example of it is that one neglects the prayer without sickness and
without involvement in some work.'" (ibid.)

The author says: Allah has named prayer as faith in the verse: and Allah was not going to make
your faith to be fruitless (2:143). Probably, that was the reason that the Imam (a.s.) particularly
mentioned it as the example in this tradition.

The Imam (a.s.) said, "This (denial of faith) refers to him who believes and yet obeys
polytheists." (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi)
Abu Hamzah (ath-Thumali) says, "I asked Abu Ja'far (a.s.), about the words of Allah: and
whoever denies faith, his work indeed is forfeited, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the
losers. He said, 'Its esoteric Qur'anic interpretation is: and whoever denies the wilayah of ‘Ali;
and 'Ali is the faith.'" (Basairu 'd-darajat)

The author says: It is esoteric or inner meaning, opposite of the manifest one, as we have
explained while writing about "The Decisive and The Ambiguous Verses" in the third volume of
this book. Also, the tradition may be based on the 'Flow of the Qur'an’; and the Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.) had named 'Ali (a.s.) as Faith when he had gone out to fight 'Amr ibn 'Abd Wadd
in the Battle of the Trench, when he (s.a.w.) said: "The whole of Faith has gone out to fight the
whole Disbelief." There are other traditions of the same theme.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 6-7

 
‫ُم‬ ْ ‫سك‬ ِ ‫حو ْا بِ ُر ُؤو‬ ُ ‫س‬ َ ‫ق َوا ْم‬ ِ ِ‫م َراف‬ َ ‫ُم إِلَى ا ْل‬ ْ ‫ُم َوأَ ْي ِديَك‬ ْ ‫هك‬ َ ‫جو‬ ُ ‫سلُو ْا ُو‬ ِ ْ‫صال ِة فاغ‬ َّ ‫م إِلَى ال‬ ْ ‫م ُت‬ْ ‫ين آ َم ُنو ْا إِذَا ُق‬ َ ‫َيا أَيُّ َها الَّ ِذ‬
‫ن‬ َ ‫ِم‬./ِّ ‫ح ٌد َّمنكُم‬ َ
َ ‫جاء أ‬ َ
َ ‫س َف ٍر أ ْو‬ َ ‫ضى أ ْو َعلَى‬ َ َ ‫ج ُنبًا َفاطَّ َّه ُرو ْا َوإِن كُن ُتم َّم ْر‬ ُ ‫م‬ ْ ‫ين َوإِن كُن ُت‬ ِ َ‫ك ْعب‬ َ ‫ُم إِلَى ا ْل‬ ْ ‫جلَك‬ ُ ‫َوأَ ْر‬
‫يد‬ُ ‫ِم ْن ُه َما ُي ِر‬./ِّ ‫ُم َوأَ ْي ِديكُم‬ ْ ‫هك‬ ِ ‫جو‬ ُ ‫حو ْا بِ ُو‬ ُ ‫س‬ َ ‫بًا َفا ْم‬./‫ص ِعي ًدا طَ ِِّي‬ َ ‫مو ْا‬ ُ ‫م‬َّ َ‫م تَجِ ُدو ْا َماء َف َتي‬ ْ َ‫ساء َفل‬ َ ./‫م ال ِِّن‬ ْ ‫ط أَ ْو ال َ َم‬
ُ ‫س ُت‬ ِ ِ‫ا ْلغَائ‬
‫} َوا ْذك ُُرو ْا‬6{ َ‫شك ُُرون‬ ْ َ ْ‫ت‬ ‫ُم‬‫ك‬ َّ ‫ل‬ ‫ع‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫ُم‬‫ك‬ ‫ي‬َ ‫ل‬‫ع‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ت‬ ‫م‬ ‫ع‬ ِ ‫ن‬
َ ْ ْ َ ُ َ َ ْ َّ ُ َ ْ َ َّ ُ ُ ِ ُ ‫م‬ ‫ت‬
ِ ‫ي‬ ِ ‫ل‬‫و‬ ‫ُم‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ه‬ َ ‫ط‬ ‫ي‬ ِ ‫ل‬ ‫د‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ك‬
ِ ‫ـ‬َ ‫ل‬ ‫و‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ح‬
َ ٍ َ َ ْ / ‫ن‬ ‫ِم‬
.
ِّ ‫ُم‬‫ك‬ ‫ي‬ َ
ْ َ َ َ ْ َ ُ ‫ال‬
‫ل‬‫ع‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ي‬ِ ‫ل‬ ‫ه‬ ّ ‫ل‬
‫ور‬
ِ ‫م بِذَاتِ الص ُُّد‬ َ
ٌ ‫م ْع َنا َوأطَ ْع َنا َواتَّ ُقو ْا الل ّ َه إِنَّ الل ّ َه َعلِي‬ ِ ‫س‬َ ‫م‬ ْ ‫ه إِ ْذ ُق ْل ُت‬ ِ ِ‫ُم َو ِميثَا َق ُه الَّ ِذي َواثَ َقكُم ب‬ ْ ‫ه َعلَ ْيك‬ ِ ّ ‫م َة الل‬َ ‫نِ ْع‬
}7{
{6} O you who believe! When you rise up to prayer, wash your faces and your hands as far as
the elbows, and wipe a part of your heads and your feet to the ankles; and if you are under
obligation to perform a total ablution, then wash (yourselves); and if you are sick or on a
journey, or one among you comes from privy, or you have touched the women, and you do not
find water, betake yourselves to clean earth and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your
hands therewith; Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you
so that He may complete His favour on you, that you may be grateful. {7} And remember the
favour of Allah on you and the covenant with which He bound you firmly, when you said: "We
have heard and we obey," and fear Allah; surely Allah knows what is in the breasts.
 

Commentary
The first verse contains rules of all three types of at-taharah (cleanness): wudu', wajib ghusl and
tayammum; and the second verse emphasizes or complements this order. There is another verse
already mentioned in the chapter of "Women" which deals with these three modes of cleanness:
O you who believe! Do not go near prayer when you are intoxicated until you know (well) what
you say, nor when you are in a state of major ritual impurity, unless (you are) travelling on the
road- until you have washed yourselves; and if you are sick or on a journey or one of you comes
from the privy or you have touched the women, and you cannot find water, betake yourselves to
clean earth, then wipe a part of your faces and (a part of) your hands. Surely Allah is Pardoning,
Forgiving (4:43).
This verse of the chapter of "The Table" is clearer than that of the chapter of "Women" and
covers more aspects of the rule. That is why we had not given a detailed commentary there, until
we have reached the verse under discussion here.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! When you rise up to prayer: al-Qiyam (to stand up, to rise up),
when followed by preposition ila (to) generally connotes the intention of doing that thing;
because when one intends to do a thing one usually moves towards it. Let us suppose a man is
sitting and he intends to perform an act, usually he would rise to do it. In other words, rising up
for a work is inseparable from its intention. There is a similar example in the words of Allah:
And when you are among them and establish the prayer for them (4:102), that is, you intend to
establish the prayer. Conversely, there is a verse which uses the word wish or intention to allude
to the actual deed: And if you wish to have (one) wife in place of another and you have given one
of them a heap of gold, then take not from it anything (4:20); it means when you divorce a wife
and marry another; so the verse uses the word "wish" for the actual deed.

In short, the verse shows that prayer must be preceded by bath and wudu'. If it had been
unrestricted it would have meant necessity of wudu' before every prayer irrespective of the
words: and if you are under obligation to perform a total ablution, then wash (yourselves).
However, legislative verses are seldom unrestricted in all aspects. Moreover, it is possible to say
that the coming words: but He wishes to purify you, explain this obligation of bath, as will be
explained later. It is only this much explanation that can be given here for this verse; the exegetes
have written at length about it but it is all related to the matter of fiqh and not to tafsir.

QUR'AN: wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows: al-Ghusl (pouring water on
something); it is usually done for cleaning, removal of dirt and filth. al-Wajh (the side of a thing
that faces you); but mostly it is used for the front side of man's head, that is, the side which has
eyes, nose and mouth in it; when somebody faces you his features become manifest to you; the
traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahlul 'l-Bayt (a.s.) interpret it as the area from the
beginning of the hairline in the forehead up to the tip of the chin length wise and that which is
covered by the thumb and middle finger breadth wise. There are some other delineation
mentioned by the exegetes and jurisprudents.

al-Aydi (plural of al-yad); it is the organ which is used for folding and unfolding, catching and
releasing, attacking someone, etc. It begins from shoulder ending at fingertips. Because most of
these activities like catching and releasing are done through that part which begins from elbow
down wards, that section is also called hand; and for this very reason the section from wrist to
fingertips is also called hand. In this way, the word becomes common between the whole and its'
parts.

It is this commonality which makes it necessary to mention some association to point to the
intended meaning; and it is for this reason that Allah has added: "as far as the elbows" to show
that the area of the hand to be washed is that which ends at the elbows; also it shows that the
whole area up to the finger tips is covered. The traditions also support this meaning. The
preposition ila (to, as far as) indicates the limit of action and it connotes continuation of
movement.
This preposition does not show whether or not the elbows are included in the order of washing;
the order to wash the elbows is derived from the traditions, not from this preposition.

Someone has said that the preposition ila in this verse means "together with" as is seen in the
verse: and do not devour their property (as an addition) to your own property (4:2). He has also
argued on the strength of traditions that the Prophet (s.a.w.) used to wash the elbows in wudu'. It
is really an astonishing insolence in exegesis of the Divine Book. Let us say that the tradition
describes an action, but an action may be interpreted in different ways. How can it be used to
pinpoint the meaning of a word? Or it may legislate a rule without intending to explain this
verse. Moreover, the obligation of washing the elbows could have been inferred from logical
reasoning; or may be the Prophet (s.a.w.) has added to it, because he had the authority to do so
(as he had done in the five prayers, as the correct traditions say). As for the verse: and do not
devour their property (as an addition) to your own property, the word: al-akl (to devour) contains
the idea of addition and joining and for this reason it is followed by the preposition: ila; it is not
that ila gives the meaning of togetherness.

The above discussion makes it clear that the clause: "as far as the elbows", qualifies the words,
"your hands". It does not clarify where the washing of hands is to begin and where it is to end.
So far as this clause is concerned, the washing could begin from the elbows going to the
fingertips (and that is the way man acts while washing his hand apart from wudu')or it could
begin from fingertips ending at the elbows. But the traditions from the Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt
(a.s.) guide us to follow the former method, instead of the latter.

This removes the objection raised by many people that the clause: "as far as the elbows" proves
the obligation of beginning the washing from fingertips ending at the elbows. This claim is based
on the assumption that the clause: "as far as the elbows", is related to the order of washing; but,
as we have explained, it is connected with the hands. It should be realized that the word "hands",
being a common noun, needed an association to make its meaning clear, and once the word
"elbows" connects with "hands" it cannot be again connected with the order of washing.

Moreover, the ummah unanimously agrees that the wudu' of those who begin washing from the
elbows coming to the fingertips is correct (vide Majma 'u'l-bayan). And this unanimity emanates
from the fact that the verse gives this meaning and it could only be correct if the clause: "as far
as the elbows", is connected with the "hands" and not with the washing.

QUR'AN: and wipe apart of your heads and your feet to the ankles: al-Mash (to let the hand or
any other limb pass over something). They say: 'I wipe the thing'; 'I wiped part of the thing' (bi-
shay'). When this verb is used without preposition it indicates wiping of the whole thing; and
when used with the preposition bi it denotes partial wiping. The Divine words: "and wipe a part
of your heads", show that only a part of the head is to be wiped; however it doesn't show which
parts are to be wiped. It is known only from the traditions. Our correct traditions say that it is the
front part of the head.

The words, wa arjulakum has been recited in two ways:

1. With kasrah of li (wa arjulikum):In this case it is clearly in conjunction with bi-ru'usikum, i.e,
"and wipe a part of your heads and your feet." Some people say that this kasrah here has no
grammatical significance; it just follows the inflection of the preceding word, bi-ru'usikum. But
it is a mistake because following in inflection is considered a bad grammar as grammarians have
said; and the Divine words should not be taken in such a vulgar way.

2. With fathah of la (wa arjulakum). If you read the sentence without any preconceived idea you
will see that arjulakum is in
conjunction with the grammatical position of bi-ru'usikum (which is in dative case and should
have been ru'usakum but for the preposition bi). You will understand that the verse shows the
obligation of washing the face and hands and wiping the head and feet. You will never think that
the word: "and your feet" should be connected to the clause: "wash your faces" in the beginning
of the verse, while another order to wipe the parts of the heads has already come in between. A
man of good literary taste will not try such gymnastics in a speech of high literary value. How
can a speaker of high standards agree to say
for example: 'I kissed the face of Zayd and his head and touched his shoulder and hands', when
he actually want to say that he had kissed the hands also?

Numerous traditions for wiping the feet have been narrated from the Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.).
As for the traditions of Ahlu 's-Sunnah, they do not purport to explain the wordings of the
Qur'an; they rather describe the action of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and fatwa ofsome companions.
However they differ among themselves: Some show the obligation of wiping the feet, while the
others support their washing.

However, overwhelming majority of the Sunnis have given preference to the traditions of
washing over those of wiping; but one should not entangle with them here because it is a matter
of jurisprudence, and the arguments and counter arguments are more appropriate for a book of
fiqh. However, they have tried to fit the verse on a ruling of fiqh which they have accepted and
have written various contrived reasons for it; but the verse does not agree with such
interpretations unless one is prepared to pull it down from the peak of eloquence to the depth of
incoherence.

Some people have said that arjulakum (with fathah of la)is in conjunction with: "wash your
faces"; and if it is recited arjulikum (with kasrah of li), then it just follows bi-ru'usikum. But we
have already explained that such interpretations are not worthy of a speech of high literary
standard.

(The author has then quoted some more abstruse grammatical interpretations of the partisans of
washing. They have been omitted here because they are beyond the grasp of non-Arabic
speaking readers.)

Someone even while reciting with kasrah of li has tried to show obligation of washing of feet.
He says that the conjunction is in its place (i.e. "your feet" is in conjunction with "wipe a part of
your heads";) yet wiping is a shortened form of washing and therefore wiping of feet means their
washing! Then he supports his argument by saying that the verse mentions the limits of the
washed organ only i.e. the hands and does not limit the wiped organ i.e. the head; now when it
limits the wiped organ by saying: "and your feet to the ankles", we know that it wants them to be
washed!

This is the worst type of argument. Wiping is totally different from washing and there is no
inseparable connection between them. Apart from that, why should only the feet be washed and
the head be left for wiping? Would that I knew what prevents him from interpreting the word
mash wherever it appears in the Qur'an or traditions as washing and vice versa. Why should not
the traditions of washing taken as to mean wiping and the traditions of wiping as meaning
washing? In this way all the proofs will turn topsy-turvy without any clear end. As for his
supporting reason he turn was tried in it to impose a meaning on the word through analogy and it
is the worst type of analogy.

(Again the author quotes here some contrived reasoning to show that wiping and washing are
not two separate actions; and then replies to it. They have been omitted here because of its
abstruseness.)

This and similar contrived reasonings which this verse has been made to suffer go against its
manifest meaning; their only aim is to justify traditions of washing in a way that they should not
appear to be going against the Qur'an. If we open the door for imposing the theme of a tradition
on a verse by twisting the apparent meaning of that verse then nobody could be found guilty of
going against the Qur'an. There is a better way for the believers in the washing of the feet to
follow. They should say as some early muhaddithin (like Anas and ash-Sha'bi) are reported as
saying that Jibril had brought wiping and the sunnah is washing. It means abrogation of the Book
by the Sunnah and the subject will turn from the tafsir to the Principles of Jurisprudence:
whether or not the Sunnah can abrogate the Book When an exegete says that a certain tradition is
against the Book, he means to say that the connotation of this tradition goes against the apparent
meaning of the Book. He shows the conflict of the tradition with the Qur'an, not that he gives a
fatwa for a rule of the shari'ah.

Now, we come to the words: "to the ankles": al-Ka'b is the bone protruding on the dorsum of the
foot. Some people say that it is the bone protruding at the joint of the leg and foot. In this
meaning there are two such bones at the joint of each foot and leg.

QUR'AN: and if you are under obligation to perform a total ablution, then wash (yourselves):
al-Junub is an infinitive verb but is generally used in the meaning of active participle; that is why
it is used for both genders as well as for singular, dual and plural. When they want to use a word
as an infinitive verb, they say al-janabah.

This sentence is in conjunction with the clause: wash your faces, as the verse is meant to show
the necessary stipulation of cleanliness for prayer. The sentence means: perform a total ablution
if you are in al-janabah. This condition alludes to an unspoken condition in wudu'. The verse
then will mean: wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows, and wipe apart of your
heads and your feet to the ankles, if you are not junub; and if you are junub, then perform a total
ablution. It may be inferred from it that wudu' is prescribed if there is no janabah, but with
janabah the ghusl is enough as the traditions show.
The same law has been explained in the verse of the chapter of "Women": nor when you are in a
state of major ritual impurity -unless (you are) travelling on the road- until you have washed
yourselves (4:43). The verse under discussion is more elaborate as it names the bath as
cleanliness. This cleanliness is other than that which one usually gets from taking bath which it is
an effect of that bath; but the cleanliness mentioned in this verse refers to the very act of taking
bath (as it removes spiritual uncleanness); while in this context removing physical uncleanness
and dirt from the body by using water is called at-tanazzuf. There is a tradition from Imam (a.s.):
"Whatever water flows on becomes clean." This rule is inferred from this very verse.

QUR'AN: and if you are sick or on a journey, or one among you comes from privy, or you have
touched the women, and you do not find water, betake yourselves to clean earth: Now begins the
rule which applies to a person who does not have water for cleansing or bath. The four situations
which are joined with the particle of conjunction "or" are not opposite to each other in reality;
sickness and journey by themselves do not cause al-hadath (the things because of which wudu'
or ghusl becomes necessary); they may demand wudu' or ghusl when a small or big hadath takes
place in that condition. The last two alternatives do not stand face to face with the first two;
rather both of the first two alternatives are divided into the last two. That is why someone has
said that "or" in the clause: "or one among you comes from privy", is used in the meaning of
"and", as we shall describe later. Moreover, the reasons justifying tayammum are not limited to
sickness or journey; there are other causes too.

Allah has mentioned sickness and journey and in these two conditions one is generally unable to
get or use water whenever he wishes; and He has mentioned coming from toilet and touching the
women - and unavailability of water in these two conditions is a matter of chance. Conversely, it
may be said that looking at the physical structure of man, his being sick or on journey is a matter
of chance while going to toilet or touching of the women are physical necessities. The first
causes small hadath, which is removed by wudu' and the second brings on big hadath which is
removed by ghusl. In all the four situations with which man becomes involved sometimes by
chance and at other times by nature, he is obliged to do tayammum when he cannot get water.

Unavailability of water metaphorically denotes inability to use water. It means that unavailability
of water is a condition for all the four situations including sickness.

The above explanation shows that:

First: The sickness mentioned in this verse is the one, which prevents a man from using water as
the condition: "and you do not find water" shows; rather the context of the whole speech gives
this connotation.

Second: "Or on a journey" is another alternative in which man is involved by chance and during
which sometime water becomes unavailable; it is not restricted by the words: "or one among you
comes from privy"; rather it is in conjunction with the words: "wash your faces". So the meaning
will be as follows: When you rise up for prayer while you are on a journey and you do not find
water then do tayammum. As the sentence: when you rise up to prayer, wash your faces… had
not required any conditional clause, this order of tayammum also does not need any such
condition as both are in conjunction with each other.
Third: The Divine words: "or one among you comes from the privy" is another independent
situation. Someone has said that "or" has been used here in the meaning of "and"; as Allah
(s.w.t.) has said in another context: And We sent him to a hundred thousand, rather, they
exceeded (87:147). But this interpretation is unwarranted. Apart from that, the word "aw" (or,
rather) in the verse brought in evidence is not in the meaning of "and"; it is used in its literal
meaning as we have translated it with the word "rather". It does not show that the speaker was
unsure of their number; it just means that the situation or condition was indefinite. The same
interpretation is given to other such expressions whenever they occur in the Qur'an. For
example:... so that you may guard (against evil), (2:21); ...had they but known this (2:102).

This sentence has the same construction of conjunction as the previous two. The meaning will
be: When you rise up to prayer and one of you had come from privy and you do not find water
then you should do tayammum.

It may easily be inferred from these wordings that when a man has not broken his at-t.aharah
(here it means wudu' or tayammum) with small hadath then he does not have to repeat his wudu'
or tayammum; it supports those ahadith which show that a man who has done taharah is not
obliged to repeat it.

The Divine words, "or one among you comes from privy" teach good manner; al-ghait (a
depressed plot or pit); people used to sit in such places to relieve themselves in order to be
hidden from public eyes; the Qur'an uses the expression "coming from depressed place or privy"
and it alludes to relieving oneself. Nowadays, the word al-ghait is used for human excrements
but it is a vulgar usage, which has come up in later centuries. The same is the position of al-
'adhrah; its literal meaning is threshold of the door. As the people used to empty their lavatory in
front of their houses, the word al- 'adhrah gradually came to mean feces, as al-Jawhari has
explained in as-sihah.

Also, the Qur'an has not said: "or you come from privy"; because it would have pinpointed the
one involved. Nor has it said: "or one of you has come from privy" because this possessive
construction too would have shown a sort of specification. Rather, it went further in vagueness
and ambiguity and said: "or one among you comes from privy." This was done to teach Muslims
polite manner of speaking.

Fourth: "Or you have touched the women". This too, like previous clauses, is an independent
condition; and the conjunction and the meaning are like previous phrases. Touching the women
is an allusion to sexual intercourse. This too, shows the polite manner of speech, as to how one
should keep one's tongue from clearly expressing what the human nature doesn't like to talk
freely about.

One might say that, in that case, the preceding expression, "and if you are under obligation to
perform a total ablution", would have been more appropriate because it was more decent; but it
would have missed the main point of the speech. The present expression shows that it is
something, which a man by nature is inclined to do, while the previous phrase lacks this
indication.
Someone has said that "touching the women" means exactly what it says and it doesn't indicate
sexual intercourse. However, it is a very wrong interpretation because it goes against the context
of the verse. Allah has begun the speech by describing the order concerning small hadath and
that is wudu', and then the order regarding big hadath, that is, janabah after which one normally
has to take bath. Then the speech turns to these very situations in unusual circumstances, when
one doesn't get water; so it describes the substitute of wudu', that is, tayammum. Now, the
context demands that the substitute of bath too should be mentioned and that is why it has
mentioned touching of the women alluding to sexual intercourse. There was no reason why only
the substitute of wudu' should be mentioned ignoring that of ghusl altogether.

Fifth: The above explanations do not leave room for many objections brought against the verse
as may be seen from the following:

i) The mention of sickness or being on a journey is irrelevant, because sickness or journey don't
obligate one to do tayammum unless one has undergone a hadath or has touched the women; but
the small hadath and the sexual intercourse would make tayammum necessary even if one is not
sick or on journey.

Reply: Small hadath and sexual intercourse are not to be joined with sickness and journey; all
four are independent situations as was explained earlier.

ii) The second alternative "or on a journey" is irrelevant and the reason is the same as given in
the first objection. Sickness is an excuse, which can prevent use of available water; it does not
indicate unavailability of water. Therefore, it was necessary to say "and you do not find water";
and in absence of water (one has to do tayammum); so being sick or on a journey has no
relevance here.

Reply: The phrase: "and you do not find water" is an allusion to inability to use water, no matter
whether it is because of unavailability of water or otherwise.

iii) It was enough to say: "you do not find water", and all the situations mentioned before it
would be covered in this one phrase; so if the phrases: "if you are sick or on a journey or one
among you comes from the privy or you have touched the women," were omitted it would have
been shorter and clearer.

Reply: If those phrases were omitted, all the fine points mentioned earlier would have been lost.

iv)  It would have been better if the phrase were changed to the following: "and if you are unable
to use water", because this amended phrase would have covered the sickness plus other excuses.

Reply: The present phrase alludes to that meaning too and it is more eloquent.

QUR'AN: betake yourselves to clean earth and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your
hands therewith: at-Tayammum (to intend,); as-sa'id (face of the earth) at-tayyib, a thing is
called tayyib when it is in its natural condition. This adjective used for the earth indicates that the
earth should be in its natural condition like soil or common stones. It excludes the items, which
are separated from earth by burning or through other natural processes like cement, potteries, and
minerals. Allah says: And as for the good land, its vegetation springs forth (abundantly) by the
permission of its Lord, and (as for) that which is bad (its herbage) comes forth but scantily
(7:58). This adjective has given rise to the conditions mentioned in ahadith for the soil, which
may be used in tayammum. Also, it is said that at-tayyib means clean; in that case, it indicates the
condition of cleanliness for the earth of tayammum.

The phrase: "and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your hands therewith", shows that one
has to wipe those organs in tayammum which one was required to wash in wudu'. We may say
that tayammum is a shortened alternative of wudu' from which the two wipings (of head and feet)
have been omitted and the two washings (of face and hands) substituted with the wiping; and
water has given way to soil - to remove hardships.

This shows that the two organs of tayammum are the same two which were washed in wudu'. As
Allah has used the preposition "bi" with the verb of wiping, it indicates that the wiping in
tayammum should apply to only some parts of the two organs, that is a part of face and a part of
hands. It totally fits on the explanations narrated from the Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.) that the
part of face to be wiped in tayammum is the forehead only and the part of hand to be wiped is
from wrist downwards.

This explanation shows invalidity of some people's opinion that the hand to be wiped in
tayammum covers from armpit to finger tips; or what has been said by others that the whole part
of hand washed in wudu' should be wiped in tayammum. Clearly, the verb al-mash (to wipe)
followed by preposition "bi" indicates that only a part of the organ is to be wiped.

"Min" in "minhu" translated here as "therewith" shows that wiping of face and hands should
begin with earth; and ahadith have explained that tayammum should start with hitting the hands
on earth and then wiping the face and hands with it.

Someone has said that "min" here indicates apportioning. In other words, there should remain
attached to the palms some parts of earth (like dust) which would be used for wiping the face and
the hands. According to him, tayammum would not be valid on a smooth stone on which there is
no dust, etc.

COMMENT: The meaning that we have given is more in keeping with the wording of the
Qur'an.

QUR'AN: Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty but He wishes to purify you: "Min
haraj" (translated here as any difficulty) literally means any kind of difficulty. It puts emphasis
on the negative connotation. There is no commandment in religion, which could create difficulty;
that is why the negative is attached to the Divine desire and not to difficulty. Difficulty can be of
two types:

i) A difficulty which results from the nature of the commandment itself; that is, the
commandment itself becomes a source of difficulty. Allah hasn't given any such order. For
example, He has not forbidden eating tasty foods with a view of creating a knack for self-denial,
because such an order would have created difficulty by its very nature.

ii) A difficulty, which temporarily happens in implementation of an order. For example, if

someone cannot stand in prayer because of illness, this rule will be waived for him but the
general rule will continue to apply to others.

The phrase: "but He wishes to purify you" after the preceding clause: "Allah does not desire to
put on you any difficulty", shows that Allah has not laid down any rule with the aim of creating
difficulties for human beings. The verse means: Our aim in these laid down rules is to purify you
and the main purpose is to complete our favors on you; not that We want to put you in trouble or
difficulty. That is why when We found that wudu' or ghusl was difficult for you in the absence of
water, We changed that order to tayammum which you can easily do; we have not totally waived
the order of taharah because we want to purify you and complete our favors on you, so that you
may be grateful.

QUR'AN: but He wishes to purify you so that He may complete His favour on you that you may
be grateful: The preceding explanation shows that the main purpose of wudu', ghusl and
tayammum is to make you purified through these modes of taharah. This taharah is not from al-
khabath (= an uncleanness which doesn't require an-niyyah (intention) for its removal); but it is a
spiritual purification which one gets through these three modes of taharah and which is the
condition for validity of prayer.

It may be inferred from these words that if a person continues in taharah and does not get any
hadath, then he is not required to repeat his taharah for the next prayer. Although the opening
phrase: when you rise up to prayer, is unrestricted, it does not mean that one has to do wudu',
ghusl or tayammum before every prayer because not every order is obligatory. (In the situation
mentioned above, one is only recommended to renew one's taharah.)

The clause: "so that He may complete His favor on you", the meaning of favor and its
completion was explained in the verse 3 of this chapter: This day have I perfected for you your
religion and completed my favor on you; and the meaning of gratefulness was given in the verse
144 of chapter 3: And Allah will reward the grateful. Accordingly, the favor in this verse means
the religion (not in the sense of its particular beliefs and commandments) but in the meaning of
submission to Allah in all conditions and situations. This entails acceptance of Allah's authority
over His servants in whatever He obligates them to do. That authority will be completed if the
shari'ah covers all religious commandments, small parts of which are the three types of taharah.

The verse gives two reasons for this order:

i. To purify the believers;
ii. To complete His favor on them.

These two are different from one another. The first reason gives the purpose of legislating the
three modes of purification while completion of favor is the purpose of legislating the whole
shari'ah, and the three modes of taharah are a small part of it. In other words, the two reasons
are particular and general. Accordingly, the clauses would mean as follows. We have laid down
the three purifications so that you could purify yourselves with them. They are a part of the
religion. When the whole shari'ah will be legislated, Allah's favour on you will be completed in
order that you may be grateful to Allah, so that He may choose you for Himself. Ponder on it.

QUR'AN: And remember the favor of Allah on you and the covenant with which He bound you
firmly, when you said: "We have heard and we obey"...: That was the covenant which was taken
from them. They were expected to surrender to Allah as Allah reminds them with the words:
"when you said: 'We have heard and we obey.'" It is unconditional listening and unconditional
obedience; in other words, it is Islam. The favor of Allah in the clause: "And remember the favor
of Allah on you", points to the graceful gifts which Allah bestowed on them under protection of
Islam. If they compared their condition in the days of ignorance with that after entering into
Islam, they would find themselves enjoying peace, well-being, affluence, purity of hearts and
purity of deeds; as Allah says: And remember the favor of Allah on you when you were enemies,
then He united your hearts so by His bounty you became brethren; and you were on the brink of
a pit of fire then He delivered you from it (3:103).

Alternatively, the favor may refer to the reality of Islam; Islam is the mother of all favors that
nourishes all other favors as we have described earlier. When we say that Divine favor refers to
Islam or to Divine authority, we are aiming at pinpointing the examples of favor. We are not
trying to find out the meaning of the word; meanings are known from dictionaries and we are not
concerned with it here.

Then Allah reminds them of His Omniscience and that Allah knows the hidden secrets of the
hearts. So, He has ordered them to fear Him: and fear Allah; surely Allah knows what is in the
breasts.

Traditions
at-Tusi narrates with his asnad from as-Sadiq (a.s.) about the words of Allah: when you rise up
to prayer, that he said, "When you rise up from sleep." The narrator (Ibn Bakir) says, "I said
'Does sleep break wudu'?'He (the Imam) said, 'Yes, when it overwhelms hearing and he doesn't
hear voices.' " (Tahdhibu'l-ahkam).

The author says: This meaning is also narrated in other traditions and as-Suyuti has narrated it
in ad-Durru'l-manthur from Zayd ibn Aslam and an-Nahhas. It doesn't go against the
explanations given in the Commentary that rising up to prayer means intending to pray, because
what we have said explains the meaning of "rising to" and the tradition explains the meaning of
"rising from".

al-Kulayni narrates through his chain of narrators from Zurarah that he said, "I said to Abu Ja'far
(a.s.), 'From where did you know and say that wiping should be done to a part of head and a part
of feet.' He (the Imam) laughed and said, 'O Zurarah! The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) has said
so and the Book has been revealed by Allah with this order, because Allah, the Mighty, the
Great, says: wash your faces, so we know that the whole face should be washed. Then He says:
and your hands as far as the elbows; in this way, the hands up to the elbows have been joined
with face (in one order) and we know that they too should be washed up to the elbows. Then He
disjointed the speech and said: and wipe a part of your heads; when He used the preposition "bi"
before "your heads", we understood that wiping should cover only a part of the head. Then He
joined the feet with the head (in that order) as had joined the hands with the face, and said: and
your feet to the ankles. Now, because He has joined them with the head, we know that wiping
should cover only a part of the feet. Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) explained it to the
people but they neglected it. Then (Allah) said: and (if) you do not find water, betake yourselves
to clean earth and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your hands therewith. When wudu' was
waived in the absence of water, wiping (with earth) was ordered for part of (the organs) which
were washed (in wudu') because He has said: part of your faces, then has joined with it the hands
(that is, parts of it). Then He has said: therewith, that is, in tayammum. It was so ordained
because Allah knew that the wiping with earth would not cover the whole face as the earth
adheres to parts of the palms leaving other portions untouched. Then Allah said: Allah does not
desire to put on you any difficulty; and al-haraj means difficulty.'" (al-Kafi).

The author says: The clause: and (if) you do not find water, paraphrases the verse making its
meaning clearer.

Also al-Kulayni narrates through his chain of narrators from Zurarah and Bakir that both of them
asked Abu Ja'far (a.s.) about the wudu' of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). He (the Imam) asked
for a wash-bowl with water; he dipped his right hand, scooped a handful of water and pouring it
on his face washed the face with it; then he dipped his left hand and scooped a handful of water
and pouring it on his right arm washed the arm from the elbow to the palm without returning the
hand to the elbow; then he dipped his right palm (in the water) and poured it on his left arm and
did as he had done with the right arm; then he wiped his head and feet with wetness of his palms
without adding new water to them. Then he said, "One should not insert his fingers under the
shoelace." Then (the Imam) said, "Surely Allah, the Mighty, the Great, says: When you rise up to
prayer, wash your faces and your hands, it is therefore not proper to leave any part of one's face
without washing and Allah has ordered to wash the hands to the elbows, it is therefore not proper
for him to leave any part of his hands up to the elbows without washing, because Allah says:
wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows. Then Allah has said: and wipe a part of
your heads and your feet to the ankles. So, if he wiped a part of his head or a part of his feet
between the ankles and toe-tips, his wudu' will be completed." The narrators said, "We asked,
'Where are the ankles?' (The Imam) said, 'Here (pointing to the joint of feet with bone of leg).'
We said, 'What is this?' (The Imam) said, This is the bone of leg, and ankle is below it.' Then we
asked, 'May Allah make your affairs good! One handful (of water) is enough for the face and one
handful for the arm?1 (The Imam) said, 'Yes, if you use it properly and two handfuls cover the
whole wudu'.' " (ibid.)

The author says: This tradition is well known; al-' Ayyashi has narrated it from Bakir and
Zurarah from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) and has narrated a similar tradition through Abdullah ibn
Sulayman from Abu Ja'far (a.s.); also there are other traditions having similar connotation as
well as of the preceding tradition in other books.

al-'Ayyashi has narrated from Zurarah ibn A'yan; and Abu Hanifah has narrated from Abu Bakir
ibn Hazm that they said, "A man did wudu' and did mash on his socks and entering the mosque
performed his prayer. Then came there 'Ali (a.s.) and trampled his neck under foot and said,
'Woe unto you! You are praying without wudu'!' He said, "Umar ibn al-Khattab has ordered me
(to do wudu' like this).' So, 'Ali (a.s.) caught his hand, brought him to 'Umar and said, 'Look what
this (man) is narrating from you (and his voice was raised).' 'Umar said, 'Yes. I have ordered him
(to do like it). Verily, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had done mash (in similar way).' 'Ali (a.s.)
said, 'Was it before the revelation of (the chapter of) "The Table" or after it?' He said, 'I don't
know.' 'Ali (a.s.) said, Then why do you give fatwa when you don't know. The Book (of Allah)
has left socks behind."' (Tafsiru'l-burhan).

The author says: There had appeared a controversy during the reign of 'Umar about mash on
socks, and it was the judgment of  ‘Ali (a.s.) that it was abrogated by the verse of the chapter of
"The Table", as appears from the traditions. That is why it has been narrated from some
companions like al-Bara', Bilal and Jarir ibn 'Abdillah that they had narrated from the Prophet
(s.a.w.), (permission of) mash on socks after revelation of the chapter of "The Table". (In this
way they tried to justify 'Umar's fatwa). But these traditions are not free from confusion. Perhaps
they thought that the abrogation of the wiping on socks was not based on the Qur’anic verse. But
it is not so, because the verse confirms the wiping on the feet up to the ankles and socks are
certainly not parts of the feet. The same is the connotation of the coming tradition.

al-'Ayyashi narrates from Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Khurasani (and the hadith is marfu') that he
said, "A man came to the Leader of the Faithful (a.s.), and asked him about the mash on socks.
The Imam bowed his head for sometime; then he raised the head and said, 'Verily Allah, the
Blessed, the High, has ordered His servants to do taharah and divided it among the organs; so
He gave a share of it to the face and a share of it to the head and a share of it to the feet and a
share of it to the hands. Now, if your socks are among these organs you may do mash on them.’ "
(at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

Again, he narrates from al-Hasan ibn Zayd from Ja'far ibn Muhammad (a.s.) that he said, "Verily
'All opposed the people in the reign of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab regarding the mash on socks. They
said, 'We had seen the Prophet (s.a.w.) doing mash on socks.' 'Ali (a.s.) said, 'Was it before the
revelation of "The Table" or after it?' They said, 'We don't know.' 'Ali (a.s.), said, 'But I know
that the Prophet (s.a.w.) left wiping on the socks when "The Table" was revealed. And that I do
mash on a donkey's back is preferable to me than doing mash on the socks.’ Then he recited this
verse: O you who believe! When you rise up to prayer wash your faces and your hands as far as
the elbows, and wipe apart of your heads and your feet to the ankles." (ibid.)
as-Suyuti writes: Ibn Jarir and an-Nahhas (in his Nasikh) have narrated about 'Ali (a.s.) that he
was doing (fresh) wudu' for each salat and used to recite: O you who believe! When you rise up
to prayer... (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: Its explanation has been given earlier.

al-Kulayni narrates through his chain of narrates from al-Halabi from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he
said, "I asked him (the Imam) about the words of Allah, the Mighty, the Great: or you have
touched the women. He (the Imam) said, 'It means sexual intercourse; but Allah is concealed and
He prefers to cover. Therefore, He did not (clearly) name the act as you do.'" (al-Kafi)

al-'Ayyashi narrates from Zurarah that he said, "I asked Abu Ja'far (a.s.), about tayammum. He
said, 'Verily 'Ammar ibn Yasir came to the Prophet (s.a.w.) and said, "I was in condition of
janabah and I had no water with me." The Prophet (s.a.w.) asked. "What did you do? O
'Ammar!" He said, "I removed my clothes and then I turned round over the earth." (The Prophet)
said, "The donkeys too do the same. Allah has said: and wipe a part of your faces and (part of)
your hands therewith." Then (the Prophet) put his hands together on the earth and wiped them.
Then, he wiped from his forehead until below the eyebrows; then rubbed on hand with the other
on the back of the palm, beginning with the right hand.'" (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

Zurarah narrates from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said, "Allah laid down washing for the face and
the arms, and mash, for the head and feet. When man happened to be overcome by journey,
sickness or other needs, Allah removed the washing and changed it to wiping. Then he recited:
and if you are sick or on a journey, or one among you comes from privy, or you have touched the
women, and you do not find water, betake yourselves to clean earth and wipe a part of your
faces and (part of) your hands therewith." (ibid.)

'Abdu'l-A'la Mawla Al Sam says, "I said to Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), 'I stumbled and my nail was
broken. So I put a bandage on my toe. How should I do wudu'?' The Imam (a.s.) said, The order
for this and similar situations is known from the Book of Allah, the Blessed, the High: and
(Allah) has not laid upon you any hardship in religion, (22:78).' " (ibid.)

The author says: This refers to the verse of the chapter of "The Pilgrimage" which disallows
difficulties. The Imam did not refer the clause of the similar meaning in the verse of wudu' and
went to the last verse of the chapter of "The Pilgrimage". It shows that non-imposition of
difficulty has the same meaning in both places. The traditions quoted above contain many fine
points which may be understood if one keeps in mind the explanations we have given regarding
these verse; that commentary may also be taken as explanation of the traditions.
Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 8-
14
 
‫ه َو‬ ُ ‫اع ِدلُو ْا‬ ْ ‫آن َق ْو ٍم َعلَى أَال َّ تَ ْع ِدلُو ْا‬ ُ ‫ش َن‬ َ ‫ُم‬ ْ ‫ج ِر َم َّنك‬ ْ َ‫ط َوال َ ي‬ ِ ‫س‬ ْ ‫ش َه َداء بِا ْل ِق‬ ُ ‫ه‬ ِ ّ ‫ين لِل‬ َ ‫ين آ َم ُنو ْا كُو ُنو ْا َق َّوا ِم‬ َ ‫َيا أَيُّ َها الَّ ِذ‬
‫حاتِ لَ ُهم‬ َ ِ‫صال‬ َّ ‫ملُو ْا ال‬ ِ ‫ين آ َم ُنو ْا َو َع‬ َ ‫} َو َع َد الل ّ ُه الَّ ِذ‬8{ َ‫ملُون‬ َ ‫ما تَ ْع‬ َ ِ‫ير ب‬ ٌ ِ‫خب‬ َ ‫ب لِل َّت ْق َوى َواتَّ ُقو ْا الل ّ َه إِنَّ الل ّ َه‬ ُ ‫أَ ْق َر‬
‫ين آ َم ُنو ْا‬ َ ‫} يَا أَيُّ َها الَّ ِذ‬10{ ‫يم‬ ِ ‫ح‬ ِ ‫ج‬ َ ‫اب ا ْل‬ ُ ‫ح‬ َ ‫ص‬ ْ َ‫ك أ‬ َ ِ‫ين َك َف ُرو ْا َو َك َّذ ُبو ْا بِآيَاتِ َنا ُأ ْولَـئ‬ َ ‫} َوالَّ ِذ‬9{ ‫م‬ ٌ ‫ظي‬ ِ ‫ج ٌر َع‬ ْ َ‫َّم ْغ ِف َر ٌة َوأ‬
ِ ّ ‫ُم َواتَّ ُقو ْا الل ّ َه َو َعلَى الل‬
‫ه‬ ْ ‫م َعنك‬ ْ ‫ف أ ْي ِديَ ُه‬ َ َّ ‫ك‬ َ ‫م َف‬ ْ ‫ُم أ ْي ِديَ ُه‬َ ْ ‫ا إِلَ ْيك‬.ْ‫سطُو‬ ُ ‫م أن َي ْب‬ َ ٌ ‫م َق ْو‬ َّ ‫ه‬ َ ‫ُم إِ ْذ‬ ْ ‫ه َعلَ ْيك‬ ِ ّ ‫ت الل‬ َ ‫م‬ َ ‫ا ْذك ُُرو ْا نِ ْع‬
‫ل الل ُّه‬ َ ‫ش َر نَ ِقيبًا َو َقا‬ َ ‫ي َع‬ ْ ‫م ا ْث َن‬ ُ ‫ل َوبَ َع ْث َنا ِمن ُه‬ َ ‫س َرائِي‬ ْ ِ‫َاق بَنِي إ‬ َ ‫خ َذ الل ّ ُه ِميث‬ َ
َ ‫} َولَق َْد أ‬11{ َ‫م ْؤ ِم ُنون‬ ُ ‫َّل ا ْل‬ ِ ‫َف ْليَ َت َوك‬
‫س ًنا‬ َ َ ‫ح‬ ‫ًا‬
‫ض‬ ‫ر‬ َ
‫ق‬
ْ َ ‫ه‬ ّ ‫ل‬‫ال‬ ‫م‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ض‬ ‫ر‬ ْ
‫ق‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫و‬
ُ ُ ْ َ َ ْ ُ ُ ُ ْ َّ َ َ ‫م‬ ‫وه‬ ‫م‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ز‬ ‫ع‬ ‫و‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ل‬ ‫س‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ب‬ ‫م‬ ‫نت‬ ‫م‬ ‫آ‬
ِ ُ ُ ِ ُ َ َ َ َّ ُ ُ ْ َ َ َ َّ‫و‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ك‬َ ‫ز‬ ‫ال‬ ‫م‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ت‬ ‫آ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ة‬ َ ‫ال‬ ‫ص‬ ‫ال‬ ‫م‬ ‫ت‬
ُ ُْ ‫م‬ َ
‫ق‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫ن‬ َ
ْ ِ ْ َ َ ‫إِنِ ّي‬
‫ئ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ُم‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ع‬ ‫م‬
‫ل‬ َّ ‫ض‬َ ‫ُم َفق َْد‬ ْ ‫ك ِمنك‬ َ ِ‫من َك َف َر بَ ْع َد َذل‬ َ ‫ار َف‬ ُ ‫حتِ َها األ َ ْن َه‬ ْ َ‫ج ِري ِمن ت‬ ْ َ‫ج َّناتٍ ت‬ َ ‫ُم‬ ْ ‫خلَ َّنك‬ ِ ‫ُم َوألُ ْد‬ ْ ‫س ِي ّئَاتِك‬ َ ‫ُم‬ ْ ‫أَّل ُ َك ِ ّف َرنَّ َعنك‬
‫ه‬ ِ ‫ض ِع‬ ِ ‫م َعن َّم َوا‬ َ ِ‫كل‬ َ ‫ح ِرّفُونَ ا ْل‬ َ ‫سيَ ًة ُي‬ ِ ‫م َقا‬ ْ ‫ج َع ْل َنا ُقلُوبَ ُه‬ َ ‫م َو‬ ْ ‫ه‬ ُ ‫م لَع َّنا‬ ْ ‫ض ِهم ِ ّميثَا َق ُه‬ ِ ‫ما نَ ْق‬ َ ِ‫} َفب‬12{ ‫يل‬ ِ ِ‫السب‬ َّ ‫س َواء‬ َ
‫ح إِنَّ الل ّ َه‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ص‬ ‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ف‬ ‫اع‬ َ
‫ف‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ً ‫ال‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ل‬ َ
‫ق‬ َّ ‫ال‬ ‫إ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ئ‬ ‫آ‬ ‫خ‬ ‫ى‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ل‬ َّ ‫ط‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ز‬ ‫ت‬ َ ‫ال‬ ‫و‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ب‬ ْ
‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫ر‬ ّ ‫ك‬ ‫ذ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬ ‫م‬ ‫ا‬ّ ً ‫ظ‬ ‫ح‬ ْ
‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫س‬
ْ َ ْ َ ْ ُ َْ ُ ْ ُ ُ ْ ِّ ِ ِ ْ ُ ْ ّ ِ ٍ َ ِ َ َ َ ُ ِ َ ُ َ َ َ ِ ِ ُ ِ ُ َّ ّ ِ َ ُ َ‫َون‬
َ
‫ه َفأغْ َر ْي َنا‬ ِ ِ‫ما ُذ ِكّ ُرو ْا ب‬ ً َ ‫سو ْا‬ َ
َّ ‫حظ ّا ِ ّم‬ ُ ‫م َف َن‬ ْ ‫خذْ نَا ِميثَا َق ُه‬ َ ‫صا َرى أ‬ َ َ‫ين َقالُو ْا إِنَّا ن‬ َ ‫ن الَّ ِذ‬ َ ‫} َو ِم‬13{ ‫ين‬ َ ِ‫سن‬ ِ ‫ح‬ ْ ‫م‬ ُ ‫ُيحِبُّ ا ْل‬
}14{ َ‫ص َن ُعون‬ ْ
ْ َ‫ما كا ُنوا ي‬ َ َ ِ‫م الل ُّه ب‬ ُ ‫س ْوف ُي َن ِب ّ ُئ ُه‬ َ َ ‫ة َو‬ ْ َ
ِ ‫م ال َع َدا َو َة َوالبَ ْغضَاء إِلى يَ ْو ِم ال ِقيَا َم‬ ْ ْ ُ ‫بَ ْي َن ُه‬
{8} 0 you who believe! Be upright for Allah, bearers of witness with justice, and let not hatred of
a people incite you not to act equitably; act equitably, that is nearer to piety, and fear Allah;
surely Allah is Aware of what you do. {9} Allah has promised to those who believe and do good
deeds: they shall have forgiveness and a mighty reward. {10} And (as for) those who disbelieve
and reject our signs, these are the companions of the flame. {11} O you who believe! Remember
Allah's favor on you when a people had determined to stretch forth their hands towards you, but
He withheld their hands from you, and fear Allah; and on Allah let the believers rely. {12} And
certainly Allah made a covenant with the Children of Israel, and We raised from among them
twelve chieftains; and Allah said: "Surely I am with you, if you keep up prayer and pay zakat and
believe in My Messengers and assist them and offer to Allah a goodly loan, I will most certainly
cover your evil deeds, and I will most certainly cause you to enter gardens beneath which rivers
flow, but whoever disbelieves from among you after that, he indeed shall lose the right way".
{13} But on account of their breaking their covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard;
they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded
of; and you shall always discover treachery in them excepting a few of them; so pardon them and
turn away; surely Allah loves those who do good (to others). {14} And of those who say: "We
are Christians," We did take their covenant, but they forgot a portion of what they were
admonished with, therefore We excited among them enmity and hatred to the Day of
Resurrection; and Allah will inform them of what they did.
 

Commentary
The connection of the verse with the preceding ones is clear and needs no elaboration. The series
of the verses is addressed to the believers, pointing to some important matters, which affect them
individually and collectively in both worlds.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Be upright for Allah, bearers of witness with justice and let not
hatred of a people incite you not to act equitably. The verse is similar to the verse 135 of the
chapter "Women", O you who believe! Be maintainers of justice bearers of witness for Allah's
sake, though it may be against your own selves or (your) parents or near relatives; if he be rich
or poor, Allah is nearer to them both in compassion; therefore do not follow (your) low desires,
lest you deviate; and if you swerve or turn aside, then surely Allah is aware of what you do.

However, there is a subtle difference between the two verses. The verse of the chapter of
"Women" forbids deviation from justice in bearing witness because of some low desires; the
person loves the man for whom he bears witness because of some relationship or friendship, etc.
and therefore, gives evidence in his favor in order that he might get some undue benefits.
Conversely, this verse of the chapter of "The Table" prohibits deviation from justice while
bearing witness because of hatred and enmity for the person against whom evidence is tendered;
he bears witness against him intending to take some revenge from him and thus tramples on his
rights.

This difference of themes has brought difference of stipulations in the clauses of the two verses.
The verse in the chapter of "Women" says: Be maintainers of justice, bearers of witness for
Allah's sake; while this verse in the chapter of "The Table" turns the restrictions around and says:
"be upright for Allah, bearers of witness with justice."

The main purpose of this verse is to restrain the believers from going against truth in bearing
witness because of some enmity that the witness might be entertaining against the party
concerned. Therefore, the evidence is attached to justice, meaning that one should observe justice
while giving evidence; the evidence should not contain even an iota of injustice, even if the
person concerned is one's enemy. On the other hand, evidence in favor of someone because of
love or relationship (even if it goes against the right) is not counted such a deviation from justice
although in reality it is not free from injustice and deviation. Therefore, the verse in the chapter
of "The Table" enjoins bearing witness with justice and it has been based on the order of being
upright for the sake of Allah; while the order in the chapter of "Women" enjoins giving evidence
for the sake of Allah, that is, without following base desires and it is based on the order of being
upright with justice.

The same is the reason why in the verse of "The Table" the order to bear witness with justice
leads to the order of acting equitably as Allah says: act equitably, that is nearer to piety; it calls
to justice and counts it as a means of acquiring piety. And in the verse of the chapter "Women",
the order has been reversed and the command to bear witness for Allah is followed by the
phrases: do not follow your (low) desires lest you deviate. Thus, Allah prohibits the believers
from following one's low desire and discarding of piety; and counts it as a means of deviating
from justice.

Then, both the verses warn them against deviation from piety, using almost similar wordings.
The verse of the chapter of "Women" says: and if you swerve or turn aside, then surely Allah is
aware of what you do, i.e., if you don't keep firm hold of piety; and the verse of the chapter of
"The Table" says: and fear Allah, surely Allah is Aware of what you do.

The meaning of the wording: "be upright for Allah, bearers of witness with justice ...", may
easily be understood from explanations of previous verses.

QUR'AN: act equitably, that is nearer to piety...: The pronoun "that" refers to justice that is
understood from the order of acting equitably. The meaning is clear.

QUR'AN: Allah has promised to those who believe and do good deeds: they shall have
forgiveness and a mighty reward: The sentence: "they shall have forgiveness and a might
reward", elaborates the divine promise given to those who believe and do good deeds. This verse
presents this divine promise more forcefully than does the verse 29 of the chapter of "Victory":
Allah has promised those among them who believe and do good forgiveness and a great reward.
It is because the verse under discussion clearly and independently describes the promise while
the verse of the chapter of "Victory" mentions it as a part of the sentence. Someone has said that
it is more emphatic because it is news after news; but this reasoning is not correct.

QUR'AN: And (as for) those who disbelieve and reject our signs, these are the companions of
the flame: ar-Raghib has said: "al-Jahmah means intensely searing fire; and from it is derived the
word al-jahim (the Hell)". The threat contained in this verse stands opposite to the promise of the
preceding verse: they shall have forgiveness and a mighty reward.

In this verse, disbelief is qualified with rejection of the Divine message; the aim is to exclude a
disbelief, which is not joined with rejection of the Divine signs and commandments.

When someone knows that the Divine sign is true and does not reject it (yet does not follow it
properly) then his case is in the hands of Allah; if He wishes He would forgive him; otherwise
He might give him punishment. The two verses contain good promise for those believers who do
good deeds and stern threat to those who disbelieve and reject the Divine signs. Between these
two extremes, there are many intermediate stages and stations. Allah has kept their conditions
vague and ambiguous.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Remember Allah's favor on you when a people had determined to
stretch forth their hands towards you...: These wordings may be applied to various incidents and
events which had taken place between the infidels and the Muslims; for example, the battles of
Badr, Uhud and Ahzab, etc. Apparently, it is a general description and refers to the polytheists1
continuous efforts to kill the believers, erase Islam, and annihilate the religion of tawhid. Some
exegetes have said that it refers to the polytheists' conspiracy to kill the Prophet (s.a.w.) or to
plan of some Jews to assassinate him, but the apparent wording does not support this
particularization, as may be seen clearly.

QUR'AN: and fear Allah, and on Allah let the believers rely. This exhortation for piety and
reliance on Allah in fact points to intense warning and total prohibition of neglecting the piety
and discarding reliance on Allah. We say so because this command is immediately followed by
the description of making covenant with the Children of Israel and also with those who said:
"We are Christians". Both groups had broken the Divine covenant that made them the target of
Divine curse, and their hearts were hardened consequently; thus they neglected a portion of their
religions. Consequently, Allah created enmity and hatred among them up to the Day of
Resurrection.

The incident has been referred to, only to make the believers aware that the Jews and the
Christians have been meted out the punishment because they had forgotten the Divine covenant;
they had undertaken that they would surrender themselves to Allah and had reinforced it with the
promise of obeying the God's commands. Accordingly they should have desisted from going
against the Divine rules and should have relied on God in their religious affairs. They should
have taken what Allah had chosen for them and left what He did not like them to do. Its only
way was to obey their Messengers by believing in them and not following anyone other than
Allah and His Messenger. They should not have listened to those arrogant and insolent persons
who called them to submit to their authority, even if they were their religious scholars and
monks. There should be no obedience except to Allah or to him who calls to Allah's obedience.

But they threw the Divine guidance behind their backs. As a result they were removed far from
Divine mercy; they altered the Divine speech from its place and interpreted it in a way that was
against the Divine ideas; as a result, they neglected and forgot the important parts of the religion.

It was a part on which all good and happiness depended. When they abandoned it, every
happiness, felicity, and good departed from their lives, and what was left of religion in their
hands, that too was contaminated and spoiled. Religion is a composite entity of beliefs and rules,
every part of which is intertwined with all other parts; if a part is spoiled all other parts are
adversely affected, especially if the spoiled part was related to the basics. For example, a person
prays but not for the sake of Allah, spends in charities but not to seek the pleasure of Allah or
fights but not for raising the word of truth. Such people cannot get benefit of what has remained
in their hands because it is altered and rotten; and what they had neglected of the religion would
not be of any help to them in the hereafter. Nobody can do without religion especially its
fundamental principles.

It is seen from the above that the context demands that the believers should be warned against
neglecting the piety and discarding the reliance on God. This purpose is served by referring to
that event and inviting them to ponder on it.
Also it appears from the above that reliance on God should cover all legislative and creative
matters or may be the legislations only; in other words, Allah has commanded the believer to
obey Allah and His Messenger in religious commandments and accept whatever the Messenger
has brought and explained to them; they should entrust the religious affairs and Divine
commandments to their Lord; should refrain from thinking that they were independent or that
they could manipulate the Divine shari'ah which the Messenger has brought to them. Also, they
should conform to the system of the cause and effect laid down by God in the universe. But they
should not ascribe to it any independent authority. They should not give to it any shade of
Lordship. They should always remain waiting for what Allah decides or chooses for them by His
own management and will.

QUR'AN: And certainly Allah made a covenant with the Children of Israel and We raised from
among them twelve chieftains...: ar-Raghib has said: an-Naqib (translated here as chieftain)
denotes the one who investigates or explores the condition of his people; it is derived from an-
naqb (breaching or boring a wall or a hide); plural = an-nuqaba'.

Allah narrates to the believers of this ummah what had happened to the Children of Israel. They
were given their religious commandments; a covenant was made with them that they would
remain steadfast in religion. Chieftains were appointed for them and the shari'ah was
promulgated, and thus the proof of Allah was completed against them. And what was their
response to all that? They broke the covenant and in return, Allah cursed them and made their
hearts stone hard. Allah says: "And certainly Allah made a covenant with the Children of Israel."
It is mentioned several times in the chapter of "The Cow", and in other place: "and we raised
among them twelve chieftains"; apparently, they were the heads of the twelve tribes. They were a
sort of rulers over them; their relationship with their tribes was in a way like that of ulu'l-Amr
vis-a-vis people of this ummah; they had the authority in the worldly and religious affairs
although they did not receive any divine revelation nor had they any right to legislate any
shari'ah (because this is reserved for Allah and His Messenger). "And Allah said: 'Surely I am
with you.'" This is a commitment that Allah would protect and look after them. It follows that
God would help them if they obeyed Him and would abandon them if they disobeyed. That is
why this sentence is followed by these two conditions: "if you keep up prayer and pay zakat and
believe in My Messengers and assist them." at-Ta'ziz (to help respectfully). "My Messengers"
refers to those who were to come in future like 'Isa and Muhammad, and all those whom Allah
raised between Musa and Muhammad (peace be on them all). "And offer to Allah a goodly
loan", it refers to non-obligatory spending in the way of Allah, not the obligatory zakat: " 'I will
most certainly cover your evil deeds, and I will most certainly cause you to enter gardens
beneath which rivers flow.'" This is the goodly promise given by God and it is followed by these
words: " 'but whoever disbelieves from among you after that, he indeed shall lose the right way.'"

"But on account of their breaking their covenant"; apparently, it refers to the disbelief mentioned
just above about which Allah has warned that he indeed shall lose the right way.
Fabima naqdihim: The particle "ma" here gives emphasis to their breaking the covenant; also it
creates a vagueness which gives various connotations in different settings; it may show that a
certain thing is too big or too small, etc. The meaning: 'Because of their certain contrary behavior
against the covenant, We cursed them and made their hearts hard.' Curse means keeping isolated
from Divine Mercy. Qasiyah (hard); it was originally used for hard stones; a hard heart is that
which doesn't submit to truth, is not affected by mercy. Allah says: Has not the time yet come for
those who believe that their hearts should be humble for the remembrance of Allah and what has
come down of the truth? And (that) they should not be like those who were given the Book
before, but the time became prolonged to them, so their hearts hardened, and most of them are
transgressors (57:16).

This hard-heartedness led them to altering the words from their places; this alteration could be by
interpreting a Divine speech in a way which Allah was not pleased with, that is, misinterpreting
it and giving it an uncalled for meaning. Also, it could be by deleting some words or adding or
altering it; all these are examples of alteration. In this way they lose the sight of clear realities of
religion. "And they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of; that was the portion
which contained the fundamentals of religion on which the felicity of both worlds depended; that
felicity was replaced by infelicity and hardships. They started believing that God was like His
creatures, that the Prophet Musa (a.s.) was the final Prophet, that the shari'ah of the Torah would
continue forever, that bada' or abrogation of the shari'ah was invalid and similar other beliefs.

"and you shall always discover treachery in them"; it may also be translated as 'you shall always
find a treacherous group among them.' "excepting a few of them; so pardon them and turn away;
surely Allah loves those who do good (to others)." We have explained several times that
exception of a few does not prevent attachment of curse and punishment to the whole group or
nation. (A strange interpretation was seen in an exegesis that "a few" refers to 'Abdullah ibn
Salam and his companions. The fact is that 'Abdullah ibn Salam had entered into Islam long
before revelation of the chapter "The Table", while the exception in this verse points to some
Jews who had not entered into Islam yet. (Author's note))

QUR'AN: And of those who say, "We are Christians," We did take their covenant, but they
forgot a portion of what they were admonished with, therefore, We excited among them enmity
and hatred to the Day of Resurrection, and Allah will inform them of what they did: ar-Raghib
has said: "Ghara" means "became attached"; it is derived from al-ghara' (glue).

Jesus Christ, son of Mary was a Prophet of Mercy; he called people to peace and love and
exhorted them to look towards the hereafter keeping aloof from worldly adornments and
delights. He strictly forbade them to fight among themselves for the gains of this life. (Refer for
it to statements of Christ (a.s.) on various occasions as attributed to him in the four Gospels.
(Author's note))
When they forgot a portion of what they were admonished with, Allah made their hearts inclined
to war and fighting in place of love and peace and exchanged the fraternal feelings which they
were taught with enmity and hatred, as He says: "but they forgot a portion of what they were
admonished with, therefore, We excited among them enmity and hatred to the Day of
Resurrection."

This enmity and hatred became ingrained in their psyche, which has fixed its tentacles among
these Christian nations. This mindset of theirs is like the Fire of the hereafter from which they
cannot escape no matter how hard they strived. Whenever they will desire to go forth from it,
from grief, they shall be turned back into it and taste the chastisement of burning (22:22). This
had begun soon after 'Isa, son of Maryam (a.s.) was raised up. His disciples and missionaries
who roamed from Jerusalem to Rome were entangled in one controversy after another among
themselves; and this has kept growing and spreading its tentacles resulting in wars, fighting,
raids, banishments and anathemas, until it reached to the great world wars which threatened the
earth with destruction and humanity with annihilation. All this shows how a Divine bounty turns
into Divine revenge and how the endeavors are wasted; and soon Allah will show them the result
of what they were doing.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 15-

19
 
‫جاءكُم‬ َ ‫ير َق ْد‬ ٍ ِ‫ن ا ْلكِ َتابِ َويَ ْع ُفو َعن َكث‬ َ ‫خ ُفونَ ِم‬ ْ ‫م ُت‬ ْ ‫ما كُن ُت‬ َّ ‫ِم‬./ِّ ً‫ُم َكثِيرا‬ ْ ‫ن لَك‬ ُ ./‫سو ُل َنا ُيبَ ِِّي‬ ُ ‫ُم َر‬ ْ ‫جاءك‬ َ ‫ل ا ْلكِ َتابِ َق ْد‬ َ ‫ه‬ ْ َ‫يَا أ‬
‫ماتِ إِلَى‬ َ ‫ن الظ ُّ ُل‬ ِ ‫ِم‬./ِّ ‫ج ُهم‬ ُ ‫خ ِر‬ ْ ‫السال َ ِم َو ُي‬ َّ ‫ل‬
َ ‫س ُب‬ ُ ‫ض َوانَ ُه‬ ْ ‫ع ِر‬ َ َ‫ن اتَّب‬ ِ ‫ه الل ّ ُه َم‬ ِ ِ‫} يَ ْه ِدي ب‬15{ ‫ين‬ ٌ ِ‫اب ُّمب‬ ٌ ‫ور َوكِ َت‬ ٌ ‫ه ُن‬ ِ ّ ‫ن الل‬ َ ‫ِم‬./ِّ
‫ُل‬ ‫ق‬ ‫م‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ر‬
ْ َ ََْ ُ ْ ُ ِ َ َ ُ َ ‫م‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ح‬ ‫ي‬‫س‬ ‫م‬ ‫ل‬ْ ‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ه‬ ّ ‫ل‬‫ال‬ َّ‫ن‬ ِ ‫إ‬ ْ
‫ا‬ ‫ُو‬ ‫ل‬ ‫آ‬ َ
‫ق‬ ‫ين‬ ‫ذ‬
َ ِ َ َ ْ َّ ‫ل‬‫ا‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ك‬ َ ‫َد‬ ‫ق‬ َّ ‫ل‬ } 16 { ‫يم‬
ٍ ِ َ ْ ‫ق‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ُّس‬ ‫م‬ ‫ط‬ ‫ا‬
ٍ َ ِ ‫ر‬ ‫ص‬ ‫ى‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫إ‬ ‫م‬ ‫يه‬ ‫د‬
ِ ْ ِ ِ ْ ََ ِ ِ ِِ ِ ‫ه‬ ‫ي‬ ‫و‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ذ‬ْ ‫إ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ُّور‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ال‬
‫ك‬ ُ ُ ْ
‫ل‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬
ِ ّ ‫ل‬ِ ‫ل‬‫و‬َ ‫ًا‬‫ع‬ ‫ي‬ ‫م‬
ِ ‫ج‬
َ ‫ض‬
ِ ْ ‫ر‬ َ ‫أل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ي‬ ِ ‫ف‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬َ ‫و‬
َ ‫ه‬ُ ‫م‬َّ ُ
‫أ‬ ‫و‬ َ ‫م‬
َ َ ‫ي‬ ‫ر‬
ْ ‫م‬
َ ‫ن‬
َ ‫ب‬ْ ‫ا‬ ‫ح‬
َ ‫ي‬ ‫س‬
ِ ‫م‬
َ ْ
‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ك‬
َ ‫ل‬
ِ ‫ه‬
ْ ‫ي‬
ُ ‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫د‬
َ ‫ا‬ ‫ر‬ َ
َ ِ ‫أ‬ ْ‫ن‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ا‬ ً
‫ئ‬ ‫ي‬
ْ ‫ش‬َ ِ ّ ‫ن الل‬
‫ه‬ َ ‫ك ِم‬ ُ ِ‫مل‬ ْ َ‫من ي‬ َ ‫َف‬
‫صا َرى‬ َ ‫ت اليَ ُهو ُد َوال َّن‬ ْ َ
ِ ‫} َوقال‬17{ ‫ير‬َ ٌ ‫ي ٍء ق ِد‬ َ ْ ‫ش‬ َ ‫ِل‬ ./ِّ ‫شاء َوالل ّ ُه َعلى ُك‬ َ َ َ‫ُق َما ي‬ ُ ‫خل‬ ْ َ ‫ما ي‬ َ ‫ما َواتِ َواأل ْرضِ َو َما بَ ْي َن ُه‬ َ َ ‫الس‬ َّ
‫ب َمن‬ ُ َ َُ‫ِذ‬
.
/ ِّ ‫ع‬ ‫ي‬‫و‬ ‫اء‬ ‫ش‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ِ ‫ل‬ ‫ر‬
َ َ َ ُ َ َ َ ْ َّ / ٌ َ َ ُ ْ َ ‫ف‬
ِ ‫غ‬
ْ ‫ي‬ ‫ق‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫خ‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ‫ِم‬
.
ِّ ‫ر‬ ‫ش‬ ‫ب‬ ‫م‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ُم‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ب‬ ‫و‬ ‫ن‬
ِ ُُ ِ ‫ذ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ُم‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ِذ‬
.
/ ِّ
ُ َ ُ َ ‫ع‬ ‫ي‬ ‫م‬ ‫ل‬
ِ َ
‫ف‬ ‫ُل‬ ‫ق‬
ْ ُ ُ َّ َ ‫ه‬ ‫ؤ‬ ‫ا‬‫ب‬ ‫ح‬
ِ َ ‫أ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ه‬ ِ ّ ‫ل‬ ‫ال‬ ‫اء‬ ‫ن‬ َ
َ ْ ُ ْ َ‫ن‬
‫ب‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ح‬
‫ن‬ُ ./‫سو ُل َنا ُيبَ ِِّي‬ ُ ‫ُم َر‬ ْ ‫جاءك‬ َ ‫ل ا ْلكِ َتابِ َق ْد‬ َ ‫ه‬ َ
ْ ‫} يَا أ‬18{ ‫ير‬ َ ‫ه ا ْل‬ ِ ‫ما َوإِلَ ْي‬ َ ُ ‫ه ُم ْل‬ ِ ّ ‫شاء َولِل‬
ُ ‫ص‬ ِ ‫م‬ َ ‫ض َو َما بَ ْي َن ُه‬ ِ ‫ما َواتِ َواأل ْر‬ َ ‫الس‬َّ ‫ك‬ َ َ‫ي‬
./ِّ ‫ير َوالل ّ ُه َعلى ُك‬ َ َ ْ َ َ َ ْ ‫لَك‬
‫ِل‬ ٌ ‫ير َونَ ِذ‬ ٌ ‫ش‬ ِ َ‫جاءكُم ب‬ َ ‫ير فق َْد‬ ٍ ‫ير َوال َ نَ ِذ‬ ٍ ‫ش‬ ِ َ‫جاءنَا ِمن ب‬ َ ‫ل أن تَ ُقولُوا َما‬ ِ ‫س‬ ُ ‫ن ال ُّر‬ َ ‫ِم‬./ِّ ‫ُم َعلى ف ْت َر ٍة‬
}19{ ‫ير‬ ٌ ‫ي ٍء َق ِد‬ ْ ‫ش‬ َ
{15} O People of the Book! Indeed has come to you Our Messenger making clear to you much
of what you concealed of the Book and passing over much; indeed there has come to you a light
and a clear Book from Allah; {16} with it Allah guides him who follows His pleasure into the
ways of peace and brings them out of utter darkness into light by His permission and guides
them to a straight path. {17} Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely, Allah - He is the
Messiah, son of Mary." Say: "Who then could control anything as against Allah if He wished to
destroy the Messiah son of Mary and his mother and all those on the earth together?" And Allah's
is the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is between them; He creates what He
pleases and Allah has power over all things. {18} And the Jews and the Christians say: "We are
the sons of Allah and his beloved ones." Say: "Why does He then chastise you for your faults?
Nay, you are men from among those whom He has created; He forgives whom He pleases and
chastises whom He pleases;" and Allah's is the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is
between them, and to Him is the eventual return. {19} O People of the Book! Indeed Our
Messenger has come to you explaining to you after a cessation of the Messengers, lest you say:
"There came not to us a giver of good news or a warner," so indeed there has come to you a giver
of good news and a warner; and Allah has power over all things.
 

Commentary
It was described above that Allah had made a covenant with the People of the Book that they
would help respectfully His Messengers and would preserve the Book that was revealed to them
but they broke the covenant, which they had made with their Creator. After this preamble, Allah
invites them to believe in His Messenger whom He has now sent and the Book, which has been
revealed to him. For this purpose, Allah has introduced the Messenger and the Book to them and
has established proof of truth of his messengership and the Book and finally, He has completed
that proof for them.

As for the introduction, it is contained in these sentences: O People the Book! Indeed has come
to you Our Messenger making clear to you much of what you concealed of the Book and passing
over much; indeed there has come to you a light and a clear Book from Allah. And then, O
People of the Book! Indeed Our Messenger has come to you explaining to you after a cessation
of the Messengers...

As for establishment of the proof, we see it in the Divine words: making clear to you much of
what you concealed of the Book and passing over much. There could be no better proof of the
truth of the Prophet (s.a.w.) who was an unlettered Arab and was revealing to them what they
were hiding that could be known only to their own scholars with specialized knowledge.
Likewise, the sentence: with it Allah guides him who follows His pleasure into the ways of
peace... gives a convincing proof; the true ideas are the best proof for the truth of Messengeship
and veracity of the Book.

As for completing the proof, it is asserted in the last sentence: lest you say: "There came not to
us a giver of good news or a warner," so indeed there has come to you a giver of good news and
a warner, and Allah has power over all things.

Also, Allah has refuted in the passing the belief of a group of them that: "Surely, Allah - He is
the Messiah, son of Mary", and the saying of the Jews and the Christians both: "We are sons of
Allah and his beloved ones."

QUR'AN: O People of the Book! Indeed has come to you Our Messenger making clear to you
much of what you concealed of the Book and passing over much: We may quote the following
verses to sec how (he Prophet made clear to them what they were hiding: Those who follow the
Messenger. the Prophet, the ummi. whom they find written down with them in the Tawrat and
the Injil... (7:157). Those whom we have given the Book recognize him as they recognize their
sons;... (2:146). Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those with him are severe against the
unbelievers, compassionate among themselves... that is their description in the Tawrat and their
description in the Injil; like as seed produce that puts forth its sprout... (48:29). Also, as he
(s.a.w.) disclosed the order of stoning which they had hidden and wanted to use the Prophet to
get it changed as the verse 41 of this chapter will show: O Messenger! Let not those grieve you
who strive together in hastening to unbelief... We find even today the law of stoning clearly
mentioned in Deuteronomy, 22:23-24.

As for the Messenger's passing over much of their misbehavior, suffice it to say that he left
undisclosed many things, which they were hiding of their Book. It may be ascertained from the
contradictions and errors still found in the Tawrat and the Injil. The Tawrat, for example,
contains many things concerning Tawhid (Divine Unity) and Prophethood which cannot be
ascribed to Allah: That He has got a body, He enters into a place and things like that; also
unacceptable accusations against the Prophet that they indulged in kufr, sins and other
misdemeanors. Also, the Tawrat is totally silent about the resurrection, while no religion can
stand on its feet without this important belief. As for the Gospels, they, and especially the Gospel
according to St. John are full of idolatrous ideas.

QUR'AN: indeed there has come to you a light and a clear Book from Allah: The construction
of the sentence manifestly shows that the coming one depends on Allah as a speech depends on
the speaker and an explanation depends on the explainer. Accordingly, the light would refer to
the Qur'an; and in that case the conjunction: "and a clear Book", would be an explicative
apposition; thus, the light and the clear Book both would indicate the Qur'an. Allah has called the
Qur'an a light in several places; for example: ...and follow the light which has been sent down
with him... (7:157). Therefore believe In Allah and His Messenger and the Light which We have
revealed... (64:8). ...and we have sent to you clear light (4:174).

Alternatively, the light may refer to the Prophet (s.a.w.). This explanation gets support from the
beginning of the verse; also, Allah has called the Prophet, "Light", in the verse 46 of the chapter
33: ...and as a light-giving torch.

QUR'AN: with it Allah guides him who follows His pleasure into the ways of peace: "with it" -
the preposition "with" is attached to the pronoun of the instrument that refers to the Book or to
the Light. It makes no difference whether the light refers to the Prophet or to the Qur'an, because
the end result is the same. The Prophet (s.a.w.) is one of the apparent causes of the guidance and
the same is the position of the Qur'an; and the reality of guidance comes from Allah as He has
said: Surely you cannot guide whom you love, but Allah guides whom He pleases... (28:56). And
thus did We reveal to you a spirit by Our command. You did not know what the Book was, nor
(what) the faith (was), but We made it a light, guiding thereby whom We please of Our servants;
and most surely you guide to the right path. The path of Allah, Whose is whatsoever is in the
heavens and whatsoever is in the earth; now surely to Allah do all affairs eventually come
(42:52-53). As you see, these verses ascribe the guidance to the Qur'an and the Prophet (s.a.w.)
and simultaneously, they ascribe it to Allah; Allah is the Guide in reality while others are
apparent causes who have been brought in this world to revive the guidance.

The guidance of Allah benefits him who follows His pleasure. In other words, the Divine
guidance will affect only those who would follow His pleasure. Guidance in this verse denotes
conveyance to the destination; Allah takes such people to a way or ways of peace or to many
such ways, one after another.

Peace is unrestricted; as such, it denotes safety and freedom from all misery and distress that
spoil the happiness of life in this world or the hereafter. The Qur'an has described Islam, faith
and piety as success, achievement and security and the peace mentioned here fits perfectly on
that. We have described in the first volume of our book while explaining the verse: Guide us to
the straight path (1:5), that depending on the conditions of the walkers, Allah has created many
lanes in one highway; all walk on the same route related to Allah which He has named in His
Book, 'the straight path': And (as for) those who strive hard for Us, We will most certainly guide
them unto Our ways; and Allah is most surely with the doers of good (29: 69). And (know) that
this is My path, the straight one, therefore follow it, and follow not (other) ways, for they will
lead you away from His way... (6:153). Allah has thus shown that He has laid down many lanes
but all lead the walkers to the same destination without differentiating between walkers of one
lane from those of the others. It is unlike the ungodly ways where each way leads to a different
destination.

The verse thus means - and Allah knows better - that Allah guides, and through His Book or
through His Prophet, He leads those who follow His pleasure to the ways that protect the walkers
from infelicity of the life of this world and the next, and keeps them away from all things which
contaminate the happiness of life.

The guidance to peace and happiness revolves around following the Divine pleasure; and Allah
has said: ...and He does not like kufr in His servants;... (39:1).... yet surely Allah is not pleased
with the transgressing people (9:96). Ultimately, it depends on keeping aloof from the way of
injustice and avoiding any contact with unjust people. Allah has excluded them from His
guidance and made them despaired of reaching this Divine honor, as He has said: ...and Allah
does not guide the unjust people (62:5). The verse: "with it Allah guides him who follows His
pleasure into the ways of peace", runs in a way parallel to the verse 6:82 which says: Those who
believe and do not mix up their faith with injustice, those are they who have the security and they
are those who go aright.

QUR'AN: and brings them out of utter darkness into light by His permission and guides them to
a straight path: az-Zulumat is plural of az-zulmah (darkness). Darkness has been brought in
plural while light is singular. It gives an indication that unlike the path of untruth there is no
difference or disparity in the path of truth even if it contains various lanes suitable to various
spiritual levels.

If bringing out of utter darkness into light is ascribed to someone other than Allah, like the
Prophet or the Book, then the Divine permission means His approval and pleasure; as Allah says:
(This is) a Book which We have revealed to you that you may bring forth men, by their Lord's
permission from utter darkness into light... (14:1). This verse says that the Prophet was to bring
them out from darkness to light, and this action has been qualified with permission of their Lord.
The idea is to show that the Prophet was not an independent cause of guidance, because its actual
cause is Allah. Soon after that a verse says: And certainly We sent Musa with Our signs saying:
"Bring forth your people from utter darkness into light ..." (14:5). This verse, has not qualified
the guidance with Divine permission because the imperative mood has taken care of that.

When this action is attributed to Allah then 'bringing them out with Mis permission' means that
Allah takes them out of darkness with His knowledge; al-idhn (permission) has been used for
information. They say: adhina bihi (learnt of him), that is, was informed about him. The
following verses give the same meaning: And an announcement (information) from Allah and
His Messenger... (9:3). But if they turn back, say: "I have given you warning (information) all
alike..." (21:109). And proclaim (inform) among men the hajj... (22:27); there are several other
verses like these.

"and guides them to a straight path": The verb, "guides them", has been repeated because another
verb: "and brings them out", has come between "with it Allah guides Him", in this sentence.
Also, we have explained in the chapter of "The Opening" that the straight path is a highway,
which contains many lanes. Therefore, guidance to that path also should be a comprehensive one
which would include all kinds of guidance.

"a straight path" is a common noun, yet it refers to the same straight path which is unique and
which Allah always ascribes to Himself alone (the only exception is in the chapter of "The
Opening" where it is not ascribed to Allah but the context makes it clear). The common noun
serves to enhance its status and magnify its honor.

QUR'AN: Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely, Allah - He is the Messiah, son of Mary":
It refers to one of the three sects mentioned in the chapter of "The House of 'Imran" who
believed that Allah had become one with Messiah and Messiah is god and man both at the same
time. This sentence may fit to the belief of sonship of Messiah as well as the belief of the three
persons in one god. Be it as it may, the sentence points to the belief that Messiah had become
one with God.

QUR'AN: Say: "Who then could control anything as against Allah if He wished to destroy the
Messiah son of Mary and his mother and all those on the earth together?"...: This is a proof to
refute their belief because that belief contains contradiction in term. They say that Messiah is
God and at the same time he is man as they have introduced him as the son of Mary; now being a
man he is subject to all those changes which afflict any other man on this earth; all human beings
like all that is in the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, are owned and controlled
by Allah; they are subjugated under His Kingdom and authority; He can dispose them as He
wishes and decides for or against them as He thinks fit; He has the right and authority to destroy
Messiah as He has the right and authority to destroy his mother and all those who are on the
earth together without any distinction for Messiah over others. But if he is God how can he be
destroyed? To say that Messiah is man rebuts their claim that he is God.

The words: "who then could control anything as against Allah", are an allusion to show that there
is no one at all who could stop Allah from doing anything He wished; otherwise, it would mean
that Allah had no control on that thing. No cause in the universe has an independent control on
its effect; nothing can stop or overwhelm the Divine control on anything; nobody owns anything
except Allah alone who has no partner or colleague; when He makes us owner of a certain thing,
His ownership and His authority on it continues as before.

Now, come the words: " 'if He wished to destroy the Messiah son of Mary and his mother and all
those on the earth together?'" The Messiah is qualified by the phrase "son of Mary" to show that
he was a total man, and like other human beings was under the control of the Lord. For this very
reason, "his mother" has been added in conjunction because both had the same root and origin.
Then, the clause: "and those on the earth together" was added because all are governed by the
same law without any difference.

This qualification and conjunction clearly present the proof of 'Isa's transience. The Messiah is
like any other human being, and like all those on the earth he is subject to all the changes and
variations which affect others, because all are similarly transient; if others can be destroyed by
Divine order then 'Isa too would be affected likewise. There is nothing to save him from it; if he
were God he could not be destroyed.

The clause: "And Allah's is the Kingdom of the Heavens and the earth and what is between
them", gives the reason of the preceding statement. The Qur'an generally refers to the creation
with the words: "the Heavens and the earth" but here the phrase: "and what is between them" has
been added. The aim is to make the proof clearer; now no one can say that Allah has not
mentioned what is between the heavens and the earth while the speech deals with 'Isa who was
between the heavens and earth. In this sentence, the predicate "and Allah's is" has been written
before the subject, in this way it confines the Ownership to Allah, and the proof becomes more
emphatic. The meaning will be: How can anyone stop Allah if He wished to destroy the Messiah
and others when the Kingdom and unrestricted authority on the heavens, earth and what is
between them is reserved for Allah and no one shares it with Him. Consequently, nobody can
stop the implementation of Allah's order.

"He creates what He pleases; and Allah has power over all things": These sentences in their turn
explain the reason of the preceding sentence, that is: "and Allah's is the Kingdom of the heavens
and the earth and what is between them." The Kingdom - which is a sort of control and
ownership - contains in its essential ingredients comprehensive power and effectual will; and
such a Kingdom in the heavens, earth and what is between them is reserved for Allah. He has
power over all things and He creates what He pleases. His creating what He pleases and having
power on all things is the proof of His Kingdom; and His Kingdom proves that if He wished to
destroy all, there is nobody to stop its implementation. Finally, it proves that no one is His
partner in His Divinity.

To prove that His will is implemented and His power is comprehensive, it is enough to say that
He is Allah. Perhaps, for this reason the Divine name, Allah, has been repeated several times. If
He is Allah then nobody shares Godship with Him.

QUR'AN: And the Jews and the Christians say: "We are the sons of Allah and His beloved
ones": Certainly, they did not claim real sonship as the Christians claim for the Messiah (a.s.).
Neither the Jews nor the Christian put forward this claim in the literal sense. They called
themselves sons of God metaphorically, as a mark of distinction. In their scriptures, a lot of
people have been called sons of God, for example, Adam, Jacob, David, Ephraim, Jesus, and
good-doing believers.

What they meant with this claim was that their relationship with Allah was like that of sons with
their father. They thought themselves like the sons of a King who had special status in
comparison to the subjects. They were nearer to God and God was not supposed to treat them as
His other subjects. In a way, they were exempted from the laws and regulations which were
revealed for the general public, because they had very close connection with the King and as
such, He would not punish them like His other subjects, nor will He keep them standing like
common people on the Day of Resurrection. He would not humiliate them like others. All of this
was the result of their relationship with God that was a relation of love and honor.

This sonship created a special relationship with God, which brought them very near to Him. The
phrase: "His beloved ones" coming after the conjunction is an explicative apposition; it serves no
real purpose. This claim of special relation and belovedness was meant to establish its
inseparable attribute, that is, they can never be chastised and punished. They are assured of
Divine favor and honor because if Allah were to punish them, it will go against the distinction
and honor that He has reserved for them. The proof of the above interpretation is seen in the
rebuttal of their claim where Allah says: He forgives whom He pleases and chastises whom He
pleases. There was no reason to give this reply if they had not meant by their claim: "We are the
sons of Allah and His beloved ones", that they cannot be punished at all even if they did not
accept the call of truth. Also, there would be no meaning to the statement: Nay you are men from
among those whom He has created. In short, when they said: '"We are the sons of Allah and His
beloved ones'", they wanted to say that they were the chosen people of God and His beloved
ones and Allah was not going to give them punishment even if they did what they did or left
what they left, because full security against every unpleasant result or situation was a
concomitant of special relationship and love.

QUR'AN: Say: "Why does He then chastise you for your faults?": Allah tells His Prophet to
refute their claim by bringing two proofs against them:

(1) By contradicting their claim, pointing to the chastisements that were inflicted on them; and

(2) Bringing a proof, which would oppose their claim. The sentence under discussion contains
the first proof: "Say: 'Why does He chastise you for your faults?"' If you are right in your claim
that you are the sons of Allah and His beloved ones, that you are safe from Divine punishment
and in no way you can be chastised, then you should have been safe from every punishment of
this world and the next. If so, then why are you constantly being punished for your sins and
faults?

As for the Jews, they always committed major sins; they killed their prophets, they murdered
their good people, they broke the Divine covenants which were taken from them, they altered the
words from their places, they concealed the Divine communications and rejected them, they
committed every type of transgression and contravention. Consequently, they always tasted the
bitter results of their misdeeds; some were transformed into animals, others were thrown into
disgrace and infelicity, unjust rulers were hoisted over them who killed them, disgraced them,
and destroyed their towns and cities. Theirs is but a moribund life; they are neither alive nor
dead.

As for the Christians, the sins and crimes that have taken root in their societies and nations are
not less than those of the Jews; nor are the various types of chastisement meted out to them
different from those of the Jews. Their condition was the same before coming of the Prophet
(s.a.w.), remained the same in his days and continues unchanged after him until now. History has
recorded all this, even more than that; and the Qur'an also describes it to a certain extent, as may
be seen in the chapters of "The Cow", "The House of 'Imran", "Women", "The Table" and "The
Battlements", etc.

They cannot say that these misfortunes, disasters and calamities that afflict them from time to
time are in fact manifestations of Divine love towards them, which they do not emanate from
Divine wrath and are not meant as punishment or chastisement. After all, similar misfortunes had
come upon good servants of Allah, even His Prophets and Messengers like Abraham, Ishmael,
Jacob, Joseph, Zacharia and John the Baptist and others like them; and you too, O Muslims!
Have suffered such reversals of fortune as in the battle of Uhud and Mutah, etc. How can you say
that when these catastrophes come to us they are Divine punishment but when you are afflicted
you count it as Divine favor?

COMMENT: There is no doubt that these physical troubles, worldly disasters and misfortunes
afflict the believers and disbelievers alike, and they catch the good-doers and evil-doers in
similar way. It is the Divine custom that covers all the servants of Allah since time immemorial.
However, it is called with different names and brings about different effects depending on the
goodness or wickedness of the men affected. In other words, we have to see what is the status of
the servant vis-a-vis his Master.

There is no doubt that when the good traits are entrenched in a servant's psyche and the human
excellence has fully covered his being (like the Prophets and their true followers), then the
afflictions and worldly troubles which come to him, serve only to unveil his hidden virtues and
merits which benefit not only him but even others. This type of afflictions, although they are
disliked by human nature, are parts of spiritual training which Allah puts His good servants
through; you may say that through these misfortunes Allah opens the way to raise their status and
rank.

Then comes one whose felicity or infelicity has not taken root and after affliction with calamities
and catastrophes, he did not find the way to felicity and happiness, then these trials and
tribulations help in exposing his status of belief or disbelief, merit or demerit. The only name that
can be given to such misfortunes is that they are tests and trials coming from Allah, which open
the way for the man to the paradise or the hell.

Lastly come those whose life is a permanent tale of base desires; they are depraved and corrupt
and are intent on making others depraved and corrupt; they are submerged in the currents of
desire and anger; if they get a chance, they would choose depravity over virtue and arrogance
before their Creator instead of submitting to Him; as the Qur'an narrates the end results of the
unjust nations like the people of Noah, 'Ad, Thamud, Pharaoh, the inhabitants of Midian and the
people of Lot. Their bad end was the result of their arrogance against Allah. The calamities that
were poured on them and which annihilated their whole nations have to be counted as Divine
punishment, chastisement, and the evil consequences of their deeds. They cannot be explained in
any other way.

Allah has combined these three groups in His noble speech: ...and We bring these days to men by
turns, and that Allah may know those who believe and take witnesses from among you; and
Allah loves not the unjust. And that Allah may purge those who believe and eradicate the
unbelievers (3:140-1).

The history of the Jews since the time Musa was raised amongst them until Allah raised
Muhammad (s.a.w.), (more than 2000 years); and likewise, the history of the Christians since the
day the Messiah was raised to heaven till the advent of Islam (nearly six centuries, a.s they say)
are full of various types of sins they did and crimes they committed. There was hardly an evil
they did not indulge in, they persisted in it and remained stubborn without any shame. In this
backdrop, the only name that can be given to the calamities that afflicted them is chastisement,
punishment, and retribution.

Of course, the Muslims too have suffered similar afflictions; those misfortunes (in their natural
disposition) were such episodes, which the Divine management had brought on the Muslims.
Such tins been the course of Allah that has indeed run before: ...and you shall not find a change
in Allah's course (48:23). We have to look at the position of the affected Muslims to decide
about those misfortunes; if they were steadfast on the path of truth then the misfortune was a trial
and test given to them by Allah, and if they had deviated from the straight path, then certainly it
was punishment and chastisement. No one has any badge of honor against Allah, nor can anyone
arbitrarily claim any right on Allah. The Qur'an has never said that the Muslims had any special
honor before Allah nor has it called them sons of Allah and His beloved ones. In fact, Qur'an
doesn't care about the names and the titles, which people have taken for themselves.

Allah has addressed them in these words: Do you think that you will enter the Garden while
Allah has not yet known those who strive hard from among you, and (He has not) known the
patient... And Muhammad is no more than a Messenger, the messengers have already passed
away before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels? And whoever
turns back upon his heels, he will by no means do harm to Allah in the least; and Allah will
reward the grateful (3:142-4). (This) shall not be in accordance with your vain desires nor in
accordance with the vain desires of the People of the Book; whoever does evil, he shall be
requited with it, and besides Allah he will find for himself neither a guardian nor a helper
(4:123).

The phrase: " 'Why does He then chastise you for your faults?'", may be taken to refer to the
chastisement of the next world. In that case, it would be translated as a future tense and not as a
present imperfect tense. The People of the Book accept that they could be punished a little for
their faults. The Qur'an has quoted the Jews' claim that: "Fire shall not touch us but for a few
days" (2:80); and although the Christians say that Messiah sacrificed himself to atone his
followers' sins, but this claim in itself admits that they commit sins and that the resulting
punishment was taken by Messiah upon himself in the form of crucifixion; in addition to that, the
Gospels describe some sins like fornication, etc, and the Church in its turn was admitting it
practically by issuing certificates of atonement. However, the earlier interpretation is more
appropriate.

QUR'AN: Nay, you are men from among those whom He has created; He forgives whom He
pleases and chastises whom He pleases;" and Allah's is the Kingdom of the heavens and the
earth and what is between them, and to Him is the eventual return: It is the second argument
against their claim. It tells them that if we look into your reality it will show the falsity of your
claim that you are the sons of Allah and His beloved ones; you are merely mortal human beings
from among the creatures of Allah; you have no superiority in this matter over other creatures of
God; whoever is in the heavens and earth and what is between them, his only distinction is that
he is one of the creatures placed in the heavens and earth and between them. He is a creature of
God, and God is the King who rules over him and about him as well as over others and about
others as He wishes and anyhow He wishes; and that creature like other things is to return to his
Lord who is the King and ruler over him and the others. Accordingly, it is on Allah's discretion
to forgive whom He pleases or give punishment to whom He pleases; any distinction or nobility
or other such things cannot stop Allah from forgiving him or punishing him as He wishes.
Nothing can block Allah's way and no shield can protect anyone from Allah's will.

The clause: '"Nay, you are men from among those whom He has created'", is one premise of the
argument; the second is: "and Allah's is the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is
between them"; and the end phrase: "and to Him is the eventual return", is the third premise. The
clause: "He forgives whom He pleases and chastises whom He pleases", gives the result of the
argument that refutes their claim that there was no way they could be punished.

QUR'AN: O People of the Book! Indeed Our Messenger has come to you explaining to you after
a cessation of the Messengers...:
ar-Raghib has said: "al-Futuris tranquility after heat, softness after hardness and weakness after
strength. Allah has said: O People of the Book! Indeed Our Messenger has come to you
explaining to you after a cessation of the Messengers, i.e. tranquility and quiet during which no
messenger of Allah came."

This verse is the second speech addressed to the People of the Book; and it completes the
preceding speech. The first verse has explained to them that Allah has sent to them a Messenger
who in supported by the manifest Book and he guides by Allah's permission to every good and
happiness. Now, this verse explains that this Divine explanation is meant for completing the
proof over them, lost they say: "there came not to us a giver of good news or a warner."

This description makes it clear that the clause related to the verb: "explaining to you"; in this
verse is the same, which is mentioned, in the preceding verse. Thus, the full sentence will be:
'explaining to you much of what you concealed of the Book.' You should understand that this
religion to which you are invited is exactly the same which you believed in; it confirms what is
with you; if there is any difference it is because it makes clear those religious realities which the
Divine Books had explained and you had kept them hidden. It means that the speech: "O People
of the Book! Indeed Our Messenger has come to you explaining to you", in a way repeats exactly
the previous speech and the purpose is to add some more details which were not given before,
and which are mentioned in the clause: "lest you say: There came not to us a giver of good news
or a warner' ". Such repetition is allowed because there is a long gap between the two sentences
and it is not unusual in literature.

There is another possibility that it isa completely new speech, and the related clauses of the verb:
making clear to you are deleted. This deletion may allude to comprehensiveness i.e. He makes
clear to you all those things which require clarification. Or it may show eminence and
magnificence of the matter, i.e. makes clear to you a very important and great matter which you
needed to know. The clause: "after a cessation of the Messengers" alludes to this need. The
meaning then will be: makes clear to you all those things you needed to know because a long
period has gone by without there being any messenger who could have explained to you. The
words: "lest you say: There came not to us a giver of good news or a warner'", is connected with
the verb: indeed there has come to you, showing the reason of his coming.

The sentence: "and Allah has power over all things", aims at replying to an unspoken objection.
The Jews thought that no shari'ah was to come after the Torah because abrogation and al-bada'
were not possible. Allah refutes their assumption by saying that such thinking goes against the
comprehensiveness and generality of Divine Power. We have described in detail about
abrogation while writing on the verse 2:106 in the first volume of our book: Whatever signs We
abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it.

The Way of Thinking to which the Qur'an Guides

No doubt, man's is a life of reflection that requires perception and discernment; we call it faculty
of thought. So the life is built on thought. It follows that the more correct and comprehensive the
thought is, the more appropriate and sound the life will be. Whatever system a man follows and
whichever path he treads upon, his good life is linked to, and bound with, proper thought; as
much share it takes from that thought, that much uprightness it enjoys.

Allah has repeatedly described it in His Great Book in different ways and various styles: Is he
who was dead then We raised him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the
people, like him whose likeness is that of one in utter darkness whence he cannot come forth?
(6:122). Say: "Are those who know and those who do not know alike?" (39:9). Allah will exalt
those of you who believe, and those who are given knowledge, in high degrees
(58:11)....therefore give good news to My servants, those who listen to the word, then follow the
best of it, those are they whom Allah has guided and those it is who are the men of
understanding (39:17-18). There are many such verses, which there is no need to quote here.
Nobody has any doubt how Qur'an invites people to the correct thinking and exhorts them to
proceed on the path of knowledge.

Also the Qur'an reminds the readers that what it guides to is n way from among the ways of
thinking. Allah says: Surely this Qur’an guides to that which is most upright (17:9); i.e. the
religion, custom, or path that is most upright. In any case, it is the path of life and its uprightness
depends on the uprightness of the way of thinking, as Allah has said: indeed, there has come to
you a light and a clear Book from Allah; with it Allah guides him who follows His pleasure into
the ways of peace and brings them out of utter darkness into light by His permission and guides
them to the straight path (5:15-16). The straight path is that clear path which is free from
contradiction and conflicts, i.e. neither it goes against the truth which one seeks nor its various
sections point to different directions.

Allah, in His Mighty Book, has not pin-pointed the correct and upright thought to which He calls
His servants; He has left it to the common sense of the people, expecting them to use their
natural reasoning power and the perception engrained in their minds. If you minutely study the
Divine Book and meditate upon its verses, you will probably find over three hundred verses
which invite people to contemplate, remember or ponder; or they teach the Prophet (s.a.w.) an
argument to prove a truth or negate a falsity; as for example: Say: 'Who then could control
anything as against Allah if He wished to destroy the Messiah son of Mary and his mother..."
(5:17). Of the same genre are those verses which describe the arguments and proofs used by His
prophets and beloved ones like Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa and other great prophets, in addition to
Luqman (Lokman) and the believer from the family of Fir'awn (Pharaoh) and others, peace of
Allah be on them all. For example: Their Messengers said: "Is there (any) doubt about Allah, the
Maker of the heavens and the earth?" (14:10). And when Luqman said to his son while he
admonished him: "O my son! Do not associate aught with Allah; most surely polytheism is a
grievous iniquity" (31:13). And a believing man of Fir'awn's people who hid his faith said:
'What! Will you slay a man because he says: 'My Lord is Allah,' and indeed he has brought to
you clear arguments from your Lord?" (40:28). Also, He quotes the magicians of Pharaoh as
saying: They said: "We do not prefer you to what has come to us of clear arguments and to He
Who made us, therefore decide what you are going to decide; you can only decide about this
world's life; surely we believe in our Lord..." (20:72-73).

Allah has not ordered His servants even in a single verse of His Book that they should blindly
believe in Him, or in things sent by Him; or that they should tread on a path without thinking. He
has often hinted to the reasons because of which He has laid down certain regulations and
commandments (where a man has no way of knowing their detailed causes) describing some
things which could be used as arguments; as He says: …surely prayer keeps (one) away from
indecency and evil, and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greatest... (29:45). O you who
believe! Fasting has been prescribed for you, as it was prescribed for those before you, so that
you may guard yourselves (against evil) (2:183). Allah does not desire to put on you any
difficulty, but He wishes to purify you so that He may complete His favor on you, that you may
be grateful (5:6). There are many other verses of similar nature.

This thoughtful perception, i.e. the way of correct thinking which the Qur'an exhorts the human
beings to use, on which it has based its call to truth, good or benefit or restrains from falsity, evil
or harm - it is that perception which we know and recognize with our nature, which doesn't
change or alter, and about which no man disputes with others. If there appears some dispute or
discord about it then it is like a dispute in self-evident principles; it happens only when one or the
both parties do not understand the true meaning of I lit* subject matter because of some
miscomprehension.
You may ask what is this path, which we are supposed to know by our nature. There is no doubt
that there are some solid realities which independently exist and do not depend on our actions,
like the realities of the genesis of the world and its end or mathematical, physical or other such
principles. When we want to understand these matters we refer to basic principles, which are
self-evident and are not subject to any doubt. Also, we take help from other principles, which are
intrinsically attached to those self-evident principles. Then we arrange them in a particular way
until we get the desired result. For example we say:

A is B, and every B is C; therefore A is C.

Or, as we say:
If A is B, then C is D; and if C is D, then G is H. Therefore if A is B then G is H.
Or, as we say:
If A is B, then C is D; and if C is D, then G is H. But A is not H. Therefore G is not H.

These patterns of logic and the principle matters described above are self-evident truths and no
man of normal wisdom can have any doubt about them. If anybody doubts them, then it indicates
some defect in his power of understanding, because of which it has failed to grasp these clear
matters, as is generally seen about those who express doubts about self-evident truths.

If we look at the doubts or uncertainties expressed against this logical way of thinking, we will
see that when they want to reach at a result in their claims and objectives they too use the same
principles laid down in the logic in its form, pattern and material; if we analyze their speech to
the elementary premises used in them, they will turn into logical forms and principles. If
somebody changes those premises or the forms in a way that according to logical principles
would not lead to any result, the whole speech would become devoid of meaning and you will
see that they would not like it. This is a clear proof that these people according to their human
nature do accept the correctness of these logical principles, they submit to it and use it; they
refute it with their tongues but in their inner selves they believe in it.

1)  As some mutakallimun (experts of scholastic theology) have said: "If the logic were a way
leading to the truth then there should not have been any discord among the scholars of logic; but
we find them differing among themselves in their opinions."

COMMENT: This scholar has used hypothetical syllogism without realizing what he was doing.
He doesn't realize that when we say that logic is the instrument that prevents man from falling
into error, we mean that use of logic in proper way prevents man from falling into error. Nobody
claims that everyone who uses logic uses it correctly. Sword is the instrument for cutting; but it
will do its work only if it is used in proper way.

2)  Some of them have said: "These principles of logic were developed gradually. How can the
recognition of true realities depend on them? How can a man who doesn't know them or doesn't
use them arrive at the real truth?"

COMMENT: This argument too like the preceding one is hypothetical syllogism. Moreover it is
the worst type of sophistry. He has not understood the meaning of development. Development in
this context refers to the detailed discovery of those principles which man is vaguely aware of by
his nature; development doesn't mean invention.

3)  Some have said: "These principles were propagated among the people in order to close the
door of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.), or to divert the people from following the Book and the Sunnah. As
such the Muslims must keep aloof from them."
COMMENT: If we analyze this speech it will result in some conjunctive or hypothetical
syllogism. If a system is used for improper purpose it doesn't mean that the system in itself is not
good and proper; it is like a sword, which is used to kill an innocent person or the religion, which
is used for something other than the pleasure of Allah.

4)  Some have said: "The intellectual reasoning often leads to what is clearly against the Book
and the Sunnah, as we see in the opinions of many philosophers."

COMMENT: This too is a compound conjunctive syllogism. The mistake of the philosophers
does not emanate from the form of syllogism or from a self-evident truth. It occurs because some
wrong proposition is mixed with correct ones.

5)  Some people have said: "The whole purpose of logic is to differentiate between a form that
would lead to a correct conclusion from an unsound form; but as far as the matter is concerned,
the logic doesn't have any law which would prevent a man from falling into error about it. There
is no assurance against committing mistakes in the matter except referring it to the ma'sumin
(a.s.). Therefore, the only safe way is to return to the ma’sumin (a.s.)."

COMMENT: The above argument is sophistic. The scholar wants to prove that khabaru'l-wahid
or the collection of akhbaru'l-ahad combined with the apparent meanings of the Qur'an is al-
hujjah (proof) of shan'ah. We know that we can hold fast to the ma’sumin only when we are sure
that a hadith has actually been uttered by them and also know what is the meaning of the speech.
But such certainty is impossible concerning akhbaru'l-ahad because there is no more than a
strong conjecture that the words were spoken by the ma'sum (a.s.), and the same is the case with
its meaning. And this applies to all those proofs, which are based on strong conjectures. Holding
fast to the ma'sumin (a.s.) admittedly depends on the certainty of matter and the certainty of
matter may emanate from their words or from logical premises; and in any case, one has to be
sure that the form of the argument is not faulty (and it leads us to logic).

They have said that in view of all these doubts, the rational arguments cannot give us any
certainty regarding the subject matter.

COMMENT: First of all, it is just an overbearing obstinacy. Secondly, this speech in itself is a
rational argument from which he wants to reach to a definite conclusion and even its form is
based on logic.

6) Some have said: "All that is needed by human beings is placed in the Mighty Book and stored
in the traditions of the ma’sumin (a.s.). Therefore, why should we resort to the left overs of the
unbelievers and atheists?"

COMMENT: The need of rational and logical arguments is the same, which we observe in this
objection itself, because he has composed a logical conjunctive syllogism and has used in it the
materials that are admittedly correct. Yet, he has fallen victim of sophistry in two places.
Firstly, he did not realize that these logical principles themselves are a part of what is stored in
the Book and the Sunnah and one cannot go to its depth without independent research.
Secondly, it is one thing to say that the Book and the Sunnah do not need any addenda or
appendix for making their meaning clear and quite another to say that those who hold fast to the
Book and the Sunnah also do not need any additional help in reaching at the correct conclusion.
What will they say if a medical doctor who makes research about the human body were to claim
that he did not need to study any scientific, social, or literary subject, because all are related to
human beings. Or, if an ignorant person refused to learn any knowledge claiming that all types of
knowledge are found in the human nature. These friends of ours are not different from them.

Thirdly, the Book and the Sunnah themselves invite the people to widely use the correct logical
and rational arguments. (Such arguments are the self-evident premises or those depending on the
self-evident propositions.) Allah says: ...therefore give good news to My servants, those who
listen to the word, then follow the best of it; those are they whom Allah has guided, and those it
is who are men of understanding (39:17-18). There are many other such verses and traditions. Of
course, the Book and the Sunnah forbid us to follow what clearly goes against them. The Book
and the definitely proved Sunnah are the things whose veracity and truth has been clearly proved
by reason; and it is impossible that the same reason should prove invalidity of what it has
definitely proved to be valid earlier. Admittedly, we have to distinguish true rational premises
from the false ones, in order that we may hold fast to the correct premises, in the same way, as
we have to distinguish the decisive verses and traditions from the ambiguous ones in order that
we may hold fast to the decisive ones. The same is the case of the traditions where we have to
distinguish those traditions, which have surely emanated from the ma'sumin (a.s.) from the
forged and fraudulent ones; and how great their number is!

Fourthly, the truth is truth wherever it is found and however it is found. Its truth is not affected
by the belief or disbelief of its conveyor nor his piety or sinfulness makes it tainted. To refuse to
accept a truth just because of hatred of its conveyor is nothing but the prejudice of ignorance,
which has been condemned by Allah in His Book and through the words of His Messengers
(a.s.).

7) Some have said: "The way of precaution in religion which is preferred in the Book and the
Sunnah is to restrict oneself to the apparent meanings of the Book and the Sunnah and to keep
aloof from using logical and rational principles, because there is a danger of their pushing one
into eternal perdition from which one could never get out."

COMMENT: The objector has in this very statement used the logical and rational principles as
it contains exceptive syllogism based on rational premises that are acceptable by reason although
they are not based on the Book or the Sunnah. However, the risk he mentions might involve
those who don't have ability to understand deep rational propositions. But as for those capable
persons who have such discernment, there is no proof from the Book, the Sunnah, or reason to
show that they cannot understand the realities of the deep knowledge. We know that man can
have no nobility or greatness except with such understanding and the Book, the Sunnah and the
reason all prove it.

8) Some people have said: "The way of our noble predecessors was totally different from the
way of the philosophy and 'irfan. They used the Book and the Sunnah and had no need to use the
logical and rational principles like the philosophers, or to use the ways of spiritual regimen like
the Sufis. When the Greek philosophy was rendered into Arabic in the days of the caliphs, the
Muslim mutakallimun (scholastic theologians) who themselves were among the followers of the
Qur'an decided to fit the philsophical ideas on the Qur'anic realities. As a result, they were
divided into two sects, the Ash'arites and the Mu'tazilites. Then, during the same period appeared
another group who were called Sufis and 'arifs. They claimed that the secrets were open to them
and they knew in depth the Qur'anic realities. They thought that they had no need to return to the
ma'sumin (a.s.). In this way, they separated from the Shi'ahs who held fast to Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.);
things continued like this until about the middle of the thirteenth century of Hijrah (about a 100
years ago). Then these people (the philosophers and the Sufis) began forgery and deception; they
reinterpreted the themes of the Qur'an and Hadith to make them conform to the ideas of
philosophy and tasawwuf. They used this method so extensively that the majority of the Shi'ahs
were confused."

He has inferred from the above statement that these principles go against the correct way to
which the Book and the Sunnah guide the people. Then he has mentioned some objections
against the logic For example, the existence of discord among the logicians themselves, and the
fact that one is not always safe from errors in spite of using logical formulae and the fact that we
do not find a sufficient number of self-evident truths or free from doubt realities which could
serve in leading us to the deep realities. Then he has mentioned many themes of philosophy that
according to him go clearly against the principles inferred from the Book and the Sunnah. This is
the gist of his writing, which we have given in brief.

COMMENT: would that I knew which aspect of these lengthy ramblings can be mended and
corrected, because the disease has passed the stage of treatment. What he has said about the
history of the mutakallimun and their going against the aimmah of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.) - that they
wanted to fit the philosophy on the Qur'an which supposedly divided them into two sects of
Ash'arites and Mu'tazilites; then the appearance of the Sufis and their presumption that they and
their followers had no need of the Book and the Sunnah; that the things continued like that until
the thirteenth century of Hijrah when the philosophy or 'irfan came into being - all these are
totally against the known definite history and we shall briefly refer to all of this later on.

Apart from that, he has committed a great blunder by mixing al-kalam (scholastic theology) and
philosophy. The philosophy deals with phenomenal things and matters (which are found in
reality) and offers proof for accepted issues and problems through such premises, which are free
from doubt. Scholastic theology, on the other hand, deals with matters that may be real and
objective or subjective (mentally posited), and it offers proof for issues and problems through
such premises, which could be based on reality or on subjective consideration. Obviously, these
two fields of knowledge are far removed from one another. How can it be thought that the
mutakallimun would endeavor to make philosophy conform to the Qur'an? It is common
knowledge that the mutakallimun from their very beginning until now had remained in conflict
and dispute with the philosophers and al-'urafa' (here this word has been used for the Sufis).
Their books and writtings which are in our hands and the reports of their debates and polemical
argumentations which have come to us are the best witness to prove it.

Probably, his talk was based on the writings of some orientalists who claim that it was the
transference of Greek philosophy to Islam, which caused the appearance of 'ilmu'l-kalam
(scholastic theology) among the Muslims. This man did not know the meaning of al-kalam or
philosophy, nor was he aware of the aims and objectives of the two fields of knowledge. He was
also unaware of the factors that led to the appearance of scholastic theology in Islam. He just
shot his arrows in the dark.

Even more amusing is his assertion where he describes the difference between al-kalam and
philosophy. He says: "The scholastic theology aims at attesting to the topics of genesis and
resurrection keeping in view the aspects of religion; while philosophical discussions talk about
the same topics without paying any attention to religious dictates." Then he has used this
supposed difference to claim that the way of logical and rational principles is totally different
from the way of religion, and goes against the path laid down by the shari'ah. He has
confounded the confusion. Every knowledgeable scholar knows that the group which has
mentioned this difference between these two disciplines wants to indicate that the syllogisms
used in theological discussions are dialectical and composed of uncontestable premises (the well
known undisputable ones), because such arguments lead to undisputed realities; as for the
philosophical discussions, some of them are composed of argumentative syllogisms which aim to
prove what is truth, not what is universally accepted. In the light of the above, how can it be
taken to mean that the way of scholastic theology is the way of religion and the way of
philosophy goes against religion and that it should be discarded even if it is true?

As for his objections against logic, philosophy and 'irfan, we have already commented on his
objections against logic. What he has written concerning philosophy and 'irfan, if it is correct
quotation and he has correctly understood its meaning that it goes against the clear dictates of the
true religion, then nobody doubts that it is invalid and it is among the erroneous ideas of
philosophers or those who tread on the path of 'irfan; but such errors should be put in the account
of those people who have expressed those ideas, and should not be used against philosophy or
'irfan as a discipline; it would be merely the defect and deficiency of the scholars concerned.

It was incumbent on him to ponder on the disputes that have grown between various groups of
scholastic theologians - Ash'arites, Mu'tazilites and Shi'ites. These differences have divided the
single Islamic ummah into 73 sects, then every sect has branched into various sub-sects, and
these subdivisions might be equal in number to the main divisions. He should have thought what
was the root cause of these differences. Was it not because of following the path of religion
itself? Does any research scholar have a right to present these differences to prove that religion is
null and void and its way is incorrect? Can any explanation be given for this phenomenon that
could not be applied with equal force to logic and philosophy? Can the logicians and
philosophers be accused of an inner deficiency that could not be found in the people of religion?

Similar to the scholastic theology is the case of Islamic jurisprudence. How many sects have
developed even within a single sect; how much discords and differences are found among their
various fuqaha’? The same is the case of all numerous disciplines and arts as none of them is
immune from differences.

All this long talk has led him to declare that all the ways used for argumentation are null and
void and the only correct path is that of the Book and the Sunnah that is the path of religion. In
short, the only way left to him is that of tadhakkur (remembrance). It is a theory attributed to
Plato; he says that if man frees himself from lustful mentality, acquires piety and spiritual
perfection, and then turns to his inner self, he may reach at the truth.

This explanation is offered of the said Platonic theory. Some ancient Greek and other
philosophers had adopted it. Some Muslims and some other occidental philosophers accepted
this view too. However, every group has affirmed it in a different way.

1. Some assert that human knowledge is but natural; it is there, present with him actually from
the first instant of his existence; as such, when we say that a new knowledge has come to Zayd, it
in effect means that he has remembered it.

2. Some others say that when man turns to his soul by isolating himself from material
distractions, it causes discovery of realities - it does not mean that knowledge is present with him
actually; rather it is with him potentially. Actuality of knowledge is found in the inner human
soul - it separates from him when he is heedless, connects with him when he remembers. This
view is held by the Illuminists and those cognizant with divine knowledge (implying here the
Sufis), and their likes from all religions and creeds.

3. Another group offers the same explanation as the no.2 above, but has added to it the condition
of piety and adherence to the shari'ah in knowledge and practice. It has been asserted by some of
our contemporary Muslims and others, as they think that this condition of adherence to the
shari'ah would separate them from the Sufis and 'urafa' (those cognizant with divine
knowledge). But they are oblivious of the fact that the Sufis and 'urafa' have already put that
condition in their explanations, as evidenced by their reliable books, which are commonly
available. So, this view is the same as the one held by the Sufis; yet the one differs from the other
in the manner of "following" and the exact identification of its meaning. They believe that
"following" should inflexibly concentrate on the apparent meanings of the Qur'an and the
Sunnah. Their method is a mixture of those of the Sufis and the Akhbaris.

If this theory of remembrance is not intended to invalidate reference to logic and rational
principles, then it may be deemed correct to a certain extent. When man is created in his essence,
he has perception of his person and is cognizant of his personal powers and weaknesses; this
cognition is naturally present with him, and it turns to acquired knowledge under influence of
some of his faculties. Every faculty is bound to remain active within its sphere. It is inferred
from the above that man, from the first moment of his existence, has some knowledge - that
knowledge, although behind in nature, is concurrent with him in time. Also, nobody can deny
that man gets some knowledge when he isolates himself somewhat from material connections.

But if the theory of remembrance is meant to invalidate reference to logic and rational principles,
in other words, if it means that turning to oneself by isolating from external distraction frees one
from the need of arranging academic premises for arriving at the results, then this view is most
absurd, unworthy of slightest consideration. There are many reasons, which negate this view:

First: Deep research in human fields of knowledge and cognition, shows that man's declarative
knowledge depends on his knowledge of the ideas of subject and predicate separately; and his
ideas are confined to, or abstracted from the knowledge of items perceived by one of the five
senses. Analogy and experiments have shown that if a man lacks one of the senses, he remains
totally oblivious of all knowledge that depends on that sense - be it ideal or assertive, self-
evident or requiring analogical set-up. If the knowledge were actually present with human nature
and essence, lack of a sense would not have any adverse effect on that knowledge. If it were said
that blindness or deafness obstructed that remembrance, it would contradict the basic theory that
remembrance - turning to oneself by discarding material connections - helps in this process by
removing the obliviousness.

Second: So far as this remembrance is concerned, only some human beings are blessed with it.
As for the general humanity, they achieve their goals of life by combining various premises and
deriving the results; they derive in this way thousands and thousands of correct results. This
method pervades all fields of knowledge and technical skills. To deny this fact would be
haughtiness, and to explain it as a chance would be rashness. To follow this method is but natural
for the human beings; and when a species is equipped with a natural and creative apparatus, it is
bound to succeed in its endeavors, it is impossible for it to stumble in its actions.

Third: If we analyze the results of this "remembrance" we find that it is made up of well-
arranged logical premises - disturb any laid down procedure in its form or substance and you
disturb the result. So, they do use the logical principle - without knowing what they were doing.
The hypothesis of chance and concurrence cannot be applied here. If they want to prove their
theory of remembrance, they should bring an academic form based on it, which should have no
connection with logic and its principles.

Now, let us look at the view that remembrance frees man from the need of referring to logical
principles. It implies that there are two ways: the way of logic and the way of remembrance by
following the shari'ah; that both of these ways lead to the correct destination, but the way of
remembrance is better and preferable, because it is sure to hit the mark by conforming to the
ma'sum's views; while there is the risk of falling into error, always or mostly, in the way of logic
and intellect.

In any case, the second objection to the previous view applies here too. Only a few persons can
comprehend all objectives of the Hook and the Sunnah with their mysteries and secrets that have
such astonishing wide range. Those precious few persons are those who deeply meditate on
religious gnosis with its astonishing inter-connectedness and intertwining roots and branches;
some aspects of which are related to belief, others to personal and social activities. Man cannot
be asked to perform something beyond his ability and power, neither in creation nor in
legislation. People are only required to understand the objectives of religion through normal
methods that they use in their lives. That is, arranging the known premises for discovering the
unknown. And we know that only some premises of shari'ah are known which have been
established by proofs. It is amusing to note that a proponent of remembrance has used this very
argument against logic and philosophy. He says that even if we accept for the sake of argument
that it was possible to know the actual realities by using the logic and philosophy, only such
stalwarts of philosophy as Aristotle and Avicenna could achieve it; general public could not do
it. Therefore, how can the Lawgiver order people to use logical and philosophical principles to
discover the realities?
That man did not realize that the tables could be turned on him and the same question asked from
him. If he says, that use of remembrance is within reach of everybody according to the degree of
his following of the shari'ah, we shall reply that the use of logic, a little or a lot, is within reach
of everybody according to his ability of finding the realities - it is not necessary for everyone to
reach the furthest limit, even if it is beyond his strength.

The third objection, mentioned earlier, is applicable here too. These people use the methods of
logic in all their arguments they put forward in the name of remembrance. They could not
discard those logical methods even when trying to negate the same way of logic and establish the
way of remembrance. And this is enough to show its incorrectness.

Even those who follow the way of remembrance fall mostly in error. Remembrance, as they
claim, was the way used by our good predecessors - and not the way of logic. Yet they were
involved in a lot of controversies and differences among themselves, like a number of the
companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) who are regarded by the Muslims to be perfect in knowledge
and adherence to the Book and the Sunnah; or whose knowledge and probity are agreed upon by
the majority; and like many companions of the Imams of the same calibre, like Abu Hamzah,
Zurarah, Aban, Abu Khalid, Hisham ibn al-Hakam, Hisham ibn Salim, Mu'minu 't-Taq, the two
Safwans and others. Their basic differences with each other are well known. Clearly, when two
persons differ on a subject, only one will be on the right. The same is the case with ancient
jurisprudents and muhaddithin like al-Kulayni, as-Saduq, at-Tusi, al-Mufid, al-Murtada, and
others (may Allah be pleased with them all). So what is the advantage of remembrance over
logical consideration? They must search for some factor other than remembrance to distinguish
between right and wrong. The only resort is the logical contemplation.

The gist of their argument is that man by adhering to the sinless personalities saves himself from
falling into error. It is because the views of a sinless personality when heard from him properly
and when his meaning is perfectly understood are safe from error. This much is accepted by all.
Yet the fact is that what is definitely heard or taken from a ma'sum, has nothing to do with
remembrance or intellectual consideration at all; rather its syllogism runs as follows: It is the
opinion of a ma'sum; and all his opinions are right; therefore it is right. It is a proof that produces
definite result.

On the contrary, what is understood from a tradition narrated by one narrator or other such things
which produce only presumption, it has no authority; there is no proof that such solitary
traditions have any validity - except in the field of fiqh - unless it is in conformity with the
Qur'an; nor does presumption lead anywhere when its opposite is proved by academic proofs.

9) Some people have said: "Allah has spoken to us in the Qur'an in the language with which we
are familiar, with arrangements of words and phrases known to the speakers of this language.
The apparent statements contain order and prohibition, promise and threat, stories and wisdom,
sermon and arguments in a good manner. For understanding them, one is not obliged to learn
logic, philosophy, and other such legacies of unbelievers, polytheists, and unjust persons. Allah
has forbidden us to befriend them, incline towards them, or follow their paths. The proper way
for one who believes in Allah and His Messenger is to adhere to the apparent meanings of
religious statements, and stop at what a normal intellect understands from those words, without
interpreting or overstepping them. This view is held by al-Hashawiyyah (those who believe in
literal meanings of traditions), al-Mushabbihah (those who think that the person of Allah is
similar to that of humans), and other traditionalists."

This view is wrong both in form and in substance. As for the form, this argument uses the
principles of logic at the same time when it wants to ban its use! Nobody says that the Qur'an
leads to the use of the logical principles and that it was incumbent on every Muslim to learn
logic. Yet its use is unavoidable in daily life. The opponents of logic are not unlike a person who
says: The objective of the Qur'an is to lead us to the goals of religion; as such we are not obliged
to learn the Arabic language which is a legacy of the people of Ignorance! Obviously, this
assertion has no legs to stand upon, because language is the way man is naturally obliged to use
in conversation, and that is why Allah has used it in His Book and the Prophet (s.a.w.) in his
traditions. Likewise, logic is a mental way, which man is naturally obliged to tread in the sphere
of understanding, and Allah has used it in His Book and the Prophet (s.a.w.) in his traditions.

Coming to the substance of that view, it takes intellectual substance but falls into fallacy by
equalizing the apparent meaning with its application. A Muslim is required to understand from
the Qur'anic words, like knowledge, power, life, hearing, sight, speech, volition and will the
meanings that are opposite of ignorance, inability, death, deafness and blindness, etc. But he is
not supposed to assert that Allah has a knowledge like our knowledge, power and life like our
power and life, and hearing, sight, volition and will like those of ours; he is not allowed to say so
by the Book, the Sunnah or the reason. We have explained this topic to a certain extent under the
discussion of the Decisive and Ambiguous verses in the third volume of this book. (Under verse
3:7)

10) Some others have said: "The only evidence for the validity of the premises which are proved
by rational arguments is the rational premise which says that reason's dictates must be followed.
In other words, there is no authority for the reason's dictates except the reason itself. And it is
clearly a vicious circle. Therefore; there is no escape in controversial issues except to the opinion
of a ma'sun - the Prophet or Imam - without following (a non- ma'sum)."

But it is a most absurd doubt expressed on this matter. The man wanted to strengthen a structure,
but it has led to its demolition. He has invalidated the rational dictate by what he has described as
clear vicious circle. Then when he turned to authenticating the shari'ah's orders he was obliged
to argue through rational arguments (which led to a vicious circle), or through shari'ah's dictate
(which led to another vicious circle.) Now, he is disconcerted and confused between two vicious
circles. Or he may opt to follow a non-ma’sum, which will be a second confusion.

He has fallen into confusion when trying to understand the meaning of 'Obligation of following
the reason's dictate.' If this obligation refers to what stands with prohibition and permission as a
copartner, and whose contravention entails condemnation or punishment (like obligation of
obeying a good counselor, and obligation of justice in deciding the cases and other similar
things), then it is the dictate of practical intellect, and we have nothing to say against it. And if it
means that man is necessarily bound to confirm and accept a result - when arguments are offered
for it with academic premises and in correct form with perfect conception of all aspects of related
issues, then it is a proposition which man sees by his psychic forces. In this case, why should the
intellect be asked for an evidence to prove the authenticity of its proof? Because its authenticity
is self-evident; and this case is like other self-evident propositions. Every self-evident clause is
its own proof; it needs no outside proof.

11) Some have said: "The ultimate goal of logic is to get at the things' established quiddities, to
arrive at the results through firm and established general premises. But academic research has
established today that there is no totality, generality, permanency, or durability - neither in mind
nor outside it. The things are governed by the law of general transformation; nothing continues
as it is, in an established, permanent, or total condition."

This assertion is totally wrong. The man has used the principles of logic; in form and substance
both, (to argue against the same principles) as any contemplating person will understand.
Moreover, the objector has offered this objection only to prove that the old (Aristotelian) logic
was not correct; yet it is a result, which is general, enduring and established which contains
established concepts. Otherwise, it would not serve his purpose. So, the objection invalidates
itself.

Perhaps we have gone beyond the self-imposed condition to keep the book as brief as possible.
So, let us return to our previous topic.

The noble Qur'an guides the intellect to use what it has been created to use, and to precede on
what it knows and is familiar with - that is, to arrange the known premises for arriving at the
results, which were hitherto unknown. The intellect has a natural disposition for using authentic
and indisputable premises in order to arrive at genuine and authentic results - and it is what is
called "Proof. Also, the intellect is used in practical matters which lead to felicity and infelicity,
good and evil, benefit and harm; showing what should be taken and adopted and what is to be
rejected and discarded - these are mentally posited ideas, well-known or accepted premises - and
it is what is called "Debate" or "Disputation". Alternatively, it uses in matters of assumed good
or evil assumed premises, which guide to presumed good or prevent from presumed evil - and it
is called "Admonition". Allah says: Call to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and goodly
exhortation, and have disputation with them in the best manner (16:125). Clearly, "wisdom"
refers to "proof, as may be understood from its positioning vis-a-vis goodly exhortation and
disputation.

Question: The way of logical thinking and contemplation is within the ability of believer and
unbeliever both, and human beings whether winner or pious tread on it. In this background, how
can you justify the Qur’anic statements where Allah disallows good knowledge and correct
remembrance to all who are not pious and do not follow true religion; as is seen in the following
verses: ...and none minds but he who turns (to Him) again and again (40:13). ...and whoever
fears Allah, He will make for him an outlet (65:2). Therefore turn aside from him who turns his
back upon Our reminder and does not desire anything but this world's life. That is the (last)
reach of their knowledge; surely your Lord knows best him who goes astray from His path and
He knows best him who follows the right direction. (53:29-30). And how will you explain the
numerous, nearly mutawatir traditions which say that beneficial knowledge cannot be attained
except through good deeds?
Reply: There is no doubt that the Book and the Sunnah give importance to piety in respect of
knowledge. But it does not mean that they have made piety (or piety coupled with remembrance)
an independent way for acquiring knowledge of realities, separate from the natural way of
contemplation which man inevitably treads upon. Otherwise, all the arguments and disputations
brought in the noble Book against the unbelievers, polytheists, and immoral and sinful persons
would become irrelevant - they do not follow the truth and do not know what piety and
remembrance was; accordingly, they would be unable to attain the intended goal. Consequently,
it would be irrelevant to argue with them. The same applies to the disputations found in the
sunnah against various sects and groups that have gone astray.

In fact, piety is considered necessary for bringing the human intelligent soul back to its natural
uprightness. It may be explained as follows:

Man, on his body's side, is made up of contrary animalistic and predatory powers, all related to
this material body; each of these powers performs its own function without having any
coordination with other powers. The desire of food, for instance, encourages man to go on eating
and drinking; it feels no restriction or limitation by itself, except if stomach refuses to accept any
more food or drink when it is filled up completely, or if the jaws become tired of chewing, or
things like that. These are the things we always observe in ourselves

In this situation, if man inclines towards one of his powers, follows its dictates and proceeds to
where it instigates him to go, that power exceeds its limits, and subjugates the opposite power to
such an extent that it is almost negated. For example, giving free rein to desire of food or sex
diverts the man away from all important affairs of life, like earning livelihood, social relations,
domestic affairs, upbringing of children and all other individual and social responsibilities which
he is obliged to do. The same thing happens when man goes on following other powers of desire
and anger. This too we always see in our own lives as well as in others'.

With this excess and shortcoming, humanity is bound to perish. Man is a person who is
controlled by these adverse powers; he is supposed to pull all these powers together by activating
them in the way of his felicity in the life of this world and the next. Such life has to be based on
knowledge and perfection. He has no option but to give every power its due share in a way that it
does not obstruct other powers, nor does it become dormant itself.

Man cannot perfect his humanity; unless he creates a perfect balance between his various powers
in such a manner that every power keeps in the middle of the way prescribed for it. The top
characteristic of proper proportion in these powers is called wisdom, bravery, chastity, etc., and
collectively they are called justice, probity.

No doubt, man acquires the thoughts (which are present with him now), and expands his human
cognizance and knowledge by instigating these perceptive faculties to do their work. I mean,
initially man comes into this world without any of these vast information and knowledge; he is
totally empty-handed. Then his internal faculties perceive their requirements and demand from
him what they desire. These elementary perceptions are the starting point of man's knowledge.
Thereafter he goes on generalizing, particularizing, mixing and separating these matters until he
completes the process of human thoughts.

A wise person will understand from the above description that if man remains deeply involved in
obeying one of his various contradictory powers, and exceeds the limit in giving it what it
demands, then his thoughts and perceptions would be deviated from right path; he would blindly
make its propositions superior and keep other powers' propositions and thoughts subservient to
it; he will remain oblivious to the demands of other faculties and powers.

Experience confirms it. It is this deviation, which we observe in intemperate and extravagant
persons who have become slaves of their desires. Also it may be seen in unjust, oppressive
tyrants who corrupt the life in human society. The former who are submerged in the abyss of
desires and are obsessed by pleasures of drinking, entertainment and sexual enjoyments, are
almost incapable of thinking about the obligations of humanity and the important matters for
which great people vie with each other. Desire has permeated their sitting and standing, their
joining and separating and things like that. The later, that is the oppressive and haughty people,
are hard-hearted; incapable of thinking about compassion, kindliness, mercy, or humility even
where it is essential. Their lives are mirrors of their evil condition which they display in all its
manifestations - their talk and silence, their looking and averting of eyes, their advancing and
retreating, all are devoid of kindliness. Both groups are proceeding on a wrong path in seeking
the knowledge; all are bent upon the perverted and deviated knowledge and thoughts connected
with their twisted psyche. They are unaware of what lies beyond their myopic vision. And what
lies there? It is beneficial knowledge and true cognizance. Man cannot attain true cognizance and
beneficial knowledge unless his morals are excellent and his human virtues are complete. And
this is piety, Godfearing.

It is thus proved that it is the good deeds, which preserve the good characteristics, which in their
turn preserve the true cognizance, beneficial knowledge, and correct thoughts. There is no good
in knowledge if it is devoid of practice.

Although we have explained this topic in academic and ethical terms (because the context
demanded it), Allah has told all this in one short phrase, where He says: And pursue the right
course in your going about... (31:19). It is an indication that one should keep on the middle of
the path, and remain moderate in life. Also He says: If you fear Allah, He will grant you a
distinction... (8:29). ...and make provision, for surely the best provision is piety (guarding oneself
against evil); and fear Me, O people of understanding! (2:197); i.e. being men of understanding,
you require piety and God-fearing for activating your understanding. Again Allah says: And (I
swear by) the soul and Him Who made it perfect, then He inspired it to understand what is
wrong for it and right for it; He will indeed be successful who purifies it, and he will indeed fail
who corrupts it (91:7-10). Also He says: ...and fear Allah, that you may be successful (3:130).

On the other hand, He says about the opposite group: But there followed after them an evil
generation, who neglected prayer and followed the sensual desires, so they shall soon meet (the
result of their) sin; except such as repent and believe and do good... (19:59-60). Allah states here
that following the sensual desire leads to perdition. Also He says: I will turn away from My signs
those who are unjustly proud in the earth; and if they see every sign they will not believe in it;
and if they see the way of rectitude they do not take it for a way, and if they see the way of error,
they take it for a way; this is because they rejected Our signs and were heedless of them. (7:146).
Here Allah reminds that the prisoners of the powers of anger are prevented from following the
way of truth and are pulled to the path of error and perdition, then He explains that it all happens
because they are heedless of truth. Again He says: And certainly We have created for hell many
of the jinn and the men; they have hearts with which they do not understand, and they have eyes
with which they do not see, and they have ears with which they do not hear; they are as cattle,
nay, they are in worse errors; these are the heedless ones (7:179). In this verse, He states that
these heedless ones are oblivious of the true perceptions, which behoove human beings. Their
hearts, eyes, and ears do not perceive what a blissful man perceives. Their perception does not
reach higher than the level of catties or even worse - and these are the ideas which grazing catties
and preying beasts are familiar with and inclined to.

The foregoing details clearly show that the Qur'an has made thought, remembrance and
understanding conditional upon piety (God-fearing), and has joined knowledge with practice in
order that man may attain to straight thinking and correct knowledge which is free from
animalistic imaginations and Satanic insinuations.

Of course, there is a Qur'anic reality which cannot be denied; and that is: If man is brought under
the influence of divine guardianship and goes near the perimeter of heavenly sanctity, it opens
for him a door to the kingdoms of the heavens and the earth, and he sees through it what remains
hidden to others - the great signs of Allah and everlasting lights of His omnipotence. as-Sadiq
(a.s.) has said, "If the Satans had not hovered around the hearts of the human beings, they would
have seen the kingdoms of the heavens and the earth." The Sunnis have narrated from the
Prophet (s.a.w.) that he said: "If there were no multiplicity in your talk and confusion in your
hearts, you would have seen what I see, and heard what I hear." Allah has said: And (as for)
those who strive hard for Us, We will most certainly guide them onto Our ways; and Allah is
most surely with the doers of good (29:69). The apparent meaning of the following divine words
prove it: And worship thy Lord until there comes to thee that which is certain (15:99), as it shows
that certainty springs from worship. Also He says: And thus did We show Ibrahim the kingdoms
of the heavens and the earth, and so that he might be of those who are sure (6:75), as it ties the
virtue of certitude to observation of the kingdom. In other verses He says: Nay! If you had known
with a knowledge of certainty, you should most certainly have seen the hell; then you shall most
certainly see it with the eye of certainty (102:5-7) Nay! Most surely the record of the righteous
shall be in the 'illiyyin. And what will make you know what the 'illiyyin is? It is a written book;
those who are drawn near (to Allah) shall witness it (83:18-21). (A full discussion of this subject
will be found in Chapter 5, verses 55 and 105.)

Affirmation of this reality does not go against our earlier stand that the noble Qur'an supports the
way of natural thinking, on which the structure of human life is founded and man has been
created. Because this way is other than meditation and contemplation; it is a divine gift, which is
reserved for His selected servants; and the good end is for the pious ones.

A Historical Discussion
In this discussion we shall have an overall view of the history of Islamic thoughts, and the way,
which the Muslim ummah adopted - in spite of its sectarian differences. We do not intend to
support or oppose any school of thought. Our aim is to present the historical events to the Qur'an
and let the Holy Book confirm or reject them. We are not concerned with boastings of supporters
or apologia of opponents, because the place for it is in a religious discussion.

The noble Qur'an deals with all aspects of human life without being restricted with any
condition. It governs man - be he an individual or a group, small or big, male or female, be he of
white race or black, an Arab or non-Arab, civilized or primitive, learned or ignorant, present or
absent; be he at any time and in any place. The Qur'an certainly guides him in all his affairs, be it
belief, ethics or deeds.

The Qur'an interlocks with all academic and industrial aspects related to the human life. Ponder
on its verses exhorting people to meditate, think, remember and understand, and you will find
that the Book intensely urges man to acquire knowledge and discard ignorance in every field, be
it concerned with heavens or earth, whether it is vegetable world, animal kingdom or humanity
as parts of this world of ours; and even going beyond that to the angels, satans, the tablet and the
pen, etc., in order that it may be a means to acquire gnosis of God and whatever is in any way
related to the social human life - ethics, laws, reciprocal rights and social norms.

You have seen that the Qur'an supports the natural way of thinking, to which the nature
inevitably invites; there is no escape from it as the nature demands to proceed in logical way.

The Qur'an itself uses all types of logical techniques - proof, argumentation, and sermon. It
invites the Muslim ummah to follow its lead and to offer proofs regarding positivistic realities (in
practical sphere); and to argue with the help of accepted premises in other spheres as in mentally
posited considerations.

The Qur'an has offered the Prophetic way of life as its ideal; it has appointed the Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.) as its model; the Muslims used to observe and remember his ways, and follow his
knowledgeable steps as a student follows his teacher in his academic progress.

The Muslims during the Prophet's time (i.e. during his stay at Medina) were new to the Islamic
teachings. Their condition was not different from the ancient man in academic and industrial
field. When they engaged in academic discussion, it was in a simple and non-technical manner,
their only aim being to know divine commandments. In the beginning their attention was fixed
on memorizing and recital of Qur'an, and memorizing the Prophetic traditions (without writing
them) and their transmission. Sometimes they disputed with each other on religious topics; also
they entered into arguments with people of some alien faith, especially the Jews and the
Christians, because there were some groups of them in Arabia, Ethiopia and Syria. This was the
beginning of 'ilmu'l-kalam (Scholastic Theology). They also liked narrating poetry; it was a part
of Arabian culture, which Islam did not give importance to; the Book does not contain a single
word in praise of poetry or poets, nor the sunnah lauds it much.

When the Prophet (s.a.w.) departed from this world, we know what happened regarding the
caliphate; the resulting discord further increased the disunity. The Qur'an was collected during
the reign of the first Caliph after the battle of Yamamah, when a great number of the reciters
were martyred there. The condition remained the same during his time - nearly two years - and
the reign of the second caliph.

Although Islam's fame had spread and its domain increased, thanks to the great victories the
Muslims had achieved in those days, it kept them busy and prevented them from paying any
thought to academic matters, nor did they try to enhance their level of knowledge. Or, perhaps
with their academic level they did not feel need to any increase or enhancement.

Knowledge and its virtue is not something to be perceived by the five senses, which a nation may
know from the other, except when that knowledge is related to craft and industry; then its effect
is perceivable and general public recognizes it.

Those continuous and growing victories did reawaken in them the characteristics of the Days of
Ignorance - the pride and arrogance - which had subsided as a result of the Prophetic teaching
and training. But now the spirit of domineering and oppressing nations was sneaking into, and
getting hold of them. Its proof may be seen in the division of the Muslim ummah at that time into
Arab and clients; also look at the behavior of Mu'awiyah, then Syria's governor, towards the
Muslims, and how he adopted the imperial Caesarian style, in addition to many other indications
recorded by history about Muslim armies. This psychology had its effect on the academic
progress, especially the Qur'anic teachings.

As for their academic development at that time, their involvement with Qur'an was as before; and
there appeared its numerous versions attributed to Zayd, Ubayy, Ibn Mas'ud, and others.

As for hadith, it spread widely - and what a spreading it was? Its narrations and records increased
to such an extent that 'Umar forbade some companions from narration because he was narrating a
lot of it. A number of the People of the Book entered into the fold of Islam, and the Muslim
muhaddithin took from them a lot of traditions from their books including the stories of their
prophets and nations; then they mixed it with what they had preserved from the traditions of the
Prophet (s.a.w.). Forgery and uncalled for infiltration freely circulated among the ahadith. Today
we have got a lot of pieces of traditions, narrated from the companions and their narrators of the
early days of Islam, which are clearly rejected by the Qur'an.

We may summarize its reason in three factors:

1. The high status which people accorded to the Prophet's companionship and to memorization of
his ahadith; the prestige and honor enjoyed by the companions and their disciples who narrated
to the people the traditions on those companions' authority. This led the people to take traditions
- and that too abundantly - even from converted People of the Book, and to intense rivalry among
narrators of hadith for gaining precedence and pride of place.

2. Their intense avidity for remembrance and narration of hadith hindered them from testing the
narrative for correctness and from meditating on its meaning, especially presenting it to the
Qur'an for verification. The Book of Allah is the foundation on which the religion's structure is
built; and the root from which the religion's branches sprout. The Prophet (s.a.w.) had enjoined
them to do so, as his correct traditions show. For example: "Certainly forgers and liars against
me will increase; so when a tradition is brought to you, present it to the Qur'an: whatever
conforms to it, accepts it, and whatever goes against it, throw it on the wall."

This environment became a fertile ground for circulation of forged traditions in respect of divine
attributes, names and actions; about the lapses ascribed to the noble prophets, and slanderous evil
deeds attributed to the Prophet (s.a.w.); it took in its fold the myths of genesis and creation,
stories of past nations; it even contained the claim that the Qur'an had been altered, and
numerous such stories which are similar to v/hat is found in the Tawrat and the Injil.

At this juncture the Qur'an and the Hadith divided advancement and practice between
themselves. Seeming advancement became the Qur'an's lot, but practice was reserved for hadith;
consequently very soon Qur'an was abandoned. This habit of neglecting to present the hadith to
the Qur'an has become a permanent feature of the Muslims' behavior since those early days until
now, although they do not admit it in so many words: And the Messenger cried out: "O my Lord!
Surely my people have treated this Qur'an as a forsaken thing." (25:30). Exceptions to this
malady are rare, countable on fingers.

This negligence is exactly one of the reasons why many ancient national myths and superstitions
are still alive in the Muslim nations even after their entering into the fold of Islam. And disease
breeds disease.

3. What happened regarding the caliphate after the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) turned the
opinions of the general Muslims away from the people of the family of the Prophet? Muslims
found themselves divided into three groups. There were some who were devoted to (hem,
remained adhered to them; others turned away from them, not curing about them or the position
they had in Qur'anic knowledge; (here were even those who hated them, felt enmity towards
them. All this took place when the Prophet (s.a.w.) had enjoined them - in traditions whose
authenticity is undoubted and whose meaning is by all - that they should learn from the Ahlu'l-
Bayt (a.s.) and should not attempt to teach them because they know the Book of Allah better than
the ummah; he had reminded them that his family members would never make mistake in
Qur'anic exegesis nor would they go astray in its understanding. He had said in the mutawatir
hadith of "Two Precious Things": "Surely I am leaving among you two precious things, the Book
of Allah and my descendants, and they shall not separate from each other until they come to me
near the reservoir." Some of its narratives add: "Do not teach them, for they are more
knowledgeable than you." Also he has said in a nearly-mutawatir hadith: "Whoever interprets
Qur'an according to his opinion, he should prepare his seat in hell." (It has been fully explained
in the discussion on "The Decisive and the Ambiguous Verses", under verse 3:7.)

That was the biggest loss that afflicted the knowledge of the Qur'an, and the way of thinking to
which it calls. If you want any proof of this turning away, look at the paucity of the ahadith
which have been taken from the Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.). Think about the prestige and status 'ilmu'l-
hadith enjoyed in the reign of the caliphs, and how the people vied with each other in taking
hadith; and then count how many ahadith have been narrated from 'Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husayn
- and particularly those connected with the Qur'anic exegesis - and you will see an astonishing
phenomenon: As for the companions, they did not narrate from 'Ali (a.s.) anything worthy of
attention. As for their disciples if we count what they have narrated from him in the whole of
Qur'an, it will not reach a hundred narratives. As for al-Hasan (a.s.), perhaps the number of
narratives taken from him would not reach ten; and as for al-Husayn, they have not narrated from
him anything worthy of mention. You will understand the true position when you come to know
that some people have counted the narrations regarding the Qur'anic exegesis and the number has
reached seventeen thousand ahadith from Sunni chains. The same ratio is found in the tradition
of fiqh too.

Was it because they had abandoned Ahlu'l-Bayt and turned away from their hadith?Or was it
because they had abundantly taken hadith from them, and then it was hidden and forgotten
during Umayyad period, because Umayyads were hostile to them? I do not know.

However, seclusion of 'Ali and his non-participation in the gathering of the Qur'an - in beginning
and in end - and the life histories of al-Hasan and al-Husayn (peace be on them all) supports the
first alternative.

The situation regarding his hadith deteriorated to such an extent that some people denied that
some of his magnificent sermons in the book, Nahju'l-balghah were of his saying; while no one
casts any doubt about al-khutbatu'l-batra' of the Ziyad (of illegitimate birth) or Yazid's poems
extolling intoxicants!

The Ahlu'l-bayt remained under oppression and their hadith forsaken until the time of the Imams,
al-Baqir and as-Sadiq (peace be on them), when there was some intermission because of the
ensuing conflict between the Umayyads and 'Abbasids. Thus they got a chance to describe the
hitherto lost traditions of their ancestors, and renew what had been obliterated of their tracks.

However their traditions as well as those of their forefathers and descendants did not remain safe
from infiltration, were not free from forgery, and unauthorized insertion - just like the Prophetic
traditions. Those two Imams had stated it clearly and mentioned by name some forgers, like
Mughirah ibn Sa'id and Ibn Abi 'l-Khattab and others like them. Some Imams refuted many
traditions, which were attributed to them and to the Prophet (s.a.w.); and commanded their
companions and the Shi'ahs to present the narrated traditions to Qur'an, and to accept what
conforms to it and reject what goes against it.

But the people (excepting a few individuals) did not follow this order in practice concerning the
ahadith of the Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.), and especially in subjects other than fiqh; they followed the
same path which the general Muslims had taken in respect of the Prophetic traditions.

The malady spread to such an extent that a group said that the apparent meanings of the Qur'an
had no authority at all; while the books of traditions like Misbahu 'sh-shari'ah, Fiqhu 'r-Rida and
Jami 'u'l-akhbar had authority. They went to such an extent that some of them said that hadith
explains the Qur'an even when the former goes against the clear meaning of the latter. It is not
different from some Sunnis' view that hadith abrogates the Book! Perhaps what is seen in the
Muslims' behavior is what a research scholar has said: "The Sunnis took the Book and
abandoned the Ahlu'l-Bayt; the result was that they forsook the Book too, because the Prophet
(s.a.w.), has said: 'Surely they will not separate from each other.' And the Shi'ahs took the Ahlu'l-
Bayt and abandoned the Book; the result was that they forsook the Ahlu l-Bayt too, because of
the same Prophetic saying: 'Surely they will not separate from each other.' Thus the ummah
collectively forsook the Qur'an and the Ahlu'l-Bayt (the Book and the Sunnah) altogether."

The path they had taken regarding hadith was one of the factors that caused severance of
relationship between Islamic subjects (like religion and literature) and the Qur'an. This happened
while it is known that all Islamic subjects are like branches and fruits growing from this good
tree (Qur'an) whose root is firmly fixed and whose branches are in heaven, yielding its fruit in
every season by the permission of its Lord. You will clearly see it if you look at these subjects:
you will find that they have been developed and arranged in a way that they do not need Qur'an
at all. It is possible for a student to learn and complete all Islamic subjects - morphology,
grammar, rhetoric, language, hadith, rijal, critical knowledge of hadith, jurisprudence and its
fundamentals; he may become an expert and authority in these branches of knowledge without
even reciting the Qur'an or touching the Book. So what share has actually been given to Qur'an
in Muslims' lives? Its recital is only for earning reward in the next world or using it as amulet for
protection of their children from misfortunes and untoward occurrences! Learn lesson if you
have any understanding.

Now, let us return to our original topic:

You have heard what was the position of Qur'an and hadith during 'Umar's reign. In the same
period there was increase in scholastic debate, as the Islamic victories naturally led to mingling
of Muslims with other religions and groups, and there were scholars, rabbis, bishops and
patricians in those religions who discussed and debated on religious matters. In this way,
scholastic theology got boost although it was not much arranged or recorded - its early books are
attributed to later scholars.

It continued during 'Uthman's time, but people turned against the caliph. However, he succeeded
in gathering of various collections of Qur'an and uniting the Muslims on one version.

The same was the condition during 'Ali's caliphate; but he remained busy in reform of Muslim
society, as there were internal conflicts which led to battles one after another. However, he
founded Arabic grammar (syntax) and dictated its general broad lines to his companion, Abu'l-
Aswad ad-Duali, and told him to write down smaller details. He could not do more, but he
delivered important sermons and ahadith, which contain comprehensive materials of religious
knowledge and finest Qur'anic mysteries. In addition, his scholastic discussions are recorded in
collections of hadith,

This situation of Qur'an and hadith continued in Mu'awiyah's reign and after him during the
Umayyad and 'Abbasid periods' up to nearly beginning of the fourth century of hijrah. It
coincided with the end of the time of twelve Shi'ite Imams. Nothing important happened in
respect of discussions about Qur'an and hadith - except what happened during Mu'awiyah's reign
as he tried his utmost to destroy the name of the Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.) and obliterate their tracks. For
this purpose he started forgery of ahadith in an organized way. The religious rule turned into an
autocratic despotic government, and the Islamic sunnah gave way to byzantine splendor and
authority. Also in this same period 'Umar ibn 'Abdi 'l-'Aziz gave order to put hadith in writing;
before that muhaddithun used to take, preserve and transmit traditions verbally without recording
them on paper.
In this very period, Arabic poetry got wide prevalence in society. It began in Mu'awiyah's time,
as he was very keen to spread it, and it continued during Umayyad and 'Abbasid periods.
Sometimes, they rewarded two lines of poetry, or a fine literary point with hundreds and
thousands of dinar. People dedicated themselves to poetry and its transmission, and to history of
Arabia and their battles; they earned through it magnificent wealth. The Umayyads benefited
very much from spread of poetry and paid good money for it, because it supported their stand
vis-a-vis Hashimites; the same advantage was taken from it by Abbasids vis-a-vis Fatimids. The
rulers paid high respects to scholars in order that they could help them against masses, and could
make them do what they (rulers) wanted.

Poetry and literature got so much hold on academic circles that you would see many scholars,
while engaged in intellectual or academic discussions, offering a poetry or well-known proverb
as their proof, and winning the debate. Often they base theoretical purports on linguistic rules - at
least they begin with linguistic explanation of the name of the subject and then enter into its main
topics. All these things do have deep influence on scholars' thoughts and their academic
proceedings.

In those very days scholastic discussions got wide prevalence; many books and booklets were
written on this subject. Soon the scholars were divided into two big sects: the Ash'arites and the
Mu'tazilites. The seeds of their views were present at the time of the caliphs - nay, of the Prophet
(s.a.w.) himself. Its proof may be found in the recorded arguments of 'Ali (a.s.) regarding
compulsion and delegation, qadar and ability, etc. and in the narrated ahadith of the Prophet
(s.a.w.) on these subjects. (For example: His (may Allah bless him and his progeny) saying
which is narrated from him: "There is no compulsion, nor delegation; rather it is a position
between the two." And his saying: "The Qadariyyah are the Mazdaists of this ummah." (Author's
Note)) What happened at this time was clear distinction of the two groups in their opinions. The
Mu'tazilites accorded total authority to dictates of reason over apparent aspects of religion, like
the beliefs that good and evil may be understood through intellect; that it is wrong to give
precedence to something without a reason; that it is repugnant to force someone to do what is
beyond his power; that man is totally independent in his actions, and that he has been given all
power, etc. The Ash'arites, on the other hand, gave total authority to apparent factors of religion
on the dictates of reason, like the rejection of idea that good and evil could be understood
through intellect; that it was quite in order to give precedence without a reason; that man is not
independent in his actions, rather he is under compulsion; that the speech of Allah is eternal, and
many similar ideas which are found in their books.

Then they wrote and arranged the subject of scholastic theology, coined its terminologies, and
added to it some issues with which they faced the philosophers in imaginative topics of general
proposition. This happened when the works of Greek philosophy were translated into Arabic and
its study spread among the Muslims. Anyhow, it is not correct to say (as some have done) that
the scholastic theology began in Islam or divided into I'tizal and Ash'ariyyah after the transfer of
philosophy to Arabia. The existence in the early traditions of their major issues and opinions is
sufficient to refute such an idea.

The Mu'tazilites continued to multiply in number and their splendor and might kept on
increasing from their advent to the early 'Abbasid period (early third century of hijrah); then they
began their downward slide until the Ayyubids extinguished their life. Only Allah knows how
many people were massacred at that time and later for the crime of I'tizal. This left the field clear
for the Ash'arites to indulge into scholastic discourses without anybody being there to oppose
them; so they entered its arena (while previously their jurisprudents used to brand it a sin!). Now,
Ash'ariyyah is the prevalent school among the Sunnis today.

The Shi'ites had precedence in scholastic discussions. They began speaking in this vein soon
after the departure of the Prophet (s.a.w.). Most of their scholars were companions of the Prophet
(s.a.w.) e.g. Salman, Abu Dharr, Miqdad, 'Ammar and 'Amr ibn al-Hamq and others. Also there
were among the tabi'in people like Rushayd, Kumayl and Maytham and the descendants of 'Ali
(a.s.). Umayyads annihilated them; yet they put down new roots and were reinvigorated in the
days of the two Imams al-Baqir and as-Sadiq (peace be on them). They took part in discussions
and wrote books and booklets. Their efforts continued in spite of the persecution and suppression
of the governments. However they were given some breathing space during the Buwayhids' rule.
(About 4th century of hijrah) Then again they were strangulated until the advent of the Safavid
kingdom (early 10th century of hijrah) in Iran - and this situation continues till today.

The characteristic style of their scholastic discussions was more in conformity with Mu'tazilites
than with Ash'arites. The Shi'ite and Mu'tazilite views were almost similar in many aspects, as
for example they too believed that good and evil were perceivable through intellect, to give
precedence without reason was wrong, and in the questions of qadar and delegation. This
similarity made some people to think that the Shi'ites and the Mu'tazilites went on the same way
in scholastic matters, like two competing horses. But they have totally missed the point, because
the fundamentals which are narrated from the Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.) - which are the
authority in the Shi'ite sect - have no affinity with the Mu'tazilite taste and style.

In short, the scholastic theology is a noble branch of knowledge, which defends the true religious
precepts. But the Muslim scholars went awry in their debates and discussions and they made no
distinction between intellectual propositions; they mixed truth with acceptable, as we shall
explain it later to some extent.

During the same period, ancients' books were translated into Arabic; they were related to logic,
mathematics, physics, divinity, medicine, and practical hikmah. Some were translated in
Umayyad reign, and the exercise was completed in the early 'Abbasid period. Hundreds of books
were rendered into Arabic from the Greek, Latin, Sanskirit, Persian and Suriyac languages.
People became engaged in studies of various fields of knowledge, and in a short time they
formed independent views and opinions. Of course, the religious scholars were enraged by this
"development", especially when they looked at the open attacks against the accepted religious
issues launched by atheists, philosophers, Manichaeans and others; they were also infuriated by
the Muslim philosophers' disparaging the religion and religionists, and insulting the
fundamentals of Islam and landmarks of shari'ah. And there is no disease like ignorance!

What inflamed their anger most was the philosophers' habit of basing the issues on the principles
derived from Greek astronomy and physics, like the arrangement of Ptolemaic celestial bodies,
and their belief that those skies were the fifth nature; they could not be rent or mended; they were
eternal as was the astronomical system in person; likewise the elements were eternal in species;
all species were eternal and so on. In fact, all these issues were based on principles that were
taken for granted and for which philosophy had not established any proof. Yet ignorant persons
posing as philosophers were presenting them as if they were proven issues. The atheists and their
likes who professed to believe in philosophy added to it other false issues like belief in
transmigration of soul, rejection of resurrection, particularly the physical one. They used all these
suppositions for ridiculing literal meanings of religion. Sometimes one of them would say:
Religion is a collection of blindly followed rituals and responsibilities, which the prophets had
brought for training and perfecting the simple and primitive minds; but a philosopher who has
attained real knowledge, does not need them or their message, they had firm standing on the path
of argumentation.

This behavior prompted and called the jurisprudents and scholastic scholars to stand against
them and refute their views; to annihilate their influence by all possible means, debating with
them, cursing and disavowing them, declaring them out of the fold of Islam. In this way, they
broke their force, dispersed their gathering, and destroyed their books during Mutawakkil's reign.
Then philosophy was on the verge of extinction; until it was revived by the Second Teacher, Abu
Nasr al-Farabi (d. 339 AH) and then ash-Shaykhu 'r-Rais Abu 'Ali al-Husayn ibn 'Abdillah ibn
Sina (d. 428 AH) followed by other stalwarts of philosophy like Abu 'Ali ibn Miskwnyh, Ibn
Rushd al-Andulusi and others. Since then, philosophy has remained alive although the number of
its students has always been small; it rotates between strength and weakness.

Although philosophy was first brought to Arabia, very few Arabs, like al-Kindi and Ibn Rushd
got fame as philosophers. Lately it has settled in Iran.

The Muslim scholars of 'ilmu'l-kalam opposed philosophy and vehemently refuted it. However,
most of them accorded acceptance to Logic as they found it conforming to the natural way of
argumentation; so they wrote books and booklet on this discipline.

But, as you have been told earlier, they erred in its use: They applied the rules of real definition
and its parts on mentally posited concepts, and used the proof in propositions of subjective
consideration - while in fact proof had nothing to do with it, it was the field of argumentative
syllogism. You will find them talking on scholastic issues like good and evil, reward and
punishment, forfeiture and grace, and they describe its genus, class and limits, they describe its
definition. Likewise, they argue regarding issues of usul and al-kalam (in branches of religion)
on the basis of inevitability and impossibility; it is an example of using realities in mentally
posited issues. On the other hand, they say that: This is obligatory for Allah', or This is improper
for Allah'. In this way they make subjective considerations rule over realities - and they think
that it is proof! In fact, it is just a poetic analogy.

They went ahead in this respect to such a stage that one of them said: Allah is so sublime that
subjective consideration cannot creep into His command and action, such consideration is mere
allusion; therefore whatever He has created or legislated are real factual matters. Another one
said: Allah has all power; it would be beneath His omnipotence to give an order and not to be
able to establish a proof for it; therefore proof covers both created things and legislated orders.
There are other such absurd sayings that, by my life, are tragedies of knowledge and people of
knowledge; and even greater tragedy is for me to feel compelled to record and discuss them in
academic works.

In this same period, Sufism appeared among the Muslims. Its rudiments were found in the garb
of asceticism. Then the Sufis began openly showing their colors in early 'Abbasid period, when
people like Abu Yazid, Junayd, ash-Shibli and Ma'ruf appeared on the scene. They believe that
the true way for reaching real human perfection and attaining realities of cognition is to enter
into an Sufi tariqah (path). This path is a sort of diligence in practice of shari'ah for attaining to
the reality. A greater part of them - among the Shi'ites and Sunnites both - trace their chain to
'Ali (a.s.).

They claim to perform some supernatural deeds, and their talks contain things that go against
clear concepts of religion and dictate of reason (saying that those expressions have correct
interpretations which are beyond the understanding of general people!). Consequently, fuqaha'
and general Muslims could not tolerate such utterances; they opposed them, avoided them and
decreed that they were infidels. Sometimes they were imprisoned, whipped, killed, crucified,
chased away, or banished. All this happened because of their moral depravity and their loose
talks that they called mysteries of the shari'ah. But if the things were as they claimed, and the
Sufis' path was the kernel of reality and concepts of religion were merely its shell, then the
legislator of the shari'ah had more right to pay attention to it and make it public - as they are
doing. On the other hand, if it is not truth, then what is there after truth except error and
falsehood?

The Sufis, to begin with, expressed their views relating to the path in words only. After finding
some place in people's hearts, they started writing books and tracts after the third century of
hijrah. Then they went ahead and declared in clear words their opinion about reality and path
together; and what they wrote in prose and poetry spread to all corners of the world.

Their number kept increasing, and so did their strength and influence among Muslim masses.
They reached the pinnacle of their prestige in the sixth and seventh centuries of hijrah.

Then began their retreat; their status suffered and general public turned away from them. There
were two factors that led to their downfall:

First: When a system, which involves general public, becomes highly popular attracting the
masses, insincere people take its advantage seeking to gain worldly riches through it; they
disguise themselves, showing that they were deeply rooted in that system and are particularly
attached to it. This exploitation makes people dislike, nay, hate the whole system.

Second: A group of their mashayikh said that the way to know one's self was an innovation,
which the Legislator of the shari'ah had not enacted, yet it was a pleasing way which Allah is
pleased with, as He was pleased with monasticism which the Christians had innovated. not
prescribe it to them only to seek Allah's pleasure, but they did not observe it with its due
observance... (57:27).

The masses agreed whole-heartedly with it. This opened the way to them to create for it rituals
and etiquettes hitherto unknown in shari'ah. They went on innovating fresh procedure that
resulted in discarding a procedure of the shari'ah. Ultimately a time came when the shari'ah was
placed on one side and the tariqah (way) stood on another side. Not surprisingly, it led to
indulgence in unlawful things, discarding of obligatory practices of religion - in short, shari'ah
was treated as abrogated, there appeared groups like al-Qalandariyyah, and nothing remained of
Sufism except beggary and addiction to opium and bhang - which they call 'obliteration of the
self.

What have the Book and the Sunnah to say on this subject? They guide to the verdict of reason.
According to them, it is true that behind the external aspect of the shari'ah there are realities that
are its hidden or esoteric meanings. It is also correct to say that man has a way to reach that
reality. But that way is to deligently follow and obey the external aspect of the shari'ah - nothing
else. Far be it from us to think that there was any esoteric idea which the external practices did
not lead to; it is the external which identifies the hidden or esoteric realities, and leads to them.
Far be it from us to suppose that there was a nearer path than the one laid down by the Bringer of
religion, but the Prophet did not pay heed to it, or showed negligence towards it or ignored it for
some reason. Remember what Allah says: ...and We have revealed the Book to you explaining
clearly everything (16:89).

To make a long story short, three methods developed for searching and uncovering of realities:
the external meaning of religion, the way of intellectual research, and that of purification of soul.
A Muslim group adopted each method - and the three groups continue to dispute and quarrel
with one another. They are like the angles of a triangle; if one of them becomes bigger, the other
two are bound to reduce and vice versa. The methods used in Qur'anic exegesis greatly differed
from one another resulting from vast differences in exegetes' taste. Usually they imposed their
own academic views on the Qur'an, instead of letting the Qur'an shape their views - with rare
exceptions.

You have seen that the Book confirms all that is true in each method and way. It cannot be that
there is a true hidden reality, which the external sense does not conform to, or that there is a truth
- hidden or apparent - which is opposed by true proof.

That is why some 'ulama', according to the knowledge they had, and with diverse tastes, tried to
bring conformance between apparent senses of religion and 'irfan, like Ibnu'l-'Arabi, 'Abdu ‘r-
Razzaq al-Kashani, Ibn Fahd, the Second Martyr and al-Fayd al Kashani; while others
endeavored to bring agreement between philosophy and 'irfan, like Abu Nasr al-Farabi, ash-
Shaykh as-Suhrawardi (the illuminist) and ash-Shaykh Sainu 'd-Din Mahammad Turkeh. Still
others attempted to bring conformity between apparent senses of religion and philosophy, like al-
Qadi Sa'id and others; while a fourth group endeavored to make all the above disciplines
conform with one another, like Ibn Sina in his exegesis and books, and Mulla Sadra in his books
and tracts in addition to some later scholars.

In spite of that, the deep-rooted difference continues as before; the more attempts are made to
uproot, it the deeper go the roots; the more water is thrown on this fire, the higher rise the flames.

You find that no amulet is of any benefit.

Scholars of every discipline accuse experts of other fields of ignorance, atheism, or stupidity,
while the masses disavow all of them together.

This is the result of initial error when the ummah did not pay heed in the beginning to the call of
the Book for joint meditation: and holdfast to the rope of Allah and be not divided... (3:103)

Conversation drifts from one topic to another. O Allah! Guide us to what would make You
pleased with us; unite our word on truth; give us a guardian from You; and give us a helper from
You.

Traditions
It is reported (by as-Suyuti) under the verse: O People of the Book! Indeed has come to you Our
Messenger making clear to you much of what you concealed of the Book... Ibnu 'd-Daris, an-
Nasai, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim and al-Hakim (who said that it was correct) have narrated from
Ibn 'Abbas that he said, "Whoever denies stoning, he denies the Qur'an from whence he thinks
not. Allah has said: O People of the Book! Indeed has come to you Our Messenger making clear
to you much of what you concealed of the Book. So, stoning was among what they had
concealed." (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: It points to what we shall write under the verse: O Messenger! Let not those
grieve you who strive together... (5:41) that how the Jews had concealed the commandment of
stoning in the days of the Prophet (s.a.w.), and how he (s.a.w.) exposed it. at-Tafsir of al-Qummi
explains the words of Allah: after a cessation of the messengers, as 'after discontinuation of the
messengers'.

(al-Kulayni narrates) through his chains from Abu Hamzah Thabit ibn Dinar ath-Thumali and
Abu ‘r-Rabi' that he said, "We performed hajj with Abu Ja'far (a.s.) in the year when Hisham ibn
'Abdu'l-Malik too went for hajj; and there was with him Nafi' mawla (client) of 'Umar ibn al-
Khattab. He looked at Abu Ja'far (a.s.) in the rukn of the Ka'bah and people had gathered around
him. Nafi' said, 'O leader of the faithful! Who is it that people are pressing around him?'
(Hisham) said, 'He is the prophet of the people of Kufah; he is Muhammad ibn 'Ali.' (Nafi') said,
'I bear witness that I shall certainly go to him and ask him about problems which no one would
give me their reply except a Prophet or successor of a Prophet.' (Hisham) said, Then go and ask
him; perhaps you would put him to shame.'

"So Nafi' came (near) until he leaned on people; then he was close to Abu Ja'far (a.s.). Then he
said, 'O Muhammad ibn 'Ali! I have read the Torah, the Injil, the Zabur and the Qur'an; and I
have understood its lawful and its unlawful; and I have come to ask you about problems which
no one would reply except a prophet or a successor of the prophet.'" (The narrator) said, "So Abu
Ja'far raised his head and said, 'Ask whatever you want to.' (Nafi') said, Tell me how many years
(had passed) between ‘Isa and Muhammad?' (Abu Ja'far) said, 'Should I inform you according to
my view or your view?' (Nafi') said, Tell me according to both together.' He (Abu Ja'far) said,
'As according to my view, five-hundred years, and as according to your view, six-hundred
years.'" (al-Kafi)

The author says: Various traditions are narrated concerning the reason of revelation of verses.
For example, at-Tabari has narrated from 'Ikrimah that the Jews had queried the Messenger of
Allah (s.a. w.a.) about the law of stoning. So he asked who was the most knowledgeable of them;
they pointed to Ibn Suriya. He (the Messenger of Allah) adjured him by Allah whether there was
the commandment of stoning (the adulterer and adulteress) in their books. He said, "When it
increased in our society, we flogged hundred (lashes) and shaved (their) heads." The Prophet
sentenced them to be stoned. Then Allah revealed: O People of the Book! Indeed has come to
you Our Messenger making clear to you much of what you concealed... and guides them to the
straight path (5:15-16).

Also he has narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said, "Ibn Ubayy, Bahri ibn 'Amr and Shas ibn
'Adiyy came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.); he talked with them and they talked with him.
He called them to Allah and warned them of His punishment. So they said, 'What are you
frightening us with O Muhammad! We, by Allah! Are the sons of Allah and His beloved ones' -
they used the words of the Christians. Then Allah revealed about them: And the Jews and the
Christians say: 'We are the sons of Allah and his beloved ones.' Say: 'Why does He then chastise
you for your sins?'... (5:18)"

He has also narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said, "The Messenger of Allah invited the Jews to
Islam; he excited their interest in Islam and frightened them, but they refused to listen. Then
Ma'adh ibn Jabal, Sa'd ibn 'Ubadah and 'Uqbah ibn Wahb said to them, 'O group of Jews! Fear
Allah, because, by Allah, you certainly know that he is the Messenger of Allah; you were telling
us about him before his being sent, and describing to us his attributes.' So Rafi' ibn Huraymalah
and Wahb ibn Yahuda said, 'We did not tell it to you; and Allah has not revealed any book after
Musa, nor did he send any bringer of good news or any warner after him.' Thereupon, Allah
revealed: O People of the Book! Indeed Our Messenger has come to you explaining to you after
a cessation of the messengers... (5:19)"

as-Suyuti has narrated it in ad-Durru'l-manthur from Ibn 'Abbas and others; and has narrated
other stories too.

The author says: These traditions like most of the narratives giving theoretical reasons are, in
fact, mere attempts to fit some occurrences on a verse, and then claiming that it was revealed for
this reason. These are merely theoretical reasons; the verses most probably do have general
connotation.
Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 20-
26
 
ْ َ‫ج َعلَكُم ُّملُو ًكا َوآتَاكُم َّما ل‬
‫م‬ َ ‫ُم أَن ِبيَاء َو‬ ْ ‫ل فِيك‬ َ ‫ج َع‬ َ ‫ُم إِ ْذ‬ ْ ‫ه َعلَ ْيك‬ ِ ّ ‫م َة الل‬ َ ‫ه يَا َق ْو ِم ا ْذك ُُرو ْا نِ ْع‬ ِ ‫وسى لِ َق ْو ِم‬ َ ‫ل ُم‬ َ ‫َوإِ ْذ َقا‬
‫ُم َوال َ تَ ْرتَدُّوا َعلَى‬ ْ ‫ب الل ُّه لَك‬ َ ‫س َة الَّتِي َك َت‬ َ ‫م َق َّد‬ُ ‫ض ال‬ َ
َ ‫خلُوا األ ْر‬ ُ ‫} يَا َق ْو ِم ا ْد‬20{ ‫ين‬ َ ‫م‬ ِ َ‫ِمن ا ْل َعال‬./ِّ ‫ح ًدا‬ َ
َ ‫ُي ْؤتِ أ‬
‫جوا ِم ْن َها‬ْ ُ ‫خ ُر‬ ْ َ‫ى ي‬
َ ‫ح َّت‬ َ ‫خل َها‬ َ َ
ُ ‫ين َوإِنَّا لن نَّ ْد‬ َ ‫ار‬ ِ َّ‫جب‬ َ
َ ‫وسى إِنَّ فِي َها ق ْو ًما‬ َ ‫} قالُوا يَا ُم‬21{ ‫ين‬ َ َ ‫س ِر‬ ِ ‫خا‬ َ ‫ُم َف َتن َقلِ ُبوا‬ ْ ‫ارك‬ِ َ‫أَ ْدب‬
َ َ‫م ا ْلب‬
‫اب‬ ُ ‫خلُو ْا َعلَ ْي ِه‬ ُ ‫ما ا ْد‬َ ‫م الل ُّه َعلَ ْي ِه‬ َ
َ ‫خافُونَ أ ْن َع‬ َ ‫ين َي‬ َ ‫ن الَّ ِذ‬ َ ‫ن ِم‬ ِ َ ‫جال‬ ُ ‫ل َر‬ َ ‫} َقا‬22{ َ‫خلُون‬ ِ ‫جو ْا ِم ْن َها َف ِإنَّا َدا‬ ُ ‫خ ُر‬ ْ َ‫َف ِإن ي‬
‫خلَ َها‬ ُ ‫وسى إِنَّا لَن نَّ ْد‬ َ ‫} َقالُو ْا يَا ُم‬23{ ‫ين‬ َ ِ‫ُنتم ُّم ْؤ ِمن‬ ُ ‫ه َف َت َو َّكلُو ْا إِن ك‬ ِ ّ ‫ُم غَالِ ُبونَ َو َعلَى الل‬ ْ ‫مو ُه َفإِنَّك‬ ُ ‫خ ْل ُت‬
َ ‫َفإِذَا َد‬
‫سي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ن‬
ِ َْ ِ ُ ِ ْ َّ ‫ال‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ل‬‫م‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ي‬ . ‫ِن‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ِب‬
.
/ ِّ ِ ِّ / َ َ ‫ر‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ َ
‫ق‬ } 24 { ‫د‬
َ‫ِ ُ ون‬‫ع‬ ‫ا‬ َ
‫ق‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ا‬
َ ُ َ َّ ِ ِ ‫ن‬‫إ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ت‬ ‫َا‬
‫ق‬ َ
‫ف‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ر‬ ‫و‬
َ ُّ َ َ َ ‫نت‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ه‬
ْ َ ْ ‫ذ‬ ‫ا‬ َ
‫ف‬ ‫ا‬ َ ِ ُ َ َّ ‫أَبَ ًدا‬
‫ه‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ا‬ْ ‫و‬‫م‬‫ا‬ ‫د‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬
‫يهونَ فِي‬ ُ ِ‫س َن ًة َيت‬ َ ‫ين‬ َ ‫م أ ْربَ ِع‬ َ ْ ‫ة َعلَ ْي ِه‬ٌ ‫ح َّر َم‬َ ‫ل َف ِإنَّ َها ُم‬ َ ‫} َقا‬25{ ‫ين‬ َ ‫س ِق‬ ِ ‫ن ا ْل َق ْو ِم ا ْل َفا‬ َ ‫خي َفاف ُْرقْ بَ ْي َن َنا َوبَ ْي‬ ِ َ‫َوأ‬
}26{ ‫ين‬ َ ‫س ِق‬ ِ ‫س َعلَى ا ْل َق ْو ِم ا ْل َفا‬ َ ‫األ َ ْرضِ َفال َ تَ ْأ‬
{20} And when Musa said to his people: "O my people! Remember the favor of Allah upon you
when He raised prophets among you and made you kings and gave you what He had not given
any other in the worlds. {21} O my people! Enter the holy land, which Allah has prescribed for
you and turn not on your backs, for then you will turn back losers". {22} They said: "O Musa!
Surely there is a strong race in it, and we will never enter it until they go out from it, so if they go
out from it, then surely we will enter". {23} Two men of those who feared, upon both of whom
Allah had bestowed a favor, said: "Enter upon them by the gate, for when you have entered it
you shall surely be victorious, and on Allah you should rely if you are believers". {24} They
said: "O Musa! We shall never enter it at all so long as they remain therein; go therefore you and
your Lord, then fight you both, surely we will here sit down". {25} He said: "My Lord! Surely I
have no control (upon any) but my own self and (so does) my brother; therefore make a
separation between us and the nation of transgressors". {26} He said: "So it shall surely be
forbidden to them for forty years, they shall wander about in the land, therefore do not grieve for
the nation of transgressors".
 

Commentary
The verses are not without connection with the preceding ones: they show how they broke some
of the covenants they had made for listening to and obeying Musa (a.s.). How they confronted
Musa with open rejection of his order and how they were inflicted for the sin with the Divine
punishment of wandering in wilderness.

QUR'AN: And when Musa said to his people: "O my people! Remember the favour of Allah
upon you...": The verses related to Musa's life show that this incident - the call of Musa to them
to enter the holy land -  had occurred after their exodus from Egypt; as the phrase: "and made
you kings", in this verse too proves it.

The clause: "and gave you what He had not given any other in the worlds", shows that before
that time they were favored with several signs of divine favor, like manna and quails, gushing
forth of water from stone and making the clouds to give shade over them.
The phrase: the nation of transgressors, repeated twice, shows that even before this event they
were habitually opposing and disobeying the divine messenger, i.e. Musa, until transgression
became a confirmed trait of their character.

All these aspects prove that this wandering in wilderness had occurred during the last phase of
Musa (a.s.)'s life among them, and that most of the events described in the Qur'an concerning
them had taken place before it.

Musa's words: "Remember the favor of Allah upon you", point to the sum total of all the favors
Allah had bestowed on them. He has used it to prepare them for what he was going to command
them, i.e. to enter the holy land. He reminded them of the Lord's favors, in order that they might
become enthusiastic for receiving more favors and blessings. Allah had bestowed His bounties
upon them by sending Musa to them, guiding them to His religion, delivering them from
Pharaoh, sending the Torah to them and legislating the shari'ah. They had got almost everything;
now there was only one thing to complete these favors - that they should have a holy land where
they would live in and rule over it independently.

Musa (a.s.), while enumerating the favors, divided them into three categories:

1) "He raised prophets among you": It could refer to the prophets in their direct ancestral line,
i.e., Ibrahim, Ishaq, Ya'qub and those after them, or specifically to those from the Children of
Israel, i.e., Yusuf, the tribes, Musa and Harun. Prophethood is another favor.

2) "and made you kings": The word muluk (plural of al-malik) is usually translated as "kings".
Here it means: free from humiliation of Pharaohs' subjugation, independent of tyrants'
oppression. He is truly a king who independently manages the affairs of his own self, his family
and his property. The Israelites, at the time of Musa (a.s.), followed a social system that was the
best of all. It was the system of monotheism which exhorted them to obey Allah and His
messenger, to enforce complete justice in society and non-aggression against other nations; they
did not allow anyone of their group to acquire mastery over them; there was no such class
distinction among them which could disrupt their social order. There was no one over them
except Musa (a.s.) - and he was a prophet who did not behave like a king or a tribal chief who
gains upper hand unjustly.

Someone has offered another explanation for this phrase: "made you kings"; that Allah had
decreed that there would be kings among them beginning with Talut, then Dawud and going to
their last king. The speech, accordingly, refers to the future and is the news of the unseen,
because kingdom did not come to them except sometime after Musa. There is no difficulty in this
explanation, except that the phrase: "and made you kings", does not agree with it. If this
explanation were perfect, Allah would have said: 'and made among you kings', as He has said:
"He raised prophets among you."

Possibly, the "kingdom" could merely indicate concentration of authority in some members; it
would then include the custom of sheikhdom. In this light, Musa too would be a king, followed
by Joshua; before them Yusuf was king; this would reach to well-known kings, Talut, Dawud,
Sulayman and others. But the above-mentioned objection applies to this explanation also.

3) "and gave you what He had not given any other in the worlds": It reminds them of the divine
care and blessings that were joined with clear important signs. Those favors guaranteed that their
lives would improve and straighten out if they remained firm on their words and adhered to their
covenant. Those were the clear signs that surrounded them from all sides during their stay in
Egypt, and after they were delivered from Pharaoh and his people. It is a fact that no nation
before Musa's time was given so many and so continuous signs, miracles, and brilliant proofs.
Israelites were the first to be blessed with such favors in their nation's life.

Accordingly, there is no reason to say (as some have done) that "the worlds" means 'worlds of
that time'. The verse asserts that no nation throughout the world up to that time was blessed with
so many favors as were the Israelites. And it is a fact.

QUR'AN: "O my people! Enter the holy land which Allah has prescribed for you and turn not
on your backs, for then you will turn back losers": Musa ordered them to enter the holy land; but
looking at their past he knew they would not obey him. That is why he emphasized the order by
forbidding them to turn on their backs and warning them of the consequences of disobedience,
that they would turn losers, The proof that he was apprehensive of their disobedience because of
their past behavior is found in his description "transgressors" used for them after their refusal to
enter. Just one instance of disobedience does not justify the use of this active participle for them;
it is generally used when one repeatedly and continuously indulges in that action.

The land is described as holy. Exegetes have explained it as the land free from polytheism
because prophets and believers made it their abode. There is nothing in the Qur'an to explain this
word. Yet there are in it other expressions nearer in meaning. For example: ...to the remote
mosque of which We have blessed the precincts... (17:1). And We made the people who were
deemed weak to inherit the East and the West of the land, which we had blessed;... (7:137). To
bless a land means only to place in it a great good; and a part of that great good is establishment
of the religion and removal of the impurity of polytheism.

The clause: "Allah has prescribed for you", apparently means that Allah had decreed that they
would abide therein. The later coming clause: So it shall surely be forbidden to them for forty
years, does not contradict it, rather it supports it, because the clause: "Allah has prescribed for
you", is general, it has left vague many details - it does not say for what time and for whom it has
been assigned; it is addressed to the ummah without specifying who comes under its circle. It has
been said that all the people who had been addressed and were given that order, had expired and
perished in the wilderness, and it was their sons and grandsons who entered the holy land under
Joshua ben Nun. In any case, the clause: So it shall surely be forbidden to them for forty years,
indicates that this assignment was to take place after this period.

This prescription is seen in the verses: And We desired to bestow a favor upon those who were
deemed weak in the land, and to make them the Imams, and to make them the heirs, and to grant
them power in the land (28:5-6). Musa (a.s.) hoped that his people would get that land provided
they sought help from Allah and were patient, as Allah says: Musa said to his people: "Ask help
from Allah and be patient; surely the land is Allah's; He causes such of His servants to inherit it
as He pleases, and the end is for those who fear (Allah)." They said: "We have been persecuted
before you came to us and since you have come to us." He said: "It may be that your Lord will
destroy your enemy and make you rulers in the land, then He will see how you act "(7:128-9).

And it is this promise whose fulfillment is mentioned in these words: And We made the people
who were deemed weak to inherit the East and the West of the land which We had blessed; and
the good word of your Lord was fulfilled in the Children of Israel because they bore up
(sufferings) patiently;... (7:137). This verse shows that their domination over the holy land and
their settlement there was a divine word; a decided fact and firm decree provided they remained
patient in Allah's obedience, in avoidance of His disobedience and in bitter happenings.

We have widened the circle of patience because the verse is unrestricted, and also because hard
events were piling up over them during Musa's time in addition to the divine commands and
prohibitions. The more they persisted in disobedience, the harder became their assignments, as
may be seen in their stories mentioned in the noble Qur'an.

This is the apparent Qur'anic connotation of prescription of the holy land for them. Yet the verses
are vague as to its time and extent. However, the following verses make it clear that this
prescription was conditional, not unrestricted, or irrevocable: It may be that your Lord will have
mercy on you, and if you again return (to disobedience) We too will return (to punishment). And
We have made hell a prison for the unbelievers (17:8); (Musa's words in the above-mentioned
verse): "It may be that your Lord will destroy your enemy and make you rulers in the land, then
He will see how you act" (7:128-9). And when Musa said to his people: "Call to mind Allah's
favor to you when He delivered you from Pharaoh's people... And when your Lord made it
known: 'If you are grateful, I would certainly give you more; and if you are ungrateful, My
chastisement is truly severe'" (14:6-7).

An exegete has said that the words of Musa: "Allah has prescribed for you", refer to the promise
Allah had given to Ibrahim (a.s.); then he has quoted from the Old Testament the divine promises
to Ibrahim, Ishaq and Ya'qub, that He would give the land to their progeny; and has gone to
some length in this topic. But keeping in view the limit we have put for our book, it is not of
much concern to us to discuss it, no matter whether those promises were in the original Torah or
are the handiwork of manipulators and forgerers. Certainly the Qur'an is not explained through
the Torah.

QUR'AN: They said: "O Musa! Surely there is a strong race in it; and we will never enter it
until they go out from it, so if they go out from it, then surely we will enter: ar-Raghib has said:
"The real meaning of al-Jabr is to restore a thing with some force. It is said: Jabartuhu fa-
injabara wa ijtabara 'I mended it, so it became mended and restored.’ " He further says:
"Sometimes al-jabr is used for restoring and mending (without connotation of force); for
example, the saying of 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him): 'O who sets every broken (thing or
heart), O who makes easy every difficult (situation or problem)’; in this sense they call bread
Jabir ibn habbah ('restorer son of grain'); at other times it is used for force and compulsion only,
as (the Prophet) has said: La jabra wa la tafwid (There is no compulsion nor delegation')." He
goes on to say: "al-Ijbar (to compel) actually means to make someone to restore another one, but
it is commonly used for mere compulsion; the clause: 'I forced him', has the meaning of, 'I
compelled him'." He has further explained: "al-Jabbar  (tyrant, gigantic, insolent) when used for
a man implies that having a defect, he tries to make it up by claiming for himself a high position
which he does not deserve. It is only used in derogatory sense. Allah says: ...and every insolent
opposer was disappointed (14:15). ...and He has not made me insolent, unblessed (19:32).  '...
there is a strong race in it' (5:22)." Also he writes: "Keeping in view the idea of overwhelming
by towering over one's fellows, they say: a jabbarah (giant) date tree; a jabbarah (colossal) she-
camel."

It is now clear that "strong race" in this verse refers to the group with power and authority who
compel people to obey them.

The sentence: "and we will never enter it until they go out from it", makes their entering the land
conditional on the exit of the strong race from it; in reality it is rejection of Musa's order,
although they promised again to enter it if their condition was met: "so if they go out from it,
then surely we will enter."

A number of traditions have been narrated describing those Amalekites, how huge were their
bodies and how tall their stature, they contain such strange things as no sane person can accept;
no archaeological find supports those stories, nor any physical research has found their trace.
Obviously those traditions are mere forgeries, inserted in Islamic literature.

QUR'AN: Two men of those who feared, upon both of whom Allah had bestowed a favor, said:
"Enter upon them by the gate,... and on Allah you should rely if you are believers": The context
clearly shows that the fear means fear of Allah; there were people who feared God and avoided
disobedience of Allah and His prophet; and these two men belonged to that group; that is why
they said what they said. Moreover, they had a distinction among that group that Allah had
bestowed His favor upon them, it has been earlier mentioned in this book that when "favor"
comes in the Qur'an without any condition, it denotes divine wilayah (friendship); so, the two
men were among the friends of Allah. This in itself indicates that the above-mentioned fear
refers to fear of Allah, because friends of Allah are not afraid of anything, they fear only Allah.
He says: Now surely the friends of Allah - they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve (10:62).

It may possibly be said that bestowal of divine favor is related to fear; that is, Allah had
bestowed His fear upon them. In the phrase: "those who feared", object of the verb, "feared", is
omitted because it is understood from the phrase: "upon both of whom Allah had bestowed a
favor", because clearly they were not afraid of the strong race, otherwise they would not have
exhorted the Israelites to enter as they said: '"Enter upon them by the gate'".

Some exegetes have given a strange explanation: The phrase: "of those who feared", means: Two
men from among those whom the Children of Israel feared and upon both whom Allah had
bestowed a favor by guiding them to Islam. They support it with the recital of Ibn Jubayr, who
read, yukhafun (in passive case; meaning: they were feared). They say: Two men from the
Amalekites had believed in Musa (a.s.) and joined the Children of Israel, then they advised them
as described in the verse, showing the way to vanquish Amalekites and capture their towns and
land.
This explanation is based on some explanatory traditions; but they are solitary narratives, and are
not supported by the Qur'an, etc.

"Enter upon them by the gate": "Gate" may refer to the first town of that strong race, nearest to
the Israelites; reportedly, it was called Ariha', such usage is not uncommon. Or it may refer to the
gate of the town.

"for when you have entered it you shall surely be victorious": It was their promise to the
Israelites for victory over the enemy. They gave such a definite promise, as they had full faith in
Musa (a.s.) who had said that Allah had prescribed the holy land for them - because they knew
that his statements were true. Or, probably they knew about this victory through the light of
divine friendship.

Most of the Shi'ah and Sunni exegetes have written that the two men were Joshua ben Nun and
Caleb ben Yuqina, and that they were among the twelve chiefs of the Israelites.

Then the two men invited them to rely on Allah: "and on Allah should you rely if you are
believers", because Allah is sufficient for him who relies on Him; the call was meant to set their
minds at rest and give them encouragement.

QUR'AN: They said: "O Musa! We shall never enter it at all so long as they remain therein; go
therefore you and your Lord, then fight you both, surely we will here sit down ": They repeated
their refusal, "We shall never enter it", in order to make Musa (a.s.) lose all hope of their
compliance, so that he should not go on telling them to enter.

This speech is full of derision, insult and contempt for Musa (a.s.) and the divine order and
promise that he had conveyed to them. The sentences are set in an amazing way: They totally
ignored the advice of the two men who had told them to obey Musa (a.s.)'s order, as if they did
not deserve any reply; then they told off Musa (a.s.) in a few words after they had talked with
him in the beginning to some length and given him their reason, etc. Resorting in argumentation
to brevity after lengthy talk indicates that the speaker is tired of talking with his opposite party
and does not like to hear his voice any more. Then they emphasized the repeated refusal, "We
shall never enter it", with the word, "at all"; then their stupidity emboldened them to commit the
most improper folly when they told Musa (a.s.): "go therefore you and your Lord, then fight you
both, surely we will here sit down."

This speech very clearly proves that they thought, like Idol-worshippers, that God had a body
like His creatures. And they were like this, for Allah quotes them as saying: And We made the
Children of Israel to pass the sea; then they came upon a people who kept to theworship of their
idols. They said: "O Musa! Make for us a god as they have (their) gods." He said: "Surely you
are a people acting ignorantly" (7:138). To this day they have continued to believe in
anthropomorphization and embodiment of God, as their books clearly show.

QUR'AN: He said: "My Lord! Surely I have no control (upon any) but my own self and (so
does) my brother; therefore make a separation between us and the nation of transgressors": The
context shows that the clause: "Surely I have no control (upon any) but my own self and (so
does) my brother", is an indirect declaration that he cannot make anyone, accept his call except
his own self and his brother. Obviously he could himself follow the divine command and call his
brother, Harun (a.s.) to do so; his brother was, after all, a messenger prophet and was his
successor in his life, he could not go against the divine commands. Another meaning: Musa (a.s.)
had no control except on his own self, and likewise his brother had no control except on himself.

Musa (a.s.) did not mean that he had no power at all even in making someone to listen to his
invitation to belief. Such an explanation does not agree with the context: Certainly there were the
two men who feared and many others who believed in him and had accepted his call. What we
should ponder upon is the fact that he had not included even his and his brother's families in the
people under his control, while obviously they were not disobedient to him in any way.

This mystery is solved when we look at the context and the situation. Musa (a.s.) had called his
people to a legitimate responsibility; he put all his efforts in it; but the Israeli society rejected his
call in a very ignominious and repulsive manner. This situation demanded that he should say to
Allah: 'O my Lord! I diligently conveyed your message to them, but in this affair I have no
control on anyone except my own self, and so does my brother; we have discharged the
responsibility put on our shoulders; but these people confronted us with total refusal. Now, we
have lost hope concerning them and our path is blocked. Now, we pray to You to open this knot
and with Your Lordship, pave the way for them to get your complete favor, that they may inherit
the land and be made successors in it. O Lord! Decide and judge between these transgressors and
us.’

They had in past disobeyed Musa (a.s.) on many occasions: in their demand to see the Lord, in
worship of the calf, in entering the door saying hittah, etc. But this time they transgressed all
limits; they openly rejected Musa (a.s.)'s call in a very rude manner. If Musa had left them in
their insolence, and remained silent on their flaunting his order, it would have been the end of his
prophetic call; his orders and prohibitions would have lost their value and the society would have
disintegrated, losing the unity which Musa (a.s.) had established with so much trouble.

The above statement shows that:

First: The situation demanded that Musa (a.s,) should mention his own condition and that of his
brother while complaining to Allah, because these two were the conveyors of the divine
message, and should not refer to other believers' condition (even though they were not
insubordinate), because the others had no concern with tabttgh and mission. The context required
description of the conveyor of the order, not of those who accepted the call, followed, and
obeyed the divine commandment.

Second: The situation also demanded that Musa (a.s.) should turn to his Lord with this
complaint, which in reality was a call to Allah to help him in enforcement of His command.

Third: The clause, "and my brother", is in conjunction with "I" in, "Surely I have no control".
The meaning thus will be as follows: and my brother too, like me, has no control except on his
own self. It is not in conjunction with, "my own self, which would imply that he had no control
except on himself and on his brother, because it would not agree with context, although both
connotations are correct in themselves. Musa and Harun (a.s.) both had control on their own
selves in obedience and compliance, and Musa (a.s.) had control on Harun (a.s.) that he would
obey him (Musa), because he was Musa (a.s.)'s successor in his life; likewise, both had control
on sincere believers that they would listen to, and obey them.

Fourth: The sentence: 'therefore make a separation between us and the nation of transgressors."
Musa (a.s.) does not invoke God against the Children of Israel that He should enforce on them
His final judgment by sending punishment on them, or by separating Musa and Harun (a.s.) from
them (by removing them from there or by giving death to both brothers); Musa (a.s.) was calling
them to what Allah had prescribed for them with completion of favor, and it was through him
that Allah bestowed His blessings on the Israelites by delivering them and making them
successors in land - all on his hands, as Allah says: And We desired to bestow a favor upon those
who were deemed weak in the land, and to make them the Imams, and to make them the heirs
(28:5). Also the Israelites were aware of the role of Musa in their lives, as Allah quotes them as
saying: They said: "We have been persecuted before you came to us and since you have come to
us." He said: "It may be that your Lord will destroy your enemy and make you rulers in the land,
then He will see how you act" (7:129).

Another evidence may be found in the divine advice to Musa (a.s.): therefore do not grieve for
the nation of transgressors (5:26). It shows that Musa (a.s.) was afraid of divine punishment
overtaking them, and not unexpectedly he would grieve for them when they were encircled in the
wilderness.

QUR'AN: He said: "So it shall surely be forbidden to them for forty years, they shall wander
about in the land, therefore do not grieve for the nation of transgressors.": The pronoun, "it",
refer to the holy land. The forbidding implies divine creative decree to that effect; at-tih
(wondering, wilderness); "in the land": "the" here refers to the land where they were at that time;
"do not grieve": Musa (a.s.) is advised not to be sorry for them. Allah has confirmed here Musa
(a.s.)'s description of his people as "transgressors".

Meaning: The holy land, i.e., entering and capturing it is forbidden to them, i.e., We have
decreed that they would not be able to enter it for forty years; they will wander in the land all
those years - neither will they be 'civilized' and dwell in a town, nor will they be 'Bedouins'
living a life of desert-dwellers; do not grieve for the nation of transgressors because of this
chastisement, because they are transgressors, one should not be sorry for them when they are
inflicted with retribution of their deeds.

Traditions
Ibn Abi Hatim has narrated from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said:
"The Children of Israel, if one of them had a servant, a riding animal and a woman he was
written a king." (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

Abu Dawud has narrated in his marasil from Zayd ibn Aslam, in explanation of: and made you
kings, that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said: "A wife, house and servant." (ibid.)
The author says: (as-Suyuti) has narrated other traditions too of the same theme. But the verse's
context does not agree with this explanation. Although it was possible that the Israelites used to
call everyone having a house, woman and servant a king, or write him as king, yet obviously not
all of them (even their servants!) fulfilled this condition and had houses, women and servants.
Certainly, only some of them were of that status, as is the case in other nations and generations;
acquiring house, wives and servants is a worldwide custom and no nation is without houses,
wives, and servants. Therefore, it was not something particularly bestowed on the Children of
Israel, so that Allah should count it as a special favor to them that He made them kings - and the
verse counts His special favors.

Probably awareness to this defect has led some narrators to say - as is narrated by Qatadah - that
the Israelites were first to have servants! But history does not agree with it.           

al-Mufid narrates through his chains through Abu Hamzah from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said:
"When Musa arrived with them near the holy land, he told them: 'Enter the holy land which
Allah has prescribed for you and turn not on your backs, for then you will turn back losers.' And
Allah had certainly prescribed it for them. They said: 'Surely there is a strong race in it, and we
will never enter it until they go out from it, so if they go out from it, then surely we will enter.'
Two men of those who feared, upon both of whom Allah had bestowed a favor, said: 'Enter upon
them by the gate, for when you have entered it you shall surely be victorious, and on Allah you
should rely if you are believers.' They said: 'O Musa! We shall never enter it at all so long as
they remain therein; go therefore you and your Lord, then fight you both, surely we will here sit
down.' He said: 'My Lord! Surely I have no control (upon any) but my own self and (so does) my
brother; therefore make a separation between us and the nation of transgressors.' So, when they
refused to enter it Allah made it forbidden to them, and they kept wandering within about four
parasang for forty years, wandering in the land; therefore do not grieve for the nation of
transgressors."

Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said: "When evening came, their crier called: 'Departure', so they set out
with chanting and songs; until came the dawn, and Allah ordered the land to turn round with
them, and in the morning they found themselves in the place which they had started from, then
they said (to one another): 'Certainly you lost the way.' They remained in this (punishment) for
forty years; and manna and quails were sent down to them; until all of them had died except two
persons, Joshua son of Nun and Caleb son of Yuqina as well as the children of the (first
generation). They kept wandering within - about four parasang. When they wanted to go from
there, their clothes and socks dried up upon them." He said: "They had with them a rock; when
they came down, Musa hit on it with his staff and there gushed out twelve streams from it, one
stream for each tribe; and when they departed, the water returned to the rock and it was put on an
animal..." (al-Amali, al-Mufid)
The Author says: There are so many traditions of nearly the same meaning narrated through
Shi'ah and Sunni chains. The words, "Abu 'Abdillah said", indicate beginning of another
tradition.

Although these traditions give such details about the wandering and other matters that are not
expressly supported by the verses, yet they do not contain anything, which might be considered
against the Book. Actually the affairs of Israelites in the time of Musa (a.s.) were amazing, and
their life was surrounded on all sides by supernatural happenings; therefore, there is nothing
wrong if their wandering had the features mentioned in the traditions.

Mas'adah ibn Sadaqah narrates from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he was asked about the words:
enter the holy land which Allah has prescribed for you; he said. "He wrote it for them, then
erased it, then wrote it for their children; so they (the children) entered it; Allah erases what He
pleases, and establishes (likewise), and with Him is the basis of the Book (13:39)." (at-Tafsir,
al-'Ayyashi)

The Author says: This theme has been narrated also by Isma'il al-Ju'fi from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.),
and by Zurarah, Humran and Muhammad ibn Muslim from Abu Ja'far (a.s.). The Imam (a.s.) has
looked at the generation which received from Musa (a.s.) the order to enter the land with
assurance that it was prescribed for them and at the generation which actually entered it; this
resulted in al-bada' regarding the generation prescribed for. It does not go against the apparent
context of the verse, which shows that those who were prescribed for had entered the land; it was
forbidden to them for forty years, then they entered it. In fact, the order was given to the Israeli
society collectively; thus the same people entered it for whom it was prescribed, because all were
one nation and one society. It was prescribed to that society to enter, then it was forbidden for a
time, then they succeeded in entering. In this light, there was no bada', although looking at the
particular people there certainly was bada'.

(al-Kulayni) has narrated through his chains from 'Abdu'r-Rahman ibn Yazid that Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.), said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said: The Prophet Dawud died on Saturday
morning, so the birds overshadowed him with their wings, and Musa Kalimullah died in
wilderness, so a crier announced from the sky: "Musa has died, and which soul would not die?"'"
(al-Kafi)

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 27-

32
 
 ‫ل‬ َ ‫ك َقا‬ َ ‫ل أَل َ ْق ُتلَ َّن‬ َ ‫خ ِر َقا‬ َ ‫ن اآل‬ َ ‫ل ِم‬ ْ َّ‫م ُي َت َقب‬ ْ َ‫ما َول‬ َ ‫ه‬ ِ ‫ح ِد‬ َ َ‫ل ِمن أ‬ َ ./‫ِق إِ ْذ َق َّربَا ُق ْربَانًا َف ُت ُق ِِّب‬ ِّ ./ ‫ح‬َ ‫م بِا ْل‬ َ ‫ي آ َد‬ ْ ‫م نَبَأَ ا ْب َن‬ْ ‫ل َعلَ ْي ِه‬ ُ ‫َوا ْت‬
‫ي‬./ِّ‫ك إِِن‬ َ ُ َ ‫ل‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ق‬ْ َ ‫أَل‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ي‬ َ
َ ْ ِ َ َ‫ل‬‫إ‬ ‫ي‬ ‫د‬
ِ ‫ي‬ ‫ط‬ ٍ ‫س‬ِ ‫ا‬ ‫ب‬
َِ ‫ب‬ ْ
‫ا‬ َ ‫ن‬َ ‫أ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬
َ ‫ي‬ ‫ن‬
ِ َ ‫ل‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ق‬
ْ ‫ت‬ ِ ‫ل‬
ُ َ َ َ َ َّ ِ‫ك‬ ‫د‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ي‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫إ‬ ‫طت‬
.
َ ‫س‬
َ َ ‫ب‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ئ‬
ِ َ ‫ل‬ }27 { ‫ين‬
َ ‫ق‬ِ ‫ت‬ ‫م‬ ْ
‫ل‬
َّ ُ َ ُ ‫ا‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬
ِ ‫ه‬ ّ ‫ل‬‫ال‬ ‫ل‬ُ َّ َ َ ‫م‬
‫ب‬ ‫ق‬
َ ‫ت‬‫ي‬ ‫ا‬ َ َّ‫إِن‬
‫ج َزاء‬ َ ‫ك‬ َ ِ‫ار َو َذل‬ ِ ‫حابِ ال َّن‬ َ ‫ص‬ ْ ‫نأ‬َ ْ ‫ك َف َتكُونَ ِم‬ َ ‫م‬ ِ ‫مي َوإِ ْث‬ َ ُ
ِ ‫ي أ ِري ُد أن تَ ُبو َء بِإِ ْث‬./ِّ‫} إِِن‬28{ ‫ين‬ َ ‫م‬ ِ َ‫ب ا ْل َعال‬ َّ ‫خافُ الل ّ َه َر‬ َ ‫أ‬ َ
‫ث‬ ‫ح‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ي‬
ُ َ َْ ً َ ُ ُ‫ا‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ر‬ ‫غ‬ ‫ّه‬ ‫ل‬‫ال‬ َ‫ث‬ ‫ع‬
َ َ ‫ب‬ َ
‫ف‬ } 30 { ‫ين‬
َ ِ ِ َ ‫ر‬ ‫س‬ ‫ا‬ ‫خ‬ ْ
‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬
َ ِ َ َ ْ ‫ح‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ص‬ َ ‫أ‬ َ
‫ف‬ ‫ه‬ ُ َ َ ‫ل‬‫ت‬ ‫ق‬
َ َ
‫ف‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ي‬ ‫خ‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ق‬
ِ ِ َ ْ ُ ُ ْ َ ُ ْ َ ََّ ‫ه‬ ‫س‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ه‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ع‬ ‫و‬ َ ‫ط‬ َ
‫ف‬ } 29 { ‫ين‬
َ ‫م‬ ِ ِ‫الظَّال‬
‫س ْوء َة‬ َ ‫ي‬ َ ‫ار‬ ُ
ِ ‫هـذَا ا ْل ُغ َرابِ َفأ َو‬ َ ‫ل‬َ ‫ت أنْ أكُونَ ِم ْث‬ َ َ ُ ‫ج ْز‬ َ
َ ‫ل يَا َو ْيلَ َتا أ َع‬ َ ‫ه َقا‬ ِ ‫خي‬ َ
ِ ‫س ْوء َة أ‬ َ ‫اري‬ ِ ‫ف ُي َو‬ َ ‫ض لِ ُي ِريَ ُه َك ْي‬ ِ ‫فِي األ َ ْر‬
َ‫سا بِ َغ ْي ِر نَ ْفس أ ْو‬ ً ‫ل نَ ْف‬ َ ‫ل أنَّ ُه َمن َق َت‬ َ َ ‫س َرائِي‬ ْ ِ‫ك َك َت ْب َنا َعلَى بَنِي إ‬ َ ِ‫ل َذل‬ ِ ‫ج‬ ْ ‫نأ‬ َ ْ ‫} ِم‬31{ ‫ين‬ َ ‫ن ال َّنا ِد ِم‬ َ ‫ح ِم‬ َ َ‫صب‬ ْ َ‫خي َفأ‬ ِ َ‫أ‬
ٍ
‫س ُل َنا‬ ُ ‫م ُر‬ ْ ‫جاء ْت ُه‬ َ ‫ميعًا َولَق َْد‬ ِ ‫ج‬ َ ‫اس‬ َ ‫حيَا ال َّن‬ ْ َ ‫ما أ‬ َ َّ‫كأَن‬َ ‫ها َف‬ َ ‫حيَا‬ ْ َ‫ن أ‬ ْ ‫ميعًا َو َم‬ ِ ‫ج‬ َ ‫اس‬ َ ‫ل ال َّن‬ َ ‫ما َق َت‬ َ َّ‫كأَن‬ َ ‫ض َف‬ ِ ‫سا ٍد فِي األ َ ْر‬ َ ‫َف‬
}32{ َ‫س ِرفُون‬ ْ ‫م‬ ُ َ‫ض ل‬ َ
ِ ‫ك فِي األ ْر‬ َ ِ‫ِم ْن ُهم بَ ْع َد َذل‬./ِّ ً‫م إِنَّ َكثِيرا‬ َّ ‫ َناتِ ُث‬./‫بِالبَ ِِّي‬
{27} And relate to them the story of the two sons of Adam with truth when they both offered an
offering, but it was accepted from one of them and was not accepted from the other. He said: "I
will most certainly slay you." (The other) said: "Allah only accepts from those who are pious.
{28} If you will stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch forth my
hand towards you to slay you; surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds. {29} Surely I wish that
you should bear my sin as well as your own sin, and so you would be of the inmates of the Fire,
and this is the recompense of the unjust.". {30} Then his mind facilitated to him the slaying of
his brother, so he slew him; then he became one of the losers. {31} Then Allah sent a crow
digging up the earth so that he might show him how he should cover the dead body of his
brother. He said: "Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I should be like this crow and cover the
dead body of my brother?" So he became of those who regret. {32} For this reason did We
prescribe to the Children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for
mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he
kept alive all men; and certainly Our messengers came to them with clear proofs, but even after
that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.
 

Commentary
The verses describe the story of the two sons of Adam, and make it clear that envy sometimes
drives son of Adam to a stage where he slays his brother unjustly, then he becomes a loser and he
regrets when no remorse can do any good. In this sense, the verses are conjoined with preceding
ones, which describe how the Children of Israel had an aversion to believing in the Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.); their rejection of the true call had no reason except envy and transgression. Thus
does envy pushes man to slaughter of his brother, then throws him in a remorse and regret from
which he can never be free; so they should take lesson from this story, and should not persist so
much in envy and then disbelief.

QUR'AN: And relate to them the story of the two sons of Adam with truth... "Allah only accepts
from those who are pious: Watlu (translated here as: "And relate") has its root in at-tilawah (to
read, to recite), which in its turn is derived from at-tuluw (to follow); because a relater describes
a news or story in stages one after another; an-naba' (news which has some benefit); al-qurban
(offering with which one wants to come nearer to God or someone else), it is an infinitive
verb/grund, it has no dual or plural form; at-taqabbul (to accept with more care accorded to the
accepted thing). The pronoun, "them", (in, "relate to them") refers to the People of the Book,
because the speech concerns them.
"Adam" refers to the same person whom Qur'an introduces as the progenitor of the mankind. An
exegete has said, "It refers to an Israelite who had two sons who quarreled regarding an offering,
and one of them, called Qabil (Cain), killed Habil (Abel); and that is why Allah says at the end
of the story: For this reason did We prescribe to the Children of Israel..." But it is wrong,
because:

First: Qur'an has nowhere mentioned any other Adam except the one who was the progenitor of
mankind. If someone else were the subject of this verse, it was necessary to place here some
indication, in order to remove any confusion.

Second: Some details of the story, e.g., sending of a crow, conforms with the condition of the
primitive man who possessed simple thoughts and unelaborated perceptions, who gradually went
on accumulating information through experiences which he got from incident to incident. The
verse clearly shows that the killer did not even know that a dead body could be covered in the
earth. Obviously, this characteristic fits on the son of Adam, the progenitor of mankind, not on a
person from the Children of Israel, who were civilized, advanced, and nationally refined in
culture; and such matters could not be unknown to them.

Third: This exegete, by saying that "and that is why Allah says at the end of the story: For this
reason did We prescribe to the Children of Israel", wants lo reply to a question leveled against
the verse. That question says: "Why the said prescription was reserved particularly to the
Children of Israel, while the moral of the story covers the whole humanity - that whoever kills a
person it is as though he killed all men, and whoever kept alive one person it is as though he kept
alive all men."

So the said exegete tried to reply that the killer and the killed were not sons of Adam who was
progenitor of mankind, and this story was not among the initial events taking place at the dawn
of humanity, so that it could provide a lesson to all succeeding generations. Rather this event had
concerned two sons of an Israelite, and the story describes an Israeli incident, which had a
particularly national character; and that is why its lesson was especially confined to the Children
of Israel.

However, this reply does not settle the argument; the question even now remains unanswered.
The principle that killing one man is tantamount to killing all men and keeping one person alive
is like keeping all men alive, is applicable to all killings taking place in human species; it is not
reserved to any particular killing; and innumerable murders had taken place before the era of
Israelites and even in Israelites before the one mentioned in this verse. Then why was this
principle enunciated from this particular murder? And why was it confined to a particular nation?

Moreover, if the matter were as he says, it was better to say, ...that whoever "among you" slays a
soul, so that it would have been reserved for them, and in that case the same question would arise
as to that reservation; and the notion in itself was not sound.

The reply to original question is as follows: The words: whoever slays a soul... it is as though he
slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men, do not enact a
legislative order; they enunciate a deep principle. Therefore, the prescription to the Children of
Israel denotes that this principle was explained to them, although its benefit was comprehensive
and covered Israelites and non-Israelites both. It is not unlike the admonitions and wisdom the
Qur'an explains to the ummah of Muhammad (s.a.w.) although their benefits are not confined to
it.

Why does this verse say that this maxim was prescribed to the Israelites? It is because the verses
are concerned with admonishing them, reminding them and rebuking them for their envy and
jealousy against the Prophet (s.a.w.); their intense hatred of the Prophet led them to tanning the
lire of mischief, instigating others to fight the Muslims and active participation in many such
wars. That is why this speech is followed by the words: and certainly Our messengers came to
them with clear proofs, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

Add to all this fact that the story as mentioned by that exegete has no basis at all - neither in
tradition nor in history.

Now, it is clear that "the story of the two sons of Adam" is related to the sons of that Adam who
was the Father of mankind. The clause: "with truth" is related either to "the story" or to "relate";
in either case it is a notice or declaration that the story as was prevalent in their society was not
free from distortion and omission. Actually the story as presented in the Genesis (ch.4) does not
mention the event of the crow and its digging up the earth; also it clearly presents God as having
a body - far exalted be He from such things!

The context of the clause: "when they both offered an offering, but it was accepted from one of
them and was not accepted from the other", obviously shows that each of the two had offered an
offering to Allah; but the word, al-qurban (offering) was used in singular form, because, as
mentioned earlier, it being a masdar, does not accept dual or plural form.

The clauses: "He said: 'I will most certainly slay you.' He (the other) said: 'Allah only accepts
from those who are pious.'" The first speaker is the killer and the second, the killed one. It shows
that they both knew that the offering of one was accepted and of the other rejected. But the verse
does not say as to how they came to know it or which evidence led them to that deduction.

However, the Qur'an in another place mentions that among the ancient nations, or particularly
among the Israelites, customarily the acceptance of an offering was known through its
consumption by fire. Allah says: (Those are they) who said: "Surely Allah has enjoined us that
we should not believe in any messenger until he brings us an offering which the fire consumes."
Say: "Indeed, there came to you messengers before me with clear proofs and with that which you
said; why then did you kill them if you are truthful? "(3:183).

Offerings are well known among the People of the Book till today. Possibly in this case too the
same method was used to indicate the offering's acceptance - especially keeping in view that the
story was narrated to the People of the Book who believed in that method. Be it as it may, the
killer and his victim both knew that the one's offering was accepted and that of the other rejected.

Obviously, the one who said, "'I will most certainly slay you,'" was that brother whose offering
was not accepted; and he thus spoke only because of envy and jealousy, as there was no other
reason, nor the victim had committed any crime by his own will and power so that he should be
confronted with such talk and threatened to be murdered.

The killer threatened: "'I will most certainly slay you,'" merely because of envy that the victim's
offering was accepted and the killer's rejected. The victim replied: '"Allah only accepts from
those who are pious. If you will stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to
stretch forth my hand towards you to slay you; surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds.'" By
this reply he made it clear that:

First: He (the victim) had nothing to do with the acceptance or non-acceptance of any offering,
nor had he committed any crime. If anyone was to be blamed, it was the killer who did not fear
Allah, and consequently Allah refused to accept his offering.

Second: If the killer wanted to kill him and stretched his hand toward the victim for that purpose,
the victim was not going to stretch his hand towards him with intention of killing him. Why?
Because of his piety and fear of Allah. In this situation, the killer would return (in the next
world) with the victim's sin and his own, so that he would be among the inmates of the Fire, and
that is the recompense of the unjust.

"Allah only accepts from those who are pious." It asserts that acceptance is reserved only for the
offering of the pious - it excludes that of impious. Or, perhaps the killer arrogantly or ignorantly
was thinking that his own offering would be accepted and that of the victim rejected - thinking
that it does not depend on piety; or that Allah did not know the real position and probably He
would be confused as human beings become sometimes; therefore it was established that the
killer's offering was not acceptable at all.

This episode contains many important principles: It describes how and when acts of worship and
offerings are accepted; admonishes about murder, injustice and envy emphasizing their
seriousness; confirms the system of divine retribution and shows that it is an integral part of the
Lordship of the Lord of the worlds, for, Lordship cannot be complete without a well organized
system interlinking various parts of the world, which would lead to just evaluation of deeds, and
would recompense injustice with painful chastisement; no that the oppressor should desist from
oppression, or should receive the retribution which he had arranged for himself, and that is the
Fire.

QUR'AN: "If you will stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch my
hand towards you to slay you; surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds: The preposition, "l" in
lain (if) is for oath; stretching forth the hand alludes to preparing for murder and making its
arrangements; the reply to this conditional clause begins with a negative connected to a nominal
clause: "not one to stretch my hand" - in original Arabic, it is not a verb but an adjective, the
negative is strengthened with 'bi’ and the whole speech with the earlier mentioned oath. All these
devices were used to show that the victim was far-removed from intention of killing his brother;
such thought had never come to his mind.

This claim of his innocence is emphasized by the clause: '"surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the
worlds.'" When the pious ones, those who fear Allah, remember their Lord, Allah, the Lord of
the worlds, Who, they know, recompenses every sin with its prescribed punishment, the fear of
Allah is awakened in them, and it does not allow them to commit any injustice which would
throw them into perdition.

Then comes the reality of this sentence: '"If you will stretch forth your hand towards me ..."", and
its true interpretation. In short, the events had reached a point where the victim had only two
alternatives before him: Either he should kill his brother or his brother kills him; if he opts for the
first alternative then he would become unjust oppressor, would carry sins of both on his
shoulders and would enter the Fire; if on the other hand his unjust brother kills him all the above
consequences would come to that brother. Obviously, the victim did not opt for the first
alternative because in that case his own felicity would be jeopardized; he rather opted for the
second alternative - that his unjust brother should suffer infelicity by killing him while he
himself attains felicity without being unjust or oppressor. Thus, in the clause: '"Surely I wish that
you should bear my sin ...'", the word, "wish", denotes option in case of there being two
alternatives.

This verse gives the interpretation of the clause: "'If you will stretch forth your hand ...'" in the
same way as had happened in the story of Musa" (a.s.) and his companion when the latter had
killed a boy they had met; Musa (a.s.) objected saying: "Have you slain an innocent person
otherwise than for manslaughter? Certainly you have done a horrible thing" (18:74). His
companion later gave him its interpretation in these words: "And as for the boy, his parents were
believers and we feared lest he should oppress them by disobedience (to them) and disbelief (m
God). So we desired that their Lord might give them in his place one better than him in purity
and nearer to having compassion" (18:80-81).

Likewise, in this case, the victim "wished" i.e. he opted for death joined with his felicity even if
it resulted in his brother's infelicity as he had wrongly preferred life joined with infelicity which
pushed him into the band of oppressors; exactly as the companion of Musa (a.s.) preferred the
boy's death in felicity (although it would cause grief and sorrow to his parents) over his
continued life which would make him oppressor and disbeliever who would go astray and lead
his parents into error; and he desired that Allah would give them in his place another boy better
than him in purity and nearer to having compassion.

The son of Adam who was murdered was pious and God fearing and had gnosis of Allah. His
piety is shown in his reply: " 'Allah only accepts from those who are pious.'" It contains the claim
of his own piety, and Allah has quoted it without rebutting it. As for his knowledge and gnosis, it
is inferred from his speech," 'surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds.'" Here he openly claims
that he feared God, and Allah has again quoted him without rebuttal; and Allah says in another
place: ...verily fear Allah only those of His servants endued with knowledge... (35:28). So when
Allah endorsed his claim that he feared Allah, it was as though He also confirmed that he was a
man of knowledge, as He has also portrayed the Musa (a.s.)'s companion as a knowledgeable
person and said: ...and whom We had taught knowledge from Ourselves (18:65). The victim's
talk with his unjust brother is enough to show the extent of his knowledge; you will find in it
deep sagacity, wisdom and good sermon. He showed with his clean disposition and pure nature
that human race was bound to multiply, and their bands would contain individuals of diverse
characters, some would be pious, others unjust and transgressors. However, there is one Lord
Who is their Owner and the Owner of all the worlds and He manages their affairs. It is an aspect
of His perfect management that He likes and loves justice and beneficence, dislikes and hates
injustice and transgression. It follows that man must fear God and acquire piety - and this is
religion. There are acts of obedience that bring man nearer to God, as there are acts of
disobedience and injustice. Obedience is accepted when it springs from piety. Disobedience and
injustice are sins the burden of which lies on the shoulders of the sinner. All this makes it clear
that there should be another life -the resurrection - where everyone would be recompensed for
his deeds, and the recompense of unjust and oppressors is the Fire.

As you see, these are the roots of the religious gnosis, confluence of the knowledge of genesis
and resurrection, which this good servant of Allah explained to his foolish brother who did not
even know that a thing could be hidden from people by burying it in the earth - until he learned it
from the crow. The victim, however, did not say to his threatening brother: If you want to kill me
I'll throw myself before you without defending myself or repulsing your attack; he had only said:
"I am not going to kill you." Nor did he say: 'I wish to be killed by you anyhow, so that you will
become an oppressor and will go to the Fire.' To cause someone to go astray and fall into
disgrace is in itself an injustice and error; and it is the verdict of natural law, not confined to one
shari'ah or the other. He only said: "If you stretch forth your hand towards me to kill me, I shall
accept it and opt for it."

Keep in mind this fine point; and then listen to this objection on this event: No doubt the killer
went beyond the limit through his oppression and transgression; but the victim too fell short in
his duty by not standing up to the killer and by accepting the oppression; instead of boldly facing
the adversary and defending himself, he meekly submitted to the killer and said: '"If you will
stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch forth my hand towards you
to slay you; ...'"

You will realize that this objection is baseless. He had not said, 'I shall not defend myself and
shall let you do whatever you want to do with me;' he had only said, "I do not wish to kill you."
The verse does not say that he was killed and knowingly did not defend himself. May be, he was
waylaid or ambushed, or was killed while defending or protecting himself.

Someone has looked at this episode in a wrong perspective, saying: The victim intended to give
his brother power over himself, so that he would kill him, and thus fall into eternal perdition,
while he (the victim) would get felicity and bliss, as he himself had said: "Surely I wish that you
should bear my sin as well as your sin, and so you would be of the inmates of the Fire." As in
these days, some ascetics think that they should adhere to their acts of worship and denial of self;
if someone oppresses him or does injustice to him, that unjust oppressor would himself bear the
burden of his oppression and injustice, and the victim should not stand up to defend his right,
rather he should bear it patiently hoping to get its reward from God. But it is nothing but
stupidity, because it is helping the sinner in his sin, and it makes both the helper and the helped
partners in sin, so it will not make the oppressor to bear the burden of sins of both alone.

However, the explanation we have written above, of the words: "Surely I wish that you should
bear my sin as well as your sin, ..." clarifies this objection.
Some people have replied to the above-mentioned two objections with some absurd answers;
there is no benefit in mentioning them.

QUR'AN: "Surely I wish that you should bear my sin as well as your own sin, and so you would
be of the inmates of the Fire,...": Tabua translated here as "bear", literally means, stay; i.e. you
should stay with my sin. ar-Raghib has written in his Mufradatu'l-Qur'an: "al-Bawa" actually
means equality of parts in a place, in contrast to an-nabwah i.e. disagreement of parts; they say: a
bawwa' (agreeable) place, when it is not repulsive; also they say: 'I bawwa 'tu lahu (prepared for
him) a place...' And the Qur’an says: 'Surely I wish that you should bear with my sin as well as
your own sin'; a poet has said:

"’I rejected her falsity and stayed with her right.' "

Therefore, its explanation with "return" looks at its inseparable connotation.

The clause: '"that you should bear my sin as well as your sin,"' denotes that the sin of unjustly
murdered person is transferred to his killer, thus he shall bear two sins while the victim will
come to Allah without any sin in his account. This is the apparent meaning of this clause and
traditions support it; also reason justifies it. This topic has been discussed to a certain extent in
the second volume of this book.

Objection: This theory compels us to admit that a person may be held responsible for another
man’s sin, but reason rejects it, and Allah has said: That no bearer of burden shall bear the
burden of another (53:38).

Reply: This matter is not within the purview of theoretical wisdom (so that reason could declare
that it was impossible); rather it is within the jurisdiction of practical wisdom that follows the
changing pattern of human social order and its exigencies. It is quite in order if the society lays
the burden of one person's deed on another person, and considers the latter responsible for it; or
if it decides that the deed done by a man was not done by him. For example, someone kills a man
and the society had some rights upon the murdered man; now the society is justified in
demanding those due rights from the killer. Likewise, if someone rebels against the society and
creates disturbance in law, order, and mischief in the land, then the society has the right to
consider all his good points as if they did not exist at all. And so on.

In the above-mentioned examples, the society looks at the bad deeds of the oppressed and puts
them in the account of the oppressor. At this juncture, that bearer of burden bears the burden of
the deeds which are now assigned to him - now it is not someone else's load; it is now transferred
to his account because he had committed injustice to his victim, and in lieu of that injustice the
victim's bad deeds have come to his door. It is not unlike a business transaction when the seller
gives the goods to the buyer and accepts a price in its place; now the new owner of the goods
uses it as he likes, and nobody would object to it simply because at one time it had belonged to
someone else - because now the previous ownership has ceased. In the same way, the verse: That
no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another, cannot prevent the killer being charged
with sins that were committed by the murdered man in his life, because now they have been
transferred to the killer's account, and the previous responsibility of the murdered man is no
more operative. It does not mean that the verse: That no bearer of burden..., has lost its validity
or effect because a new reason has caused its transfer to a new doer; it is like the hadith, "A
Muslim's property is not lawful to another except with his pleasure"; if the previous owner sells
the property, he will lose all rights in it as his rights have been transferred. But no one can say
that the above-mentioned hadith has lost its validity or effect.

An exegete has written: The words: my sin as well as your own sin, mean 'the sin of my murder
if you did it, and your sins which you had previously committed.' It is narrated from Ibn Mas'ud,
Ibn 'Abbas and others. Another interpretation: 'the sin of my murder and your previous sin
because of which your offering was not accepted.' It has been narrated from al-Jubba'i and az-
Zajjaj. A third explanation: 'the sin of my murder and your sin of slaying the whole mankind.' It
has been narrated from others.

But all these interpretations are devoid of support from the wordings of the Qur'an, and reason
too does not agree with them. Moreover, if any of these interpretations were correct, there was
no reason to put both sins side by side - when both were committed by the killer - and then
ascribe one to the victim and the other to the killer.

QUR'AN: Then his mind facilitated to him the slaying of his brother, so he slew him; then he
became one of the losers: ar-Raghib says in his Mufradatu'l-Qur'an: "at-Taw' means obedience;
its opposite is al-kurh (dislike). at-Ta'ah is synonymous to at-Taw', but it is mostly used for
obeying an order and displaying a drawing. The (Qur'anic) clause, fa-tawwa 'at lahu nafsuhu,
means his mind allowed him and seduced him; tawwa'at (used in the verse) is more appropriate
here than simple ata'at (obeyed); the Qur'anic clause is opposite to ta'abbat 'an kadha  nafsuhu
(his mind declined it)."

It does not mean that tawwa'at includes the connotation of obedience and seduction. It actually
means that at-tatwl' (masdar of tawwa'at) indicates graduality, while al-ita'ah (indicates
promptness, and it is the usual difference between the stems of if'al and taf’il. Tawwa'at, used in
the verse, therefore, implies that he was gradually pushed towards that deed through insinuations
and temptations coming successively one after another, until he submitted to it and obeyed.
Meaning: His mind submitted to that evil plan and he gradually succumbed to the temptation to
kill his brother. The phrase: "slaying of his brother", stands for "the order of slaying of his
brother".

Sometimes it is said that tawwa'at here means, 'made attractive'; in that case, slaying of his
brother will be its object - that is, his mind made slaying of his brother attractive to him. Another
explanation: tawwa'at means 'his mind acceded to him in slaying of his brother'; in this case
qatla is given the vowel a in place of i because the preposition  fi (in) has been omitted.

Someone has inferred from the phrase: fa-asbaha (became one of the losers) that he had slew his
brother at night (because asbaha literally means entered upon morning). But this is not correct,
because although literally it gives this meaning, but Arabs generally use it in the meaning of
"became" without looking at its root or time. Even in the Qur'an there are several sentences
where time factor is not relevant at all. For example: ...so by His favor you became brethren;...
(3:103).... so that they shall be regretting on account of what they hid in their souls (5:52). Hence
there is no way of taking the above phrase in its literal sense.

QUR'AN: Then Allah sent a crow digging up the earth so that he might show him how he
should cover the dead body of his brother...: al-Bahth (means searching for something in the
earth; then it is said: 'I thoroughly searched' (i.e. made research) about this matter. This meaning
is given in Majma'u'l-bayan. al-Muwarat (to hide); from this root come at-tawari (to hide
oneself) and al-wara' (behind). as-Saw'ah (what makes one annoyed, displeased); al-wayl (woe,
perdition), ya waylata (exclamatory expression used for disaster, perilous situation); al-'ajz
(weakness; opposite of power).

The context shows that the killer had spent a considerable time in bewilderment and perplexity;
while he was wary lest others come to know of his deed; he could not understand what device to
use in order to hide the dead body of his brother; this continued until Allah sent the crow. If the
sending of the crow and his digging the earth had occurred close together with his slaying of his
brother, he would not have lamented in these words: '"Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I
should be like this crow and cover the dead body of my brother?'"

Also it appears from the context that the crow had buried something in the earth after digging it;
clearly it wanted to demonstrate the method of burial, not the way of digging. Mere digging
could not teach him how to bury the dead body, because he was so simple minded that he did not
understand the purpose of digging; how could he go ahead from digging to burial as the two
things are not concomitant. His mind perceived the method of burial when he saw the crow
digging the earth and burying something in it.

Among the birds, the crow has a habit of storing for future use a part of what he obtains through
preying (or lifting away) by burying it in the earth. Although other birds which feed on grain, etc.
sometimes dig the earth, but their purpose is to find out things like grain and worms, not to bury
and store.

The pronoun, "he" in "so that he might show him", stands for the crow, as it is the nearest noun.
Some people have claimed that it refers to "Allah"; this too may be correct, but it seems a bit far-
fetched; however, meaning is correct in both cases.

The words: "He said: 'Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I should be like this crow1", were
uttered by the killer when he realized how easy was the method used by the crow to bury
something. He found that he too was able to do as the crow had done and bury the dead body -
now he had seen the connection between digging and burial. Then he felt remorse for not
thinking about it himself, so that he could understand that digging the earth was the easiest
means of hiding the body. So he expressed his regret: '"Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I
should be like this crow and cover the dead body of my brother?'" It was a sort of a soliloquy
between him and his mind in the style of a question implying negation. It is as though he was
questioned - implying negation: 'Did you lack the strength to be like this crow and cover the dead
body of your brother?' The reply would be: "No." Then he would be asked second question in the
same style: Then why did you remain oblivious to it? Why did you not resort to this method
although it was so obvious, and put yourself in such trouble without any reason for such a long
period?' There was no answer to it. And this caused the remorse. Remorse is a psychological
emotion, a mental agony that particularly affects a human being when he realizes that he has
neglected some means, which have led to loss of a benefit or appearance of a loss. You may say
that it is a feeling that affects man when he remembers that he has neglected making use of a
possibility.

This is the condition of man, when he commits an injustice or oppression, which he does not
want people to know about. Such deeds and behavior are not acceptable to the society with its
well-laid system whose parts are interlinked. The effects of such anti-social deeds are bound to
appear before public eyes, even if they remain hidden in the beginning. The unjust criminal
wants to compel the society to accept his crime, but it does not accept it at all. It is not unlike a
man eating or drinking poison, wishing that his digestive system would digest it, but it does not
digest it. And even if that injustice remains hidden in this life, there is a meeting place, which he
know that his plans were defective and he did not properly observe what was required of him;
then he will feel remorse. Even if he were given a second chance, he would damage some other
parts. It would continue like that until Allah disgraces him before the whole world.

The above discussion makes it clear that the words: "So he became of those who regret", indicate
his regret for not hiding and burying the dead body of his brother. Also it may possibly be said
that the words show his regret for the slaying itself, and it is not wide of mark.

A Talk on Perception and Thought

The verse: Then Allah sent a crow digging up the earth so that he might show him how he should
cover the dead body of his brother. He said: "Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I should be
like this crow and cover the dead body of my brother?" So he became of those who regret is a
unique one; there is no other like it in the Qur'an. It portrays man's ability of benefiting from
perception; that he acquires knowledge of characteristic properties of various things through
perception, and then thinking on it arrives at its aims and objects in life. It is what has been
discovered by academic research that human knowledge and cognition emanates from perception
(or call it sensitivity), in contrast to those who believe in remembrance and natural knowledge.
We may explain it as follows:

Look at a man with all his cognitive pictures - be it ideas or propositions, particular or general,
whatever the characteristic of his knowledge and consciousness - you will find that he has got
numerous pictures and a great deal of cognition, even if he be the most ignorant, and extremely
weak in understanding and thinking; and no one can enumerate the pictures in his mind; in fact
only Allah knows their limit.

Although it is beyond the limit of human computation, it is seen that it goes on growing and
increasing so long as the man remains alive in this world. If we retreat and go back in human
life, we shall find it decreasing and decreasing until it will become cipher, and mini will become
like a blank slate without any knowledge. Allah says: (Allah) taught man what he knew not
(96:5).

The above verse does not mean that  Allah taught him what he did not know: but as for the things
he knew, he had no need of divine teaching. Obviously, human knowledge, of whatever type it
may be, is needed to guide him to what will make his existence perfect and will benefit him in
his life; the goal to which inorganic things proceed by natural laws, the organic ones - including
man - proceed and are guided to it in the light of knowledge. Thus knowledge is guidance.

Allah has ascribed guidance to Himself, as He quotes Musa as saying: "Our Lord is He Who
gave to everything its creation, then guided." (20:50). Again He says: And Who made (things)
according to a measure, then guided (87:3). Also He says, and in a sense it points to guidance
through perception and thought: Or, Who guides you in utter darkness of the land and sea,...
(27:63). In previous volumes, we have discussed to a certain extent meaning of guidance. In
short, knowledge is guidance; and every guidance is from Allah; therefore, whatever knowledge
man has got, has come to him through divine teaching.

Also, the verse, And Allah has brought you forth from the wombs of your mothers - you did not
know anything - and He gave you the hearing and the sight and the hearts ...(16:78), gives the
connotation near to that of the verse: (Allah) taught man what he knew not.

Contemplation of man's condition and meditation on Qur'anic verses show that man's theoretical
knowledge, i.e. knowledge of things' characteristics and the resulting intellectual cognition, all
emanate from the senses, and Allah through it teaches him the things' characteristics, as is seen in
the divine words: Then Allah sent a crow digging up the earth so that he might show him how he
should cover the dead body...

Attribution of sending the crow for showing how the dead body should be covered is exactly the
attribution of teaching the way of covering to Him. The crow did not know that it was Allah
Who had sent it; likewise, the son of Adam did not perceive that there was a planner who had
arranged the matter for his thinking and learning; and the fact that apparently the crow and its
digging had caused him to learn the way of burial, was merely a chance factor like all chance
factors which teach man ways of his life in both worlds. However, it is Allah Who has created
mankind and led him to perfection of knowledge for the goal of his life. The laid down system of
creation is such as makes man seek perfection through knowledge, with continuous contacts and
knocks between him and various parts of creation; and by this process man learns the means of
acquiring his aims and objects. It is Allah Who sends the crow and other mediums to engage in
some activity that helps man in his learning; so He is the real teacher of man.

There are many similar expressions in the Qur'an. For example: ...and what you have taught the
beasts of prey, training them to hunt - you teach them of what Allah has taught you... (5:4); the
verse counts what they have learnt and what they teach as part of what Allah has taught them,
although they have learnt it from other people or found it out by themselves. Again: ...and fear
Allah; and Allah teaches you,... (2:282); but it was the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) who was
teaching them. Also: ...and the scribe should not refuse to write as Allah has taught him (2:282);
while the scribe had learnt the art of writing from another scribe. However, all these matters are
an integral part of creation and management; and the resulting knowledge helps man in arriving
at his perfection. Therefore, it is Allah who has taught him these means of perfection, as a
teacher teaches through speech and training, and a scribe teaches others through speech and pen.

This is the way of all activities, which are attributed in this world of cause-and-effect to Allah.
Allah is their creator, and there is a chain of causes between Him and His creatures, which are
apparent causes like instruments and tools, which bring a thing into existence.

You may say that these causes are conditions on which a thing's existence depends - everything
is covered from all sides by these causes. Zayd comes into this world; he is son of' Amr and
Hind. Now, 'Amr and Hind should have been born long before Zayd, and they should have
united in marriage; only then the said Zayd could be born. Likewise, for seeing through a seeing
eye, there should be a seeing eye before the sight.

Some people think that belief in oneness of God (monotheism) demands that one should totally
negate chain of causes; only then one can establish God's absolute power and dismiss the idea of
any weakness in him. They say that the idea of necessity of intermediary causes is tantamount to
saying that Allah is compelled to use a particular way for creating things and has no free will or
power. However, those people have inadvertently contradicted themselves.

In short, it is Allah Who has taught human beings characteristics of the things which are
perceived by their senses; He has taught them through the senses; then made all that is in the
earth and the sky subservient to them; He says: And whatsoever is in the heavens and
whatsoever is in the earth, all, from Himself;…(45:13)

This subjugation has a purpose behind it: Man by managing these things reaches his goals and
attains to his wishes in life. Allah has made them connected to his existence so that he may
benefit from them. The Creator has bestowed on man the faculty of contemplation in order that
he may understand how to manage and use them, how to proceed ahead through them. The
following verses points to this reality: Do you not see that Allah has made subservient to you
whatsoever is in the earth and the ships running in the sea by His command?... (22:65). ...and
made for you of the ships and the cattle what you ride on (43:12). ...and upon them (the cattle)
and upon the ships you are borne (40:80). There are many verses of similar connotation. Look at
their language, how they ascribe making of ships to Allah, while they are manufactured by man;
how they attribute carrying of man to Allah, while it is done by the ships and the cattle; how they
assign the ships' movement to His order, while it takes place because of the flow of the river,
winds or steam, etc. All these phenomena have been described as God's subjugating them to
man, because his will has some control on ships, cattle and in the earth and sky which pulls them
to the desired goal.

In short, Allah has given man thinking power over the senses, so that he may use it as a means to
reach the perfection appointed for him; he is helped by his intellectual cognition covering the
creation, in other words, the theoretical knowledge.

Allah says: ...and He gave you the hearing and the sight and the hearts that you may give thanks.
(16:78)

As for the knowledge related to action, which guides man to what is to be done and what not to
be done, it comes to man through divine inspiration (or call it, instinct) without the agency of the
senses or theoretical intellect. Allah says: And (I swear by) the soul and Him Who made it
perfect, then He inspired it to understand what is wrong for it and right for it; he will indeed be
successful who purifies it, and he will indeed fail who corrupts it (91:7-10). Then set your face
upright for religion in natural devotion (to the truth), the nature made by Allah in which He has
made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion,... (30:30). In these
verses Allah ascribes the knowledge of what should be done (i.e. good deed) and what should not
be done (i.e. evil deed) to divine inspiration; and it is what is thrown into the heart.

So, whatever knowledge gained by man is a divine guidance and through divine guidance.
However, there is difference among various types of knowledge: (i) As for the characteristics of
things found outside human mind, Allah gives him their knowledge through the five senses; (ii)
The general comprehensive intellectual knowledge is given by Allah and through His
subjugation; the senses do not interfere in it, nor can man be able to dispense with it; (iii) The
knowledge related to action, which is related to good or evil deed, and decides what is good for it
and what is bad; this comes from divine inspiration, thrown into the heart, knocking on the
nature's door.

This third type of knowledge, which in fact emanates from divine inspiration, can only succeed
in doing its work and complete its effect if the second type is in order and has grown up with
health and uprightness; as even intellect can only do its work properly if man is upright and firm
in piety and on the natural religion. Allah says: ...and none do mind except those having
understanding (3:7). ...and none minds but he who turns (to Allah) again and again (40:13). And
We will turn their hearts and their sights, even as they did not believe in it the first time,...
(6:110). And who turns away from the religion of Ibrahim but he who makes himself a fool,...
(2:130). That is, none discards the demands of nature except he whose understanding is
defective, and therefore he treads on a wrong path.

Reason supports this concomitance between understanding and piety. If man's theoretical power
becomes defective, and he does not perceive truth as truth or falsehood as falsehood, then how
can he be inspired to adhere to that or avoid this? Look at someone who believes that there is no
life after this world's life; obviously he would not be inspired to observe religious piety which is
the best provision for the life hereafter.

Likewise, if a man's natural religion is perverted, and he does not acquire the provision of
religious piety, then his inner powers which give rise to desire or anger, love or hate, etc. cannot
remain moderate; and when these powers' balance is disturbed, the power of theoretical
perception cannot discharge its functions properly.

As the Qur'anic statements aim at spreading the religious cognition and teaching the people
useful knowledge, they tread the same path and stick to the above methods which it has
prescribed for acquiring knowledge: (i) If the matter concerns particular items which have
perceivable characteristics, it clearly appeals to the senses; for example, verses which contain
phrases like, "have you not seen", "do they not see", "have you seen", "do you not then see?" (ii)
If the topic covers rational generality - whether it is related to general physical matters, or is
beyond this phenomenal world - then it pays full regard to understanding and reason, although it
is beyond the jurisdiction of the senses and outside the circle of matter and materials. For
example, most of the verses related to genesis and resurrection, which contain phrases like, "for a
people who understand", "for a people who reflect", "for a people who remember, "for a people
who understand", etc. (iii) As for practical propositions which touch upon good and evil, profit
and loss in deed, or piety and impiety, they rely on divine inspiration and describe the things
which make the person remember his inner inspiration; like the verses which contain such
phrases as, "it is better for you", "his heart is surely sinful", "in both of them there is a great sin",
"and sin and rebellion without justice", "surely Allah does not guide", etc. You should meditate
on them.

Now, it is clear that the Qur'an demonstrates the error of materialists - those who rely on sense
and experiment alone and reject pure rational propositions in practical matters. We know that the
first concern of the Qur'an is the topic of monotheism, and it is on foundation of monotheism that
it builds all true cognition, which it explains and invites people to. There is no need to remind
that monotheism is a topic which is the furthest removed from the senses, has the least
connection with matter and is deeply related to the pure rational affair.

The Qur'an explains that this true cognition is a part of nature and creation. Allah says: Then set
your face upright for religion in natural devotion (to the truth), the nature made by Allah in
which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation... (30:30).

It means that human creation is such an origination as it results in these perceptions and
cognition. What does alteration of a creation imply? That alteration itself would be another
creation and origination. But if altering of general creation is taken to mean negation of actual
function then it is beyond comprehension. Far be it from him to negate his natural knowledge
and to tread in life on a totally different path. Those who deviate from natural orders do not
negate the dictate of nature; they rather use it in a wrong way. Sometimes an archer misses the
target; now the bow and arrow as well as other conditions of shooting are originally made and
laid down for hitting the target, but mistake in using throws it into error. If knives, saws, augers,
needles, and other such things are fitted wrongly in their machines, they will perform the same
functions for which they have been made but in an undesired way. However, it will be
impossible for them to deviate from their natural function and do some other work, e.g. a saw
cannot do the work of needle by sewing clothes, and so on.

The above matters are clear for him who thinks over general arguments offered by those who
oppose rational proofs. For example, they say: 'Pure rational proofs and syllogisms composed of
such premises which are not based on perceptions of five senses, often throw one into error.
Look, for instance, at irreconcilable disputes in pure rational matters. Therefore, one should not
rely on them because they do not reassure mind.'

Also they argue for correctness of the way of senses and experiments in the following manner:
Obviously, the senses are the tools through which we acquire the knowledge of the
characteristics of various things. When we perceive a thing's effect in the framework of some
particular conditions, and observe the same effects repeatedly appearing with the same
conditions - without fail and without any discrepancy - then we become sure that the said effect
was the characteristic of the said thing and that it was not merely a matter of chance, because
chance is not a permanent phenomenon.

Both these arguments have been offered to prove that one should compulsorily depend on
perception and experiment, and should discard pure rational methods. But it is amusing to note
that all the premises used therein are rational and outside the purview of perception and
experiment. These people have used these rational premises for rebutting the use of these very
premises. That is what we have earlier said that nature cannot be negated, although man errs in
its use.

And more abominable than that is the use of experiment and test in evaluation of legislated rules
and enacted laws; a law is made and enforced in public with the aim of testing its effect through
statistics, etc.; if good results get the upper hand, the law is confirmed as a permanent one,
otherwise it is set aside and replaced by another, and so on. The same is the case of making a law
through analogy or discretional liking.

The Qur'an negates all the above methods and proves that the laid down laws are natural and
clear; general piety and impiety are academic and based on inspiration; and their details should
be learnt from the side of revelation. Allah says: And pursue not that of which you have not the
knowledge;... (17:36); and do not follow the footsteps of the Satan... (2:168). It names the laid
down shari'ah as truth: ...and He sent down with them the book with truth, so that it might judge
between people in that in which they had differed;... (2:213). ...and surely conjecture does not
avail against the truth at all (53:28). How can conjecture avail when by following it one puts
oneself in danger of falling into untruth which is error? Allah says: ...and what is there after the
truth but error;... (10:32)... yet surely Allah does not guide him who leads astray,... (16:37). In
other words, error cannot be a way to lead man to good and felicity. Whoever wants to reach
truth through falsehood, achieve justice through injustice, do a good by means of evil, or acquire
piety through impiety, he has certainly lost the way; he craves to get from the creation (which is
the foundation of law and shari'ah) what it can never deliver. Had it ever been possible, this
interchange would have happened in characteristics of opposite things, and one side of opposite
would have served what the other side was supposed to do.

Likewise, the Qur'an negates the path of remembrance (which invalidates the procedure of
thinking academics and dismisses the natural logic); and we have earlier discussed this topic in
detail.

In the same way, the Qur'an forbids people to indulge in contemplation without accompaniment
of fear of Allah. (We have talked briefly on this subject too.) That is why when Qur'an teaches
the laws of religion; it follows that legislation with description of moral virtues and good
characteristics, which in their turn awaken the instinct of piety in man, with which he is able to
understand the law. Look for example the following verses: And when you have divorced the
women and they have ended their term (of waiting), then do not prevent them from marrying
their husbands when they agree among themselves in a lawful manner; with this is admonished
whosoever among you believes in Allah and the last day; this is more profitable and purer for
you; and Allah knows while you do not know (2:232). And fight with them until there is no more
mischief (disbelief), and religion be only for Allah; but if they desist, then there should be no
hostility except against the oppressors (2:193). ...and keep up prayer; surely prayer keeps (one)
away from indecency and evil, and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greatest, and Allah
knows what you do (29:45).
QUR'AN: For this reason did We prescribed to the Children of Israel that whoever slays a soul,
unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and
whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men;...: Majma 'u 'l-bayan says: "al-Ajl
literally means felony." ar-Raghib says in Mufradatu'l-Qur'an: "al-Ajl is that felony (retribution
of) which is feared immediately; thus every ajl is a felony, but not every felony is ajl; it is said: 'I
did it because of him."'

Then it was used for describing the cause; it is said: 'I did it for this cause,1 i.e., this is the cause
of my action. Probably its use for description of cause began in the context of felony and crime,
as we say: 'Zayd did evil and for this crime (ajl) I punished him with hitting,' i.e. my hitting Zayd
sprang from his crime which was his evil-doing, or from crime of his evil-doing; then it was used
for general cause and reason, as for example, I visited you for the reason of my love to you, or
because of my love to you.

The context apparently shows that the phrase, "For this reason", refers to the story of the two
sons of Adam given in the preceding verses. That is, the occurrence of that distressing event was
the reason of our prescribing to the Children of Israel this and this. Some people have said that
this phrase is a part of the preceding sentence: So he became of those who regret; i.e. this was the
cause of his regretting. This in itself is not far-fetched, as we see in the verses 2:219-20: ...Thus
does Allah make clear to you the signs, that you may ponder (219) about this world and the
hereafter. And they ask you concerning the orphans... But in that case the words: "We
prescribed", would begin a new sentence, and the usual style of the Qur'an would demand a wa
for recommencement of another sentence, as we have seen in the above-mentioned verse 2:220.

Why does this phrase refer to the story of the two sons of Adam? It is because the story shows
that this human species by nature is entangled in desire and jealousy; thus he hates people for
things that are beyond their power (i.e., are gifted by God). This jealousy for even ordinary
things instigates him against divine decrees for negating the purpose of creation; it blinds him so
that he kills another human being, even his own brother.

Individual men belong to a single species and have the same essence and reality. Each of them
possesses (in miniature) the same humanity that is possessed by all others, and vice versa. Allah
created numerous individuals and multiplied the human race in order that this reality should
survive, in view of the fact that individuals remain alive only for short periods; by this increase
in population, new generations will replace the old, and the worship of Allah will continue. In
this background, destroying an individual by murder is tantamount to doing mischief in creation
and negating the divine aim of keeping the humanity alive through increased population and
succeeding generations. To this fact the killed son of Adam had pointed while talking to his
brother: "I am not one to stretch forth my hand towards you to slay you; surely I fear Allah, the
Lord of the worlds." Thus he indicated that slaying someone without genuine reason was
tantamount to waging war against Allah's Lordship.

As the human nature is such that a trivial cause incites him to commit injustice and oppression,
which in the long run, negates the laws given by the Lord and contradicts the purpose of creation
of humanity in general; and as the Children of Israel were sunk in jealousy and envy, pride and
haughtiness, pursuit of desire and rejection of truth - as the preceding verses have described and
their narrated stories show - Allah explained to them the reality of this heinous oppression and its
position in depth, and informed them that in His eyes slaying one man was equal to slaying all
people, and conversely keeping one person alive was tantamount to keeping alive all of them.

The phrase: "We prescribed to the Children of Israel", does not indicate any laid down law, yet it
is not without emphasis looking at its importance and approach; and it has effect in provoking
the divine wrath in this world or the next.

In short, the verse means: As man, by nature, is pushed even by a trivial motive to commit this
great oppression (i.e. murder), and peculiar characteristics of the Children of Israel were well-
known, We described to them the gravity of manslaughter, in order that they should desist from
extravagance, and there came to them Our messengers with clear proofs, but even after that they
certainly act extravagantly in the land.

The sentence: "whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it
is as though he slew all men". Here Allah has made exception of two categories of killing: (i) In
punishment, i.e., for retribution, as He says: ...retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of
the slain;... (2:178). (ii) In punishment of mischief in the land, as He says in the next verse: The
punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief
in the land is only this, that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should
be cut off on opposite sides... (5:33).

The seriousness of killing is elaborated by the phrase: "it is as though he slew all men." We have
already explained that each individual man possesses the same reality and quiddity, which is
found in all members of the species; this reality lives and dies with him. All human beings, be he
an individual or the whole species, one man or a multitude, all are one in this reality. Naturally,
murdering one soul should be tantamount to killing the whole species. Conversely, keeping alive
one man should be equal to keeping all men alive, as the verse says.

First Objection: This equalization leads to nullification of the main purpose of the verse. The
verse aims at showing the seriousness and gravity of slaying a soul and its great sin and dire
consequences. Obviously, the more men one kills the more serious and grave its consequences
should be. If one slaying is made equal to slaying all men, then what would be said for a man
who kills ten men? One victim's murder becomes equal to murdering all men; and the remaining
nine victims are left without anything to compare with.

This objection cannot be removed by saying that: 'Killing ten persons is equal to ten times
murdering all men; and killing all of them is equal to murdering all multiplied by the total
number of all'; because it means multiplication of punishment number, and the text of the verse
does not support it.

Moreover, the total is made of units each of which is equal to the total, which is again made of
such units; and this computation is not going to end at any point, and such a total is meaningless,
because it has no unit, and there is no total without unit.

Apart from that, Allah says: ..; and whoever brings an evil deed, he shall not be recompensed
but only with the like of it,... (6:160).

Second Objection: What is the meaning of saying that killing one person is equal to killing all?
If this "all" includes this one person who is killed, it means that the said person is equal to a
collection of himself and others taken together. But it is obviously impossible. If "killing all"
connotes killing all persons accept this one, it means that whoever killed a man, it is as though he
killed all men except this one. Obviously, it is a rotten claim that contradicts the purpose of
speech, i.e. elaboration of the extreme seriousness of this oppression. Moreover, the phrase: "it is
as though he slew all men", is unconditional and without any exception; so it does not allow this
hypothesis.

This objection cannot be cleared by saying that: The aim is to show equality as far as punishment
is concerned, or in other words, multiplication of punishment or other such matters.' And it is
clear.

The reply to both the above objections is this: The divine words: "whoever slays a soul, ...it is as
though he slew all men", are an allusion to the fact that all men have one single reality, that is
humanity in which all are united, and one and all are equal in it; whoever attacks the humanity
found in one of them, he attacks the humanity found in all of them. For example, there is water
divided in numerous glasses; whoever drinks from one glass he drinks the water - and he desires
the water because it is water - and what is found in all other glasses is no more than water; thus it
is as though he has drunk from all glasses. Therefore, the above-mentioned sentence is an
allusion in the form of a simile.

In this way both objections are removed, because those objections have treated it as a simple
simile in which the factor of similarity intensifies when the number of a side of simile increases;
obviously if in this case one is equalized with all the meaning will be disturbed and objection
will arise, as if someone says: One of this group of people is like a lion, and one among them is
like all in bravery and valor.

As for the sentence: "and whoever keeps it alive it is as though he kept alive all men", it will be
explained in the same way as the preceding sentence was. Keeping alive alludes to what the sane
persons would call giving life, like delivering a drowning person and freeing a captive. Allah in
His Book has counted guiding to the truth as giving life, as He says: Is he who was dead then We
raised him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people,... (6:122).
Therefore, one who guides a soul to the true faith has raised him to life.

The clause: "and certainly Our messengers came to them with clear proofs", is related to the
beginning of the verse, i.e., 'Certainly, Our messengers came to them warning them against
murder and other related ways of making mischief in the land.' The next sentence: "but even after
that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land", completes the speech, and its addition
gives the intended result of this talk - a clear idea that the Children of Israel were extravagant,
persisting in their arrogance and impertinence. We certainly described to them the gravity of
murder, and Our messengers came to them with proofs, explaining this and other related topics.
They clearly described it to them and warned them of its consequences; even then they did not
desist from their haughtiness and insolence. They certainly acted extravagantly in the past, and
continue to do so even now.
Extravagance means going beyond the boundary and exceeding this limit in all activities,
although it is mostly used in monetary context. Allah says: And they who when they spend, are
neither extravagant nor parsimonious, and (keep) between these the just mean (25:67), as ar-
Raghib has said in his Mufradatu'l-Qur 'an.

Traditions
Hisham ibn Salim narrates through Habib as-Sijistani from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said, "When
the two sons of Adam offered (their) offerings, and it was accepted from one of them and was
not accepted from the other; (the Imam) said, 'It was accepted from Habil and not accepted from
Qabil. Because of it he (Qabil) was overcome by intense jealousy and he committed outrage
against Habil. He was lying in wait for him, watching when he would be alone, until he got the
better of him, away from Adam; so he attacked and killed him. A part of their story is what Allah
has described in his Book concerning their talk before his killing...'" (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

The author says: This is one of the best traditions narrated about this story. It is a lengthy
tradition in which the Imam (a.s.) describes: the birth of Hibatullah Shith after this event, Adam's
will for him; and continuation of will among the prophets. We shall write it in some appropriate
place.

The tradition clearly shows that Qabil assassinated Habil when Habil was unaware of it, and he
did not submit himself to the killer's design, as it agrees with reason; and we have elaborated it in
the preceding Commentary.

It should be noted that our traditions give the names of the two sons as Habil and Qabil, while
the prevalent Bible says: Abel (Habil) and Cain (Qabil). But there is no authenticity in it, because
the narration of the Torah ends on one person whose details are unknown, apart from the
alterations in the Torah, which are widely known.

)al-Qummi narrates from his father, from al-Hasan ibn Mahbub, from Hisham ibn Salim, from
Abu Hamzah ath-Thumali, from Thuwayr ibn Abi Fakhitah that he said, "I heard 'Ali ibn al-
Husayn (a.s.), talking to some Qurayshites. He said, 'When the two sons of Adam offered (their)
offering, one of them offered the fattest ram which he kept, and the other offered a bunch of ear
of grain; so it was accepted from the owner of the ram - and he was Habil - and not accepted
from the other one. Thus Qabil was angry, and said to Habil, "By Allah! I will most certainly
slay you." Habil said, "Allah only accepts from those who are pious. If you will stretch forth your
hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch forth my hand towards you to slay you;
surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds. Surely I wish that you should bear my sin as well as
your own sin, and so you would be of the inmates of the Fire, and this is the recompense of the
unjust." Then his mind facilitated to him the slaying of his brother; but he did not know how to
kill him until Iblis came and taught him, saying, "Put his head between two rocks, then crush it."
So when he killed him, he did not know what he should do with him. Then came two crows, and
they came forward fighting and combating with one another; so one of them killed his
companion; then the survivor dug into the land with his claws and buried his companion in it.
Qabil said, "Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I should be like this crow and cover the dead
body of my brother? So he became of those who regret." Then he dug for him a ditch and buried
him into it; thus it became a custom to bury the dead bodies.

"Thereafter Qabil returned to his father, and he did not see Habil with him. Adam said to him,
"Where have you left my son?" Qabil told him, "Had you sent me as his guardian?" Adam said,
"Come with me to the place of offering." And (Adam) had a fore boding of what Qabil had done.
When he arrived at the place of offering, Habil's murder became clear to him. Then Adam cursed
the land that accepted Habil's blood (i.e. drank the blood, leaving nothing above); and Adam
ordered that Qabil be cursed, and Qabil was called from the sky: "You are cursed as you killed
your brother." It is for the above reason that the earth does not drink blood.

"Then Adam returned, weeping for Habil forty days and nights. When he felt grief for him, he
complained to Allah about it. So Allah revealed to him: "I am going to give you a male child
who will be a replacement of Habil." Thus Hawwa' gave birth to a son, pure and blessed; when it
was the seventh day, Allah revealed to him: "O Adam! This son is my gift to you; therefore you
name him Hibatullah (i.e. Allah's gift); so Adam gave him the name Hibatullah.'" (at-Tafsir, al-
Qummi)

The author says: This is the most moderate of the traditions narrated about this story and the
matters connected with it. Even so, it is not free of some confusion in the text; as it shows that
Qabil threatened Habil to kill him, and then he did not know how to kill him; it is an
unimaginable idea, except if it is taken to mean that he was perplexed which method he should
use to kill his brother, so Iblis (may Allah curse him!) advised him to crush his head with rock.
There are other traditions, narrated through the Shi'ah and Sunni chains, whose theme is nearer to
this tradition.

It should be noted that many diverse traditions have been narrated about this event with
astonishing themes, like:

The one that says that Allah took the ram of Habil, and kept it in the Garden for forty autumns,
then offered it as Isma'il's ransom, so Ibrahim slaughtered it:

Or that which says that Habil surrendered himself to Qabil's control and desisted from stretching
forth his hand towards his brother;

Or that which says that when Qabil killed his brother, Allah bound one of his legs to its thigh
from the day of murder to the Day of Resurrection, and turned his face to right side, wherever he
turns it turns; on him is a hedge of ice in winter, and a hedge of fire in summer; there are with
him seven angels, when one of them goes, another one comes;

Or that which says that he is undergoing punishment in an island in sea; Allah has hung him
upside down, and he will remain in the same condition up to the Day of Resurrection;

Or that which says that Qabil son of Adam hangs by his hair in core of the sun; it takes him with
it in its circulation - in winter and summer - up to the Day of Resurrection; when that day comes.
Allah will send him into the Fire;
Or that which says that the son of Adam, who killed his brother, was Qabil who was born in the
Garden;

Or that which says that when Adam came to know of the murder of Habil, he elegized him in a
few lines of Arabic poem;

Or that which says that according to their shari'ah if someone intended to attack another person,
the victim left him free to do whatever he wanted, without resistance.

In addition to other such traditions, most or all of these and other similar traditions are weak;
they go against the dictates of reason, and the Book does not support them. Some of them are
clearly forged; others are distorted, while many are the result of the narrators' mistake who tried
to narrate them in their own words.

Ibn Abi Shaybah narrates from 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said, "Does one of
you lack the strength, if a man comes to him to slay him, to say like it?" - He said it pointing
with one of his hands to the other - "Then he would be like the good one of the two sons of
Adam; he would be in the Garden and his killer in the Fire. (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: It is among the traditions describing civil strife and trials. There are many
others like it, and as-Suyuti has narrated most of them in ad-Durru'l-manthur. For example, the
following one which he has quoted through al-Bayhaqi, from Abu Musa from the Prophet
(s.a.w.) that he said: "Break your swords" -i.e., during civil strife - "and cut your strings, and stay
inside the houses, and be in it like the good one of the two sons of Adam."

Another tradition he has quoted through Ibn Jarir and 'Abdu ‘r-Razzaq from al-Hasan that he
said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a. w.a.), said, 'Verily the two sons of Adam have been offered
as an example for this ummah; so adhere to the good one of them.'" There are other narrations
like them.

These traditions apparently are not consistent with correct consideration, which is supported by
correct traditions, which command people to defend themselves and fight in support of truth.
Allah has said: And if two parties of the believers quarrel, make peace between them; but if one
of them acts -wrongfully towards the other, fight that which acts wrongly until it returns to
Allah's command (49:9).

Moreover, all of these traditions purport to explain the words of Habil in this story: "If you will
stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch forth my hand towards
you to slay you", and try to show that Habil gave his brother power over himself enabling him to
kill him without any attempt to defend himself. And you have seen that this idea is not in
conformity with the Qur’anic text.

Apart from that, what makes one suspicious of these traditions is the fact that they have been
narrated by people who sat during turmoil that led to 'Uthman's murder, and during 'Ali’s reign
they joined Mu’awiyah, the Kharijites and Talhah and az-Zubayr. Therefore, it is necessary to
interpret them in a sensible way if possible, failing which they should be discarded.

Ibn 'Asakir has narrated from 'Ali (a.s.) that the Prophet (s.a. w.a.) said, "There is a mountain in
Damascus, called Qasiyun; son of Adam killed his brother in it." (ibid)

The author says: There is no objection to this tradition. However, Ibn 'Asakir has narrated
through one chain from Ka'bu'l-Ahbar that he said, "The blood, which is on the mountain of
Qasiyun, is that of the son of Adam." Also he narrates through another chain from 'Amr ibn
Khabir ash-Sha'bani that he said, "I was with Ka'bu'l-Ahbar on the mountain, Dayru'l-Murran;
and he saw a flowing chasm in it; so he said, 'Here the son of Adam had killed his brother, and
this is the trace of his blood; Allah has made it a sign for the worlds.'"

These two traditions show that there was some firm sign there, which was claimed to be the
blood of Habil. In all probability, it looks like so many myths which crafty people have invented,
so that people should come there to visit it, bringing with them large votive offerings and
precious gifts, not unlike so many palm-prints and foot-prints on stones, and the grave of the
grandmother and other such things.

Ahmad, al-Bukhari, Muslim, at-Tirmidhi, an-Nasa'i, Ibn Majah, Ibn Jarir and Ibnu'l-Mundhir
have narrated from Ibn Mas'ud that he said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said, "No soul will
be slain unjustly but a portion of its blood shall be apportioned to the first son of Adam, because
he was the first to establish the custom of killing.'" (ibid)

The author says: This theme has been narrated through other Sunni and Shi'ah chain

Humran said, "I said to Abu Ja'far (a.s.), 'What is the meaning of the words of Allah, the Mighty,
the Great: For this reason did We prescribe to the Children of Israel that whoever slays a soul,
unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men?" He
(Humran) said, "How can it be as though he slew all men. while he had slain a single soul? He
(a.s.) said, 'He will be put in a place in Jahannam (Gehenna) where the punishment of the people
of the Fire reaches its utmost limit; if he had killed all men, he would have entered the same
place.' I said, Then if he killed another (man)?' He said, 'It will be increased for him.'" (al-Kafi)

The author says: as-Saduq too has narrated a similar tradition in Ma 'ani 'l-akhbar from
Humran.

Humran's question, "Then if he killed another (man)?" points to the above-mentioned objection
that it makes one murder equal to that murder plus all others. The Imam (a.s.) has replied that his
punishment will be increased for him.

At this juncture someone may think that this reply of the Imam (a.s.) goes against the equality
mentioned in the verse: whoever slays a soul... it is as though he slew all men, because increase
means that murder of one or many or all is not equal. But this objection is not sustainable,
because equality refers to the nature of punishment, i.e. all murderers - whether of one or many
or all - will be put in one valley of Jahannam, and to this fact refer the Imam's words: "if he had
killed all men, he would have entered the same place."
The evidence for this explanation is found in a tradition narrated by al-'Ayyashi in his at-Tafsir,
from the same Humran from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about this verse, that the Imam (a.s.) said,
"There is a place in the Fire where the punishment of all the people of the Fire reaches its utmost
limit, so he will be put in it." "I (i.e. Humran) said, 'And if he had killed two?' (The Imam, a.s.),
said, 'Don't you see that there is no place in the Fire more severe in punishment than this?' Then
he said, '(His punishment) will be increased according to his deed..."'

The Imam (a.s.) has joined negative and positive in his reply; it points to what we have already
explained that equality is in the nature of punishment and difference will be in intensity of
punishment and the effect it will have on the killer.

Some more evidence may be found in what Hannan ibn Sudayr has narrated from Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.) that he said about the verse: whoever slays a soul, ...it is as though he slew all men. "There
is a valley in Jahannam, if he slew all men, he will be (put) in it, and if he slew one soul he will
be (put) in it." This too is narrated in at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi.

The author says: It is as though the verse is quoted not verbatum in this hadith.

(al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Fudayl ibn Yasar that he said, "I asked Abu Ja'far
(a.s.), about the word of Allah, the Mighty, the Great, in His Book: and whoever keeps it alive, it
is as though he kept alive all men. He said, '(It is saving) from burning or drowning.' I said, 'He
who takes him out from error to guidance?'  He said, That is its greatest ta 'wil.'" (al-Kafi)

The author says: ash-Shaykh has narrated it in his al-Amali, and al-Barqi in his al-Mahasin,
through Fudayl from Abu Ja'far (a.s.); and it has been narrated by Suma'ah and Humran from
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.).

The statement that saving from error is the greatest ta'wil of this verse means that it is its finest
and most subtle explanation. In early period of Islam the word, ta'wil, was often used as a
synonym of tafsir.

This explanation of ours is supported by what has been narrated in at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi from
Muhammad ibn Muslim from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said, "I asked the Imam (a.s.), about the
word of Allah: whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it
is as though he slew all men. (The Imam) said, 'For him there is a place in the Fire, if he killed all
men, his punishment will not increase on it.' He said, 'and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though
he kept alive all men. He did not kill him, or saved him from drowning or burning; and the
greatest of this all is that he takes him out from error to guidance.'"

The author says: The Imam's saying, "He did not kill him", means: 'He did not take revenge
against him (the victim) though he could do so after the killing has been proved.'

al-'Ayyashi also says in his at-Tafsir that Abu Basir narrated from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said,
"I asked him (the Imam, about the verse): whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all
men; he (a.s.), said, 'Whoever saves one from the unbelief (kufr)to belief (iman).'"
The author says: This theme has been mentioned in many traditions narrated through Sunni
chains.

Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said, "Extravagant are those who regard unlawful things as lawful and shed
blood." (Majma'u l-bayan)

An Academic Discourse and Application

The Torah says about the two sons of Adam in (Genesis, 4:1-16) :

1. And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a
man from the LORD.

2. And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of
the ground.

3. And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering
unto the LORD.

4. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD
had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

5. But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his
countenance fell.

6. And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy cauntenance fallen?

7. If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.
And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

8. And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that
Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

9. And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? and he said, I know not: Am I my
brother's keeper?

10. And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the
ground.

11. And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy
brother's blood from thy hand;

12. When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive
and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.

13. And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.

14. Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I
be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every
one that findeth me shall slay me.

15. And the LORD said unto him. Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken
on him seven fold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

16. And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east
of Eden.

The Qur'an says about the story of the two sons of Adam (Qur'an, 5:27-31):

27. And relate to them the story of the two sons of Adam with truth when they both offered an
offering, but it was accepted from one of them and was not accepted from the other. He said: "I
will most certainly slay you." (The other) said: "Allah only accepts from those who are pious.

28. "If you will stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch forth my
hand towards you to slay you; surely I fear Allah the Lord of the worlds.

29. "Surely I wish that you should bear my sin as well as your own sin, and so you would be of
the inmates of the Fire, and this is the recompense of the unjust."

30. Then his mind facilitated to him the slaying of his brother, so he slew him; then he became
one of the losers.

31. Then Allah sent a crow digging up the earth so that he might show him how he should cover
the dead body of his brother. He said: "Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I should be like this
crow and cover the dead body of my brother?" So he became of those who regret.

You should contemplate on this story as described by the Torah and then compare it with the
narrative of the Qur'an; then decide for yourself.

The first thing which hits your eyes in the story of the Torah is that it has turned God the Lord
into an earthly creature in the image of man, who lives with the men, issues decrees for and
against them as another man may do; he comes near him and talks to him as one man to another;
then he hides himself by going away and becoming absent; so he does not see an absent and far
away thing or person as he sees a nearby and present person. In short, he is just like a terrestrial
man in every aspect; the only difference is that his intentions come into force and his orders are
carried out. On this basis are built all the teachings of the Tawrat and the Injil far exalted be
Allah from such insinuations!

This Biblical story makes us to understand that man at that time lived face to face with Allah and
his physical presence; then Allah hid himself from Cain or from Cain and people like him, while
the others continued to see him plainly. But irrefutable proofs show that mankind is one species,
its individuals have similar faculties and powers, and they live in this world the material life,
while Allah is totally free of material attributes and conditions; accidents of possibility and
attributes of defect cannot touch his subtle position - and this is what the Qur'an describes.

As for the Qur'an, its story is based on the fact that all men share similar traits and is joined in
humanity. Then it goes on to tell the story of the appearance of the crow on the scene, and
discloses the fact that man gradually advances to his perfection, and that his step-by-step
perfection is based on his sensory perception and contemplation. Then it describes the talk of the
two brothers; and quotes Habil's discourse which contains brilliant cognition of human nature,
and fundamental religious factors like tawhid, prophethood and resurrection; then he explains
piety and impiety, justice and injustice - the two basics which govern all divine laws and
shari'ah's rules; finally it elaborates the principle of justice of God concerning acceptance and
non-acceptance and the recompense in the next world.

Then the Qur'an describes the remorse and regret of the killer and his loss in this world and the
next. Lastly, it shows the gravity of the crime of murder that to slay one soul is tantamount to
slaying all men; and whoever keeps one soul alive is as though he kept alive all men.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 33-

40
 
ْ‫الف أَو‬
ٍ ‫ُوا أَوْ تُقَطَّ َع أَ ْي ِدي ِه ْم َوأَرْ ُجلُهُم ِّم ْن ِخ‬
ْ ‫صلَّب‬َ ُ‫وا أَوْ ي‬
ْ ُ‫ض فَ َسادًا أَن يُقَتَّل‬ ِ ْ‫اربُونَ هّللا َ َو َرسُولَهُ َويَ ْس َعوْ نَ فِي األَر‬ ِ ‫إِنَّ َما َج َزاء الَّ ِذينَ يُ َح‬
ْ‫ُوا َعلَ ْي ِه ْم فَا ْعلَ ُموا‬
ْ ‫ُوا ِمن قَ ْب ِل أَن تَ ْق ِدر‬
ْ ‫} إِالَّ الَّ ِذينَ تَاب‬33{ ‫ي فِي ال ُّد ْنيَا َولَهُ ْم فِي اآل ِخ َر ِة َع َذابٌ َع ِظي ٌم‬ ٌ ‫ك لَهُ ْم ِخ ْز‬
َ ِ‫ض َذل‬ِ ْ‫يُنفَوْ ْا ِمنَ األَر‬
َ‫} إِ َّن الَّ ِذين‬35{ َ‫ُوا فِي َسبِيلِ ِه لَ َعلَّ ُك ْم تُ ْفلِحُون‬ ْ ‫وا ِإلَي ِه ْال َو ِسيلَةَ َو َجا ِهد‬
ْ ‫وا هّللا َ َوا ْبتَ ُغ‬ْ ُ‫وا اتَّق‬
ْ ُ‫} يَا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬34{ ‫أَ َّن هّللا َ َغفُو ٌر َّر ِحي ٌم‬
َ ُ ْ
َ‫} ي ُِري ُدون‬36{ ‫ب يَوْ ِم القِيَا َم ِة َما تُقب َِّل ِم ْنهُ ْم َولَهُ ْم َع َذابٌ ألِي ٌم‬ ِ ‫ض َج ِميعًا َو ِم ْثلَهُ َم َعهُ لِيَفتَدُوا بِ ِه ِم ْن َع َذا‬
ْ ْ ِ ْ‫ُوا لَوْ أَ َّن لَهُم َّما فِي األَر‬ ْ ‫َكفَر‬
َ‫ُوا أَ ْي ِديَهُ َما َج َزاء بِ َما َك َسبَا نَ َكاالً ِّمن‬
ْ ‫َّارقَةُ فَا ْقطَع‬
ِ ‫ق َوالس‬ ِ ‫} َوالس‬37{ ‫َار ِجينَ ِم ْنهَا َولَهُ ْم َع َذابٌ ُّمقِي ٌم‬
ُ ‫َّار‬ ِ ‫ار َو َما هُم بِخ‬ ْ ‫أَن يَ ْخ ُرج‬
ِ َّ‫ُوا ِمنَ الن‬
‫ك‬ ْ َ ‫هّللا‬ َ َ َ َ
ُ ‫} أل ْم تَ ْعل ْم أ َّن َ لهُ ُمل‬39{ ‫َّحي ٌم‬ ُ ‫هّللا‬ َ ُ ‫هّللا‬ َ َ
ِ ‫َاب ِمن بَ ْع ِد ظل ِم ِه َوأصْ ل َح فَإ ِ َّن َ يَتوبُ َعل ْي ِه إِ َّن َ َغفو ٌر ر‬ْ ُ َ ‫} فَ َمن ت‬38{ ‫َزيز َح ِكي ٌم‬ ٌ ِ ‫هّللا ِ َوهّللا ُ ع‬
}40{ ‫ض يُ َع ِّذبُ َمن يَ َشاء َويَ ْغفِ ُر لِ َمن يَ َشاء َوهّللا ُ َعلَى ُكلِّ َش ْي ٍء قَ ِدي ٌر‬ ِ ْ‫ت َواألَر‬ ِ ‫ال َّس َما َوا‬
{33} The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to
make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and
their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be banished from the land; this shall
be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous
chastisement. {34} Except those who repent before you have them in your power; so know that
Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. {35} O you who believe! Fear Allah and seek means of nearness to
Him and strive hard in His way that you may be successful. {36} Surely (as for) those who
disbelieve even if they had what is in the earth, all of it, and the like of it with it, that they might
ransom themselves with it from the punishment of the Day of Resurrection, it shall not be
accepted from them, and they shall have a painful punishment. {37} They would desire to go
forth from the Fire, and they shall not go forth from it, and they shall have a lasting punishment.
{38} And (as for) the man who steals and the woman who steals, cut off their hands as a
punishment for what they have earned, an exemplary punishment from Allah; and Allah is
Mighty, Wise. {39} But whoever repents after his inequity and reforms (himself), then surely
Allah will turn to him (mercifully); surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. {40} Do you not know
that Allah - His is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth; He chastises whom he pleases; and
forgives whom he pleases and Allah has the power over all things.
 

Commentary
The verses are not without some connection with the preceding ones. Although the story of the
slaying of a son of Adam by his brother and the subsequent prescription to the Children of Israel
regarding murder, had not specifically laid down any punishment or sentence, yet the topics have
affinity with these verses that describe the punishment of thieves and those who make mischief
in the land.

QUR'AN: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive
to make mischief in the land is only this: Fasaadan (mischief) is a masdar used in the sentence as
a circumstantial clause. Waging war against Allah: It is impossible to take it in its literal sense; it
can only be interpreted metaphorically. But the metaphorical meaning is very wide and it can be
applied on disobeying any rule of the shari'ah and on every injustice and extravagance; yet the
verse joins the Messenger with Allah and it means that the disobedience covers those rulings in
which the Messenger had some involvement. This narrows the circle to include only those affairs
for which Allah has given His Messenger certain authority, like fighting the disbelievers under
the banner of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and keeping the roads safe from highway robbers, by
maintaining the general law and order which the Prophet had established in the land. The clause:
"and strive to make mischief in the land", pinpoints the intended meaning, i.e. to make mischief
in the land by disturbing the peace and highway robbery; it does not refer to fighting against the
Muslims. Moreover, it is known that the Prophet (s.a.w.) had never meted out the above-
mentioned punishments of killing, crucifying, cutting their hands and feet on opposite sides or
imprisonment to the disbelievers who were vanquished in wars.

Apart from that, the exception contained in the next verse indicates that waging war against
Allah and the Messenger only means this making mischief in the land, because one may repent
from waging war, and not from polytheism, etc.
Therefore, waging war and making mischief obviously mean the same thing, i.e. disturbing
general law and order. Law and order is upset when fear and anxiety prevail in society; normally
this happens when arms are used and lead to killings. That is why the sunnah explains making
mischief as drawing sword, etc., as we shall write under "Traditions", God willing.

QUR'AN: that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off
on opposite sides or they should be banished from the land', at-Taqtil, at-taslib and at-taqti' are
on the stem of at-taf'il from the roots, al-qatl (to kill), as-salb (to crucify) and al-qat'  (to cut
off), and accordingly emphasize or enhance the root meanings. The conjunctive aw (or) indicates
alternatives, showing that the two (or more) sides cannot appear together. The question arises
whether there is any sequence or choice between the four alternative punishments mentioned
here; the conjunctive does not throw light on it, and some other spoken words, or circumstantial
factor is needed for deciding it. Thus the verse in this sense is vague. However traditions have
explained it and those narrated from the Imams of Ahlu'l-bayt (a.s.) show that the four laid down
punishments are applied according to the level of the mischief made. For example, a man draws
sword and kills and takes property; another one only kills, a third one only takes property, and a
fourth only draws sword - obviously each one's punishment would differ from the others, as will
be explained under "Traditions".

The words: "their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides", mean that if the hand
is cut on the right side, the foot should be cut on the left; this only shows that cutting the hands
and the feet means cutting one hand and one foot (on opposite sides), not both hands and both
feet.

As for the words: "or they should be banished from the land", an-nafy means banishment;
tradition explains it as banishing him from one town to another.
The verse contains other matters concerned with the law; their details should be seen in books of
jurisprudence.

QUR'AN: this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have
a grievous chastisement: al-Khizy (disgrace); its meaning is clear. It has been argued on the
strength of this verse that if the prescribed punishment is meted out to a guilty man, it does not
necessarily mean that he will not be punished in the hereafter; and it is true to a certain extent.

QUR'AN: Except those who repent before you have them in your power; so know that Allah is
Forgiving, Merciful: However, after one is caught and proof is established against him, the
prescribed punishment is not waived. The sentence: "so know that Allah is Forgiving. Merciful",
alludes to the waiver of the said punishment. It is one of the verses where forgiveness is used for
affairs other than of the next world.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Fear Allah and seek means of nearness to Him and strive hard in
His way that you may be successful: ar-Raghib has written in Mufradatu'l-Qur'an: "al-Wasilah
means attaining something with longing; it is more particular than al-wasilah joining, attaining)
as it has added connotation of longing. Allah says: and seek means of nearness to Him; the
reality of this means of nearness to Allah is to comply with demands of His path with knowledge
and worship, and pursuit of virtues of the shari'ah, and it is like al-qurbah (= nearness)."

It is a sort of joining together, i.e. a spiritual joining which connects the slave with his master;
there is no link that connects man with his Lord except the submissiveness of worship and
veneration. Therefore, the means of nearness means ensuring the reality of veneration and
turning the face of humility and poverty to His direction - this is then the connecting link that
joins the servant to his Lord. As for knowledge and good deed, these are obviously its tools and
concomitants, except if knowledge and deed are used to this very condition.

It is clear from the above discourse that in the clause: "and strive hard in His way", the word al-
jihad (fighting, striving) has been used in its wider sense which covers both fighting the
unbelievers and struggling against one's base desires and anger. There is no reason to restrict it to
the fight against unbelievers, especially as the clause is connected to the preceding order to seek
means of nearness to Allah, and you have seen what it means. Moreover, the reason given in the
two following verses is more appropriate to that wider connotation.

However, it is possible to restrict this jihad to the fight against unbelievers, keeping in view the
Qur'anic style: The jihad in this verse is qualified with the phrase: "in His way", and this
qualification has been used in all the verses which exhort Muslims to fight the enemy; while
general striving does not contain this condition, as Allah says: And (as for) those who strive hard
for Us, We will most certainly guide them onto Our ways; and Allah is most surely with the
doers of good (29:69). Accordingly, the order to fight in the way of Allah after the order to seek
means of nearness to Him mentions a particular after the general for showing its importance; and
probably the same is the case of the order of seeking means of nearness to Him coming after the
order of fearing Allah.

QUR'AN: Surely (as for) those who disbelieve even if they had what is in the earth, all of it, and
the like of it with it, that they might ransom themselves with it from the punishment of the Day of
Resurrection, it shall not be accepted from them, and they shall have a painful punishment. They
would desire to go forth from the Fire, and they shall not go forth from it, and they shall have a
lasting punishment: As we have pointed out above, the two verses apparently give the reason of
the theme of the preceding verse. The three verses together enjoin people to fear Allah, seek
means of nearness to Him and fight in His way, because these are the important means for
warding off the painful lasting punishment from them. That is the only relevant factor, and
nothing else can take its place; because if the unbelievers (who had not feared Allah, and had not
sought any means of nearness to Him, nor had they fought in His way) had possession of all that
is in the earth - and usually it is the utmost that a man desires - and then they were given again as
much, and they wished to ransom themselves with it from the punishment of the Day of
Resurrection, it shall not be accepted from them, and they shall have a painful chastisement;
naturally they would desire to go out of the Fire but they shall not succeed, because it is a lasting
punishment which would never go away from them.

The verses show that:

First: The punishment is the basic aspect which is nearer to man; it is only iman and piety which
ward off this punishment from him, as the words of Allah point to it: And there is not one of you
but shall come down to it; this is a decided decree of your Lord. Then We shall deliver those who
were pious, and We shall leave the unjust therein on their knees (19:71-72). Most surely man is
in loss, except those who believe and do good, and enjoin on each other truth, and enjoin on
each other patience (103:2-3).

Second: The original human nature, which feels pain from fire in this world, will not become
inactive or null and void in the next world; otherwise they would not have felt pain or agony of
fire, nor would have they desired to go forth from it.

QUR'AN And (as for) the man who steals and the woman who steals, cut of their hands as a
punishment for what they have earned, an exemplary punishment from Allah; and Allah is
Mighty, Wise. But whoever repents after his iniquity and reforms (himself), then surely Allah
will turn to him (mercifully); surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful: "And" begins the new
sentence, and here it stands for amma (as for); that is why the predicate "cut off has taken fa
(then - not translated in English), as is usual for the clause which comes in reply of amma; it is
said by the exegetes. The word, aydi (hands) is plural, which in Arabic is used for at least three
items, while here it means only two hands. It is said that such usage is common; some, rather
many, organs in human body are double, like eyes, ears, hands, feet and legs; when two persons
are involved the total of these organs comes to four, which demands plural, like their eyes, hands
and legs, etc. The usage of plural spread to organs of two persons, even if the said organ was not
double. For example, they say: 'I covered the backs and stomachs (in plural) of the two with
hitting.' Allah says: If you both turn to Allah, then indeed your hearts (in plural) are already
inclined... (66:4). "Hand" is used for the organ attached to shoulder; according to traditions here
it refers to the right hand; cutting of hand means severing the whole or part of it with a sharp
instrument.

The words: "as a punishment for what they have earned", are apparently a circumstantial clause
connected to the cutting, i.e. while the cutting is a punishment from Allah for what they have
earned; an-nakal (exemplary punishment, meted out so as to make the culprit as well as the
others desist from the crime.)

As the cutting of hand is an exemplary punishment, the statement quite appropriately follows it:
"But whoever repents after his iniquity and reforms (himself), then surely Allah will turn to him
(mercifully)". The meaning: As the cutting of hand is an exemplary punishment given with the
aim of making the culprit desist in future from his crime, so whoever repents after his iniquity
and reforms himself and does not think of stealing - and it is this factor by which repentance is
established - then surely Allah will accept his repentance and turn to him with forgiveness and
mercy, because He is Forgiving, Merciful. He says: Why should Allah chastise you if you are
grateful and believe? And Allah is the Appreciator, Knowing (4:147).

There are many other jurisprudential topics connected with this verse; interested readers should
consult books of fiqh.

QUR'AN: Do you not know that Allah - His is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth; He
chastises whom He pleases; and forgives whom He pleases and Allah has power over all things:
It gives the reason why He accepts the repentance of the stealing man and woman when they
repent and reform themselves after their iniquity: To Allah belongs the kingdom of the heavens
and the earth, and the King has full authority and power to decide about his kingdom and his
subjects as he pleases - be it punishment or mercy. Therefore Allah has the power and authority
to chastise whom He pleases and forgive whom He pleases, according to the underlying reason
and wisdom - thus He chastises the stealing man and woman if they do not repent, and forgives
them if they repent.

The end clause: "and Allah has power over all things", explains the reason of the sentence: "His
is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth"; Kingdom is an aspect of power while ownership
emanates from creation and origination, i.e., divine guardianship.

We may explain it as follows: Allah is the Creator and Originator of all things; there is nothing
who's self and its effects do not belong to Allah. He is the Giver of what He gives and
Withholder of what He withholds; He has power to do with everything as He pleases - and it is
the ownership. Allah says: Say: "Allah is the Creator of all things, and He is the One, the
Subduer." (13:16). Allah is He besides Whom there is no god, the Everliving, the Self-subsisting
by Whom all subsist; slumber does not overtake Him nor sleep; whatever is in the heavens and
whatever is in the earth is His (2:255). Also He has power to do with all the things whatever He
pleases and intends; it is because everything begins from Him, and His decree is enforced and
His will effective - and it is the kingdom and rulership on everything. Thus Allah is the Owner
because everything subsists by Him, and is the King because He is Powerful, He is neither
powerless nor prevented from enforcing His pleasure and will.

Traditions
(al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Abu Salih from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said,
"There came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), a group from Banu Dubbah, (who were) sick. So
the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said to them, 'Stay with me; when you recover, I shall send you
in an expedition.1 They said, 'Keep us out of Medina.' So he sent them to the Ibili 's-Sadaqah (a
place where camels - donated as sadaqah to Baytu'l-Mal were kept), they drank its (camel's)
urine and ate from its milk. When they were cured and became strong, they killed three camel-
herders. It (the news) reached the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and he sent 'Ali (a.s.) to them, and
lo! They were in a valley wandering, unable to go out of it, near the land of Yemen. He captured
them and brought them to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). Then this verse was revealed: The
punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief
in the land is only this, that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should
be cut off on opposite sides or they should be banished from the land;..." (al-Kafi)

The author says: ash-Shaykh has narrated it in at-Tahdhib through his chain from Abu Salih
(a.s.) with minor difference; and al-'Ayyashi has narrated it in his at-Tafsir from the same Imam
(a.s.) and there is in it at the end the addition: So the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) chose to cut off
their hands and feet on opposite sides.
This story is narrated in Sunni collections of ahadith (including as-Sihahu 's-Sittah)with different
chains and varying particulars. Some of those traditions say that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)
cut their hands and feet on opposite sides and gouged out their eyes; others say that he killed
some of them and crucified some others and cut off and gouged out eyes of yet others; others tell
us that he gouged out their eyes because they had gouged out the eyes of the camel-herders; still
others say that Allah forbade him to gouge out the eyes, and that the verse was revealed
admonishing him for this mutilation; some of them say that he wanted to gouge out their eyes but
did not do so; etc.

However, the traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahlu'l-bayt (a.s.) do not mention the gouging
out at all

(al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from 'Amr ibn 'Uthman ibn 'Ubaydullah al-Madaini from
Abu'l-Hasan ar-Rida (a.s.) that he was asked about the words of Allah; the Mighty, the Great:
The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make
mischief in the land is only this, that they should he killed or crucified or their hands and their
feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be banished from the land. "What is it that
when he does it he becomes liable to one of the four (punishments)? Then he (the Imam, a.s.)
said, 'When he wages war against Allah and His Messenger and strives to make mischief in the
land and kills someone, he will be killed; and if he kills and takes (other's) property, he will be
killed and crucified; and if he takes property without killing, his hand and foot will be cut off on
opposite sides; and if he draws out sword, wages war against Allah and His Messenger and
strives to make mischief in the land but does not kill and does not take property, he will be
banished from the land.' I said, 'How will he be banished from the land and what is the limit of
his banishment?' He said, 'He shall be banished from the town where he had done what he had
done to another town, and it will be written to the people of that (another) town that he has been
banished, so they should not sit with him, nor should they sell anything to him, establish
marriage ties with him, or take food or drink with him; this will be done to him for a year; if he
leaves that town for another town, the people of that town will be informed in similar terms, until
the year comes to end. I said, 'And if he proceeds to the land of polytheism to enter it?' He said,
'If he proceeds to the land of polytheism to enter it, its people will be fought against.'" (al-Kafi)

The author says: ash-Shaykh in at-Tahdhib and al-'Ayyashi in his at-Tafsir have narrated it
from Abu Ishaq al-Madaini from the same Imam (a.s.); and nearly-mutawatir traditions of this
meaning have been narrated from the Imams of Ahlu'l-bayt (a.s.). Also it has been narrated
through various Sunni chains; and some of their traditions say that it depends on Imam's
discretion, he shall kill if he pleases, and shall crucify if he pleases, and shall cut off hands and
feet on opposite sides if he pleases, and shall banish if he pleases. Some Shi'ah traditions too
likewise say that the Imam has the discretion. For example, see the tradition narrated in al-Kafi
from Jamil ibn Darraj from as-Sadiq (a.s.) about this verse: He says: "I said, 'What are they liable
to form these prescribed punishments that Allah has named?' He said, 'It is up to Imam; he shall
cut off if he pleases, and banish if he pleases, and crucify if he pleases, and kill if he pleases.' I
said, 'Banishment, up to where?' He (a.s.) said, 'He shall be banished from one town to another;'
and said that 'Ali (a.s.) had banished two men from Kufah to Basrah." Its details may be found
fiqh. However, the verse is not without a certain indication that there is a sequence in these laid
down punishments, according to the levels of disorder. The alternatives - killing, crucifying, and
cutting of hand and foot on opposite sides and banishment - are not on the same level, on a par:
they greatly differ in intensity and degree, and this in itself is a rational proof of this sequential
order.

Also, the verse clearly shows that these are the laid down punishments for waging such war and
milking mischief in the land; so whoever draws out a sword and strives to make mischief in the
land or slays someone, he will have to be killed because he is a fighter against Allah and His
Messenger and a mischief-maker; it does not come under retribution, i.e., he is not being killed
because he has slayed a respectable soul; so even if the heirs of the slain person agree to take
blood-money, his punishment of killing is not waived. al-'Ayyashi has narrated in his at-Tafsir
from Muhammad ibn Muslim from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) a tradition which says, inter alia, "Abu
'Ubaydah said, 'May Allah ameliorate you! (What) do you see if the heir of the slain person
pardoned him (i.e. the slayer)?' Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said, 'If they pardoned, then it is incumbent on
the Imam to kill him, because he certainly had waged war, killed and stolen.' Then Abu 'Ubaydah
said. Then if the heirs of the slain wanted to take blood-money from him and let him go free, do
they have the right to do so?' He said, "No. His (punishment) is to be killed.'"

(as-Suyuti) narrates from Ibn Abi Shaybah, 'Abd ibn Hamid, Ibn Abi 'd-Dunya (in Kitabu'l-
Ashraf), Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim from ash-Sha'bi that he said, "Harithah ibn Badr at-Tamimi,
a resident of Basrah, had made mischief in the land and waged war; and he talked with some
men from Quraysh to obtain from 'Ali a promise of security for him, but they refused. Then he
came to Sa'id ibn Qays al-Hamadani. So he approached 'Ali and said, 'O Leader of the Faithful!
What is the recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to
make mischief in the land?' He said, '(It is) that they should be killed or crucified or their hands
and their feet should be cut off on opposite side, or they should be banished from the land.' Then
(the Imam) said, 'Except those who repent before you have them in your power.' Then Sa'id said,
'Even if it be Harithah ibn Badr.' Thereafter, Sa'id said, This is Harithah ibn Badr; he has come
repenting; is he then safe?' (The Imam, a.s.), said, 'Yes.' So (Sa'id) brough him to 'Ali, and he did
his bay'ah; and the Imam accepted it from him and wrote for him a warrant of safety." (ad-
Durru 'l-manthur)

The author says: Sa'id spoke the words, 'Even if it be Harithah ibn Badr', as an appendix he
attached to the verse, with the aim of showing its unrestricted generality which covers everyone
who repents after waging war and making mischief. Such additions are found generally in every
speech.
(al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Sawrah Bani Kulayb that he said, "I said to Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.), 'A man comes out of his house, proceeding to mosque or for some other work;
another man meets him and going behind him, beats him and takes away his clothes?' (The
Imam) said, 'What do they say about it those who are in your place?' I said, They say that it is
open immorality; and war mongering happens in the towns of polytheists.' He said, 'Which has
more sanctity, the house of Islam or the house of polytheism?' I said, The house of Islam.' Then
(the Imam) said, 'Such people are covered by this verse: The punishment of those who wage war
against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they
should be killed...'" (al-Kafi)

The author says: What the narrator has pointed out concerning the opinion of the people has
been narrated in some Sunni traditions. For example, ad-Dahhak has explained the reason of its
revelation in these words: "This verse was revealed about the polytheists, and at-Tabari has
written in his at-Tafsir that 'Abdu'l-Malik ibn Marwan wrote to Anas asking him about this
verse. So Anas wrote to him: 'Surely this verse was revealed about those people from the
'Arniyyin, and they were from Bujaylah.' Anas said, Then they apostatized from Islam, killed the
camel-herder, took away the camels, and spread terror in the way and committed adultery. So the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) asked Jibril about the judgment regarding those who wage war. He
said, "Whoever steals and spreads terror in the way and thinks unlawful hidden part as lawful,
you crucify him." ' " There are several other traditions.

The verse, with its generality, supports the tradition of al-Kafi; and it is known that reason or
occasion of revelation does not restrict the apparent meaning of a verse.

al-Qummi has written about the words of Allah: O you who believe! Fear Allah and seek means
of nearness to Him.. , that (the Imam) said, "Come near Allah through the Imam."

The author says: That is, through obedience to the Imam. Thus it is based on the flow of the
Qur'an, and applies the verse to its best import. A similar narrative has come from Ibn
Shahrashub that he said, "The Leader of the Faithful (a.s.), said about the divine word: and seek
means of nearness to Him: 'I am the means of nearness to Him.'" And nearer to it is the narration
of Basairu 'd-darajat, through his chains from Salman from 'Ali (a.s.). Also possibly the two
narratives may be a sort of interpretation. Ponder on it.

Majma'u'l-bayan quotes a tradition from the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he said, "Ask from Allah for
me the wasilah, as it is a rank in the Garden, will not get it except one servant, and I hope that I
shall be him."

(as-Saduq) narrates through his chain from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri that he said, "The Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.), said, 'When you ask from Allah, ask for me the wasilah.' We asked the Prophet
(s.a.w.) about the wasilah; so he said, 'It is my rank in the Garden ...'" (It is a long narrative,
known as the Hadith of Wasilah.)

If you meditate on this hadith and as to how the meaning of the verse fits on it, you will find that
wasilah is the position of the Prophet (s.a.w.) in presence of his Lord, with which he gets nearer
to Allah; and joins him there his pure progeny, then the good servants from among his ummah.
And it has been narrated in some traditions narrated from them that verily the Messenger of
Allah adheres to his Lord, and we adhere to him and you (the Shi'ahs) adhere to us.

And to this returns what we have written concerning the two narratives of al-Qummi and Ibn
Shahrashub that possibly they are a sort of interpretation. Probably Allah will help us to explain
this theme in a more appropriate place further on.

Appended to these traditions is the narration of al-'Ayyashi from Abu Basir that he said, "I heard
Abu Ja'far (a.s.), saying, "Enemies of 'Ali, they shall abide in the Fire; Allah has said: and they
shall not go forth from it."

Tafsiru'l-burhan writes about the verse: And (as for) the man who steals and the woman who
steals cut off their hands, quoting ash-Shaykh who narrates in at-Tahdhib through his chain from
Abu Ibrahim (a.s.) that he said, "The hand of the thief will be cut and his thumb and palm left
(intact), and his foot will be cut and his heel led (intact) so he shall walk with it."

(ash-Shaykh) also narrates through his chain from Muhammad ibn Muslim that he said, "I said to
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), 'In (theft of) how much will the thief's hand be cut?' He said, 'In one-fourth
of dinar.'" He (Muhammad) says, "I told him, 'In two dirhams?' He said, 'In one-fourth of dinar;
whatever the value of dinar may be."' He (Muhammad) says, "Then I said to him, 'What do you
think? One who steals less than one-fourth of a dinar, will the name of thief apply to him? And is
he in that condition, a thief before Allah?' So he said, 'Anyone who steals from a Muslim a thing
which he owns and keeps preserved, the name, thief, will apply to him, and he is a thief before
Allah, yet (his hand) shall not be cut off except in one-fourth of a dinar or more; and if the hand
of a thief were to be cut off in less than one-fourth of a dinar you would have found the people in
general amputated.'" (at-Tahdhib)

The author says: The words of the Imam (a.s.), if the hand of a thief were to be cut off in less
than one-fourth of a dinar ..., indicate that this law of cutting of hand (with this condition) is a
relief from Allah and His mercy towards His servants. This rule, i.e., restriction of this order to
the theft of one-fourth of a dinar or more, is narrated through some Sunni chains too; it has been
narrated in as-Sahih of al-Bukhari and as-Sahih ofMuslim through their chains from 'Aishah that
the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said, "Will not be cut the hand of a thief except in one-fourth of a
dinar and more."

Sama'ah narrates from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said, "When a thief is caught his middle of
palm will be cut off, then if he returned (stole again) his leg will be cut off from middle of foot;
then if he returned he will be put in prison; then if he stole in the prison, he will be killed." (at-
Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

Zurarah narrates from Abu Ja'far (a.s.), (that he was asked) about a man who stole and his right
hand was cut off, then he (again) stole and his left leg was cut off, and (now) he steals the third
time? (The Imam) said, "The Leader of the Faithful (a.s.), used to imprison him forever, and he
used to say, 'I feel ashamed of my Lord that I should leave him without any hand with which he
should cleanse himself and without any leg with which he should go for his needs.' (The Imam
then) said, 'So when he cut the hand he cut it below the joint of fingers with the palm, and when
he cut the leg he cut it below the ankle.' (The Imam) said, 'He did not think it proper to disregard
any of the laid down punishments.'" (ibid.)

Zarqan (companion and fast friend of Ibn Abi Duwad) said, "One day Ibn Abi Duwad returned
from al-Mu'tasim's presence and he was distressed. So I asked him about it. He said, Today I
wish that I had died twenty years earlier.'" He (Zarqan) said, "I told him, 'Why?' He said,
'Because of what happened from this black, Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn 'Ali ibn Musa, today in
presence of Amiru'l-mu'minin al-Mu'tasim.'" (Zarqan says) "I said, 'And how was it?' He said, 'A
thief confessed to stealing and asked the caliph to cleanse him by punishing him according to the
shari'ah. The caliph gathered jurisprudents in his presence and Muhammad ibn 'Ali (too) was
brought there. So (the caliph) asked us about the cutting (of hand), from which place it should be
cut off.' He (Ibn Abi Duwad) said, 'I said, "From wrist, because Allah says regarding tayammum:
and wipe your faces and your hands (5:6);" and a group joined me in this (opinion); and some
others said, "Rather it must be cut from elbow." He (the caliph) asked, "And what is its proof?"
They said, "Because when Allah said: and your hands up to elbows, regarding the washing (in
wudu'), it proved that the limit of hand is up to elbow.'" (Ibn Abi Duwad) said, Then he turned
towards Muhammad ibn 'Ali and said, "What do you say about it, O Abu Ja'far!" He said, "The
people have already spoken about it, O Amiru'l-mu'minin!" He said, "Leave aside what they have
said; what do you have (about it)?" He said, "Excuse me from it, O Amiru'l-mu'minin!" He said,
"I adjure you by Allah that you should tell (me) what you know about it." He said, "Now that
you have adjured me by Allah, I say that they have made a mistake in the sunnah; because
cutting must compulsorily be at the joint of the fingers, and palm should be left (intact)." (The
caliph) said, "And what is its proof?" He said, "The saying of the Messenger of Allah (s.a. w.a.):
sajdah is on seven organs: face and two hands and two knees and two feet; if his hand is cut off
from wrist or elbow, he will not have a hand to do sajdah upon; and Allah, the Blessed, the High,
says: And that the places of sajdah are Allah's, i.e. these seven organs on which sajdah is done:
therefore call not upon any one with Allah (72:18), and what is Allah's is not cut off."' (Ibn Abi
Duwad) said, 'So al-Mu'tasim liked it (very much) and ordered the thief s hand to be cut off from
the fingers' joint, below the palm.' Ibn Abi Duwad said, 'I was extremely shocked and wished
that I were dead.'"
Ibn Abi Zarqan said that Ibn Abi Duwad then continued, "After the third day I went to al-
Mu'tasim and said, 'It is incumbent upon me to give sincere advice to Amiru'l-mu'minin; and I
am going to tell him that because of which, I know, I shall enter the Fire.' He said, 'And what is
it?' I said, 'When Amiru'l-mu'minin gathers in his presence jurisprudents and scholars of his
subjects for a problem in a religious matter, and asks them about its law, and they tell him what
they know of the order concerning it; and there are in that gathering his sons, commanders,
ministers and secretaries; and people have heard that (question and answers) from behind his
door; then he leaves aside the opinions of all of them because of one man's opinion (in whose
imamah a group of this ummah believes, and claims that that man has more right to this position
than the caliph), then the caliph gives order according to that man's opinion, instead of the
jurisprudents' order?1" (Ibn Abi Duwad) said, "So his color changed and he understood what I
wanted to tell him; and said, 'May Allah give you good reward for your sincere advice!'"

He said, "On the fourth day he ordered a certain man from among his rninister-secretaries to
invite (Muhammad ibn 'Ali) to his house. He (the Imam) refused to accept and said, 'You know
that I do not attend your gatherings.' He said, 'I only invite you for a meal, and I love that you
should step on my clothes (i.e. carpets) and enter my house, so I should be blessed with your
blessing; and so-and-so, son of so-and-so, a minister of the caliph, desires to meet you.' So he
went to his place; when he was offered the meal, he felt the pain of poison, and (at once) called
for his riding animal. The host asked him to stay; he said, 'My going out of your house is better
for you.' So he remained in agony the whole day and night until he died." (ibid.)

The author says: This story has been narrated through other chains too. We have copied the
whole narration, in spite of its length (like some preceding repeated traditions) because it
contains some deep Qur'anic discourses that may help in understanding of the Qur'anic verses.

(as-Suyuti) narrates from Ahmad, Ibn Jarir, and Ibn Abi Hatim from 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar that a
woman committed theft in the time of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and her right hand was
cut off. So she said, "Do I have repentance? O Messenger of Allah!" He said, "Yes. Today you
are (free) from your sin like the day you were born of your mother." Then Allah revealed the
verse in the chapter of "The Table": But whoever repents after his iniquity and reforms (himself),
then surely Allah will turn to him (mercifully), surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

The author says: The tradition is in the style of application and looks at the connection of the
verse with the preceding one. Obviously, both verses were revealed together.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 41-

50
 
َ‫ُوا َس َّما ُعون‬ ْ ‫وا آ َمنَّا بِأ َ ْف َوا ِه ِه ْم َولَ ْم تُ ْؤ ِمن قُلُوبُهُ ْم َو ِمنَ الَّ ِذينَ ِهاد‬ ْ ُ‫ار ُعونَ فِي ْال ُك ْف ِر ِمنَ الَّ ِذينَ قَال‬ ِ ‫ك الَّ ِذينَ يُ َس‬ َ ‫يَا أَيُّهَا ال َّرسُو ُل الَ يَحْ ُزن‬
‫ُوا َو َمن‬ ْ ‫اض ِع ِه يَقُولُونَ ِإ ْن أوتِيتُ ْم هَـ َذا فَ ُخ ُذوهُ َوإِن لَّ ْم تُ ْؤتَوْ هُ فَاحْ َذر‬ ُ ِ ‫ك يُ َح ِّرفُونَ ْال َكلِ َم ِمن بَ ْع ِد َم َو‬ ْ
َ ‫ب َس َّما ُعونَ لِقَوْ ٍم آ َخ ِرينَ لَ ْم يَأتُو‬ ِ ‫لِ ْل َك ِذ‬
‫َظي ٌم‬ ِ ‫اآلخ َر ِة َعذابٌ ع‬ َ ِ ‫ي َولهُ ْم فِي‬ َ ْ ْ َ ُ ُ
ٌ ‫ك لهُ ِمنَ ِ َش ْيئا أوْ لـئِكَ ال ِذينَ ل ْم ي ُِر ِد ُ أن يُطه َِّر قلوبَهُ ْم لهُ ْم فِي ال ُّدنيَا ِخز‬ َ َ ‫هّللا‬ َ َّ َ ُ ً ‫هّللا‬ َ َ ِ‫ي ُِر ِد هّللا ُ فِتنَتَهُـ فلن تَ ْمل‬
َ َ ْ
‫ْرضْ َع ْنهُ ْم فَلَن يَضُرُّ وكَ َش ْيئًا َوإِ ْن‬ ِ ‫ك فَاحْ ُكم بَ ْينَهُم أوْ أ ْع ِرضْ َع ْنهُ ْم َوإِن تُع‬ َ َ َ ‫ت فَإِن َجآؤُو‬ ِ ْ‫ب أ َّكالُونَ لِلسُّح‬ َ ْ
ِ ‫} َس َّما ُعونَ لِل َك ِذ‬41{
َ َّ ُ ‫هّللا‬
َ‫ك َو ِعن َده ُم التوْ َراة فِيهَا ُحك ُم ِ ث َّم يَت ََولوْ نَ ِمن بَ ْع ِـد ذلِك‬ ْ ُ َّ ُ َ ‫} َوك ْيفَ يُ َحك ُمون‬42{ َ‫َح َك ْمتَ فَاحْ ُكم بَ ْينَهُ ْم بِ ْالقِ ْس ِط إِن َ يُ ِحبُّ ال ُمق ِس ِطين‬
َ ِّ َ ْ ْ ‫هّللا‬ َّ
‫} إِنَّا أَن َز ْلنَا التَّوْ َراةَ فِيهَا هُدًى َونُو ٌر يَحْ ُك ُم بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ ال ِذينَ أ ْسلَ ُموا لِل ِذينَ هَادُوا َوال َّربَّانِيُّونَ َواألحْ بَا ُر‬43{ َ‫ك بِ ْال ُم ْؤ ِمنِين‬
َ ْ َّ ْ َ َّ َ ِ‫َو َما أُوْ لَـئ‬
ُ ‫ُوا بِآيَاتِي ثَ َمنًا قَلِيالً َو َمن لَّ ْم يَحْ ُكم بِ َما أَنزَ َل هّللا‬ ْ ‫اخ َشوْ ِن َوالَ تَ ْشتَر‬ ْ ‫اس َو‬ َ َّ‫وا َعلَ ْي ِه ُشهَدَاء فَالَ ت َْخ َش ُو ْا الن‬ ْ ُ‫ب هّللا ِ َو َكان‬ ِ ‫وا ِمن ِكتَا‬ ْ ُ‫بِ َما ا ْستُحْ فِظ‬
ُ ُ ُ ُ َ َ ْ ْ ْ َ ‫} َو َكتَ ْبنَا َعلَ ْي ِه ْم فِيهَا أ َّن النَّف‬44{ َ‫فَأُوْ لَـئِكَ هُ ُم ال َكافِرُون‬
ْ َ ْ
ِّ‫نف َواألذنَ بِاألذ ِن َوالس َِّّن بِال ِّسن‬ ِ ‫س َوال َع ْينَ بِال َعي ِْن َواألنفَ بِاأل‬ ِ ‫س بِالنَّف‬
ُ
‫ار ِهم بِ َعي َسى‬ ِ َ‫} َوقَفَّ ْينَا َعلَى آث‬45{ َ‫ارةٌ لَّهُ َو َمن لَّ ْم يَحْ ُكم بِ َما أن َز َل هّللا ُ فَأوْ لَـئِكَ هُ ُم الظَّالِ ُمون‬ َ َّ‫ق بِ ِه فَه َُو َكف‬ َ ‫ص َّد‬ َ َ‫صاصٌ فَ َمن ت‬ َ ِ‫َو ْال ُجرُو َح ق‬
ً‫ص ِّدقًا لِّ َما بَ ْينَ يَ َد ْي ِه ِمنَ التَّوْ َرا ِة َوهُدًى َو َموْ ِعظَة‬ ُ
َ ‫ص ِّدقا ل َما بَ ْينَ يَ َد ْي ِه ِمنَ التوْ َرا ِة َوآتَ ْينَاهُ ا ِإلن ِجي َل فِي ِه هُدًى َونو ٌر َو ُم‬ َّ ِّ ً َ ‫ا ْب ِن َمرْ يَ َم ُم‬
‫َاب‬ َ ِ ‫ت‬‫ك‬ ْ
‫ال‬ َ‫ك‬ ْ
‫ي‬ َ ‫ل‬ ِ ‫إ‬ ‫َا‬ ‫ن‬‫ل‬ْ َ
‫ز‬ ‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫و‬
َ } 47 { َ‫ون‬ ُ ‫ق‬ ‫س‬
ِ ‫ا‬ َ ‫ف‬ ْ
‫ال‬ ‫م‬
ُ ُ ‫ه‬ ‫ك‬ َ ِ ‫ئ‬ ‫ـ‬َ ‫ل‬ ْ‫و‬ُ ‫أ‬َ ‫ف‬ ُ ‫هّللا‬ ‫ل‬
َ َ
‫ز‬ ‫ن‬َ ‫أ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬
َِ ‫ب‬ ‫م‬ ُ
‫ك‬ ْ‫ح‬ ‫ي‬ ‫م‬ َّ
َ ْ َ َ ِ ِ‫ل‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ‫و‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ف‬ ُ ‫هّللا‬ ‫ل‬
َ ‫ز‬َ ‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ي‬
َِ ِ ِ ِ ‫ج‬ ‫ن‬ ‫إل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ل‬
ُ ْ
‫ه‬ َ ‫أ‬ ْ َ‫} َو ْلي‬46{ َ‫لِّ ْل ُمتَّقِين‬
‫م‬ ‫ك‬ ُ ْ‫ح‬
ْ‫ق لِ ُكلٍّ َج َعلنَا‬ ْ َ َّ
ِّ ‫ب َو ُمهَ ْي ِمنا َعل ْي ِه فاحْ كم بَ ْينَهُم بِ َما أن َز َل ُ َوالَ تَتبِ ْع أ ْه َواءهُ ْم َع َّما َجاءكَ ِمنَ ال َح‬ ‫هّللا‬ َ ُ َ َ ً ْ
ِ ‫ص ِّدقًا لِّ َما بَ ْينَ يَ َد ْي ِه ِمنَ ال ِكتَا‬ َ ‫ق ُم‬ ِّ ‫بِ ْال َح‬
‫ت إِلَى هللا َمرْ ِج ُع ُك ْم َج ِميعًا فَيُنَبِّئُ ُكم‬ ِ ‫ِمن ُك ْم ِشرْ َعةً َو ِم ْنهَاجًا َولَوْ َشاء هّللا ُ لَ َج َعلَ ُك ْم أ َّمةً َوا ِح َدةً َولَـ ِكن لِّيَ ْبلُ َو ُك ْم فِي َما آتَا ُكم فَا ْستَبِقُوا الخَ ْي َرا‬ ُ
َ
‫نزَل ُ إِل ْيكَ فإِن‬ َ ‫هّللا‬ َ ‫ْض َما أ‬ َ ِ ‫ك عَن بَع‬ َ ‫} َوأَ ِن احْ ُكم بَ ْينَهُم بِ َما أَن َز َل هّللا ُ َوالَ تَتَّبِ ْع أَ ْه َواءهُ ْم َواحْ َذرْ هُ ْم أَن يَ ْفتِنُو‬48{ َ‫بِ َما ُكنتُ ْم فِي ِه ت َْختَلِفُون‬
َ‫} أَفَ ُح ْك َم ال َجا ِهلِيَّ ِة يَ ْب ُغونَ َو َم ْن أحْ َسنُ ِمن‬49{ َ‫اسقُون‬
َ ْ ِ َ‫اس لَف‬ ِ َّ‫ْض ُذنُوبِ ِه ْم َوإِ َّن َكثِيراً ِّمنَ الن‬ ِ ‫ُصيبَهُم بِبَع‬ ِ ‫ت ََولَّوْ ْا فَا ْعلَ ْم أَنَّ َما ي ُِري ُد هّللا ُ أَن ي‬
}50{ َ‫هّللا ِ ُح ْك ًما لِّقَوْ ٍم يُوقِنُون‬
{41} O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive together in hastening in unbelief from
among those who say with their mouths: "We believe", and their hearts do not believe, and from
among those who are Jews; (they are) listeners for the sake of a lie, listeners for another people
who have not come to you; they alter the words from their places, saying: "If you are given this,
take it, and if you are not given this, be cautious;" and as for him whose temptation Allah desires,
you cannot control anything for him with Allah. Those are they for whom Allah does not desire
that He should purify their hearts; they shall have disgrace in this world, and they shall have a
grievous chastisement in the hereafter. {42} (They are) listeners of a lie, devourers of what is
forbidden; therefore if they come to you, judge between them or turn aside from them, and if you
turn aside from them, they shall not harm you in any way; and if you judge, judge between them
with equity; surely Allah loves those who judge equitably. {43} And how do they make you a
judge and they have the Torah wherein is Allah's judgement? Yet they turn back after that, and
these are not the believers. {44} Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and
light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) were judging (matters) for those
who were Jews, and (so did) the Divines and the scholars, as they were required to guard (part)
of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof; therefore fear not the people and fear Me,
and barter not My signs for a small price; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed,
those are they that are the unbelievers. {45} And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life,
and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal
in wounds; but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; and whoever did not judge by
what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust. {46} And We sent after them in their
footsteps 'Isa, son of Maryam, verifying what was before him of the Torah and We gave him the
Injil in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Torah and a guidance
and an admonition for those who are pious. {47} And the People of the Injil should have judged
by what Allah revealed in it; and whoever did not judged by what Allah revealed, those are they
that are the transgressors. {48} And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying
what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it, therefore judge between them by what Allah
has revealed, and do not follow their (low) desires (diverging) from the truth that has come to
you; for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way, and if Allah had pleased He would
have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you, therefore
strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is the return, of all of you, then He
will let you know that in which you differed; {49} And that you should judge between them by
what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires, and be cautious of them, lest they
seduce you from part of what Allah has revealed to you; but if they turn back then know that
Allah desires to afflict them on account of some of their faults; and most surely many of the
people are transgressors. {50} Is it then the judgement of (the times of) ignorance that they
desire? And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?
 

Commentary
The verses are interlinked revealed in a single context. Clearly they speak about a group from the
People of the Book who had approached the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) regarding some laws of
the Torah, hoping that he would give a judgement other than that of the Torah; and thus they
would get relief from the strict ruling of their own Book. They told each other: "If you are given
this - i.e. what they desired - take it; and if you are not given this - i.e. are given the same law of
the Torah - then be cautious." The Prophet (s.a.w.) referred them to the ruling of the Torah, so
they turned away from him. Also there was a group of hypocrites which had a tendency similar
to that of the Jews; they wanted to put the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) into temptation, so that he
might judge between them according to their desire, favouring the powerful segments of the
society, as they were doing in the days of ignorance; and who is better than Allah to judge for a
people who are sure?

The verses give credence to what has been narrated regarding its reason of revelation. That they
were revealed concerning the Jews when two distinguished married persons from among them
committed adultery; and their religious scholars desired to change the scriptural law of stoning to
flogging. So they sent some people to ask the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) for the ruling about
adultery of married persons; they enjoined them to accept it if he sentenced them to flogging, and
reject it if he sentenced them to be stoned. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) gave judgement for
stoning, so they turned away from him. Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) asked Ibn Suriya
what was the law of the Torah on this matter, and he adjured him by Allah and His signs not to
hide what he knew of the truth; so he confirmed to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) that the law
of stoning was there in the Torah... This story will come under "Traditions", God willing.

However, the verses independently throw light on their theme; they are not restricted in their
connotation to their reason of revelation. This is the case in general with all the verses, which
were revealed on particular occasions; the reasons or events of their revelation have no
significance except as one, among many, of their applications. It is because the Qur'an is a
comprehensive and everlasting Book, which is not, confined to a time or space and not restricted
to a particular group or event. Allah says: ...it is nothing but a reminder for all mankind (12:104).
Blessed is He Who sent down the Furqan to His servant so that he may be a warner to the worlds
(25:1). ...and most surely it is a Mighty Book; falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor
from behind it;... (41:41-42).

QUR'AN: O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive together in hastening in unbelief...:
The verse consoles the Prophet (s.a.w.) and placates him because of what he had to endure at the
hands of those who are mentioned here. They were those who were striving together in hastening
in disbelief; they went ahead rapidly on this path; their motives of disbelief were reflected in
their words and deeds one after another; thus they were unbelievers striving in unbelief. It should
be noted that striving in unbelief is not the same as striving to unbelief.

The clause: "from among those who say with their mouths: 'We believe', and their hearts do not
believe", describes those who strive together in hastening in unbelief, i.e., from among the
hypocrites. It has given the attribute instead of naming the persons concerned, in order to
describe the reason of this prohibition. Likewise, the attribute: "who strive together in hastening
in unbelief, points to the reason for not grieving. Meaning therefore will be as follows, and Allah
knows better: These people should not grieve you by striving together in hastening in disbelief,
because they have entered into Islam with their mouths only, not with their hearts; and they are
not the believers; of the same character are the Jews who have approached you and have said
what they said.

The context shows that the phrase: "and from among those who are Jews", is in conjunctive with
the phrase: "from among those who say with their mouths:..."; it is not an independent sentence.
Accordingly, the words: "listeners for the sake of a lie, listeners for another people who have not
come to you", are predicate of an omitted subject, that is, they are. These sentences describe the
condition of the Jews; as for the hypocrites who have been mentioned at the beginning of the
verse, obviously, their condition does not fit this description. These Jews are "listeners for the
sake of a lie"; they avidly listen to a lie although they know it to be a lie; otherwise they were not
liable to be blamed; and they are "listeners for another people who have not come to you"; that
is, they accept whatever is reported to them and do whatever they are told. This variation in the
import of listening necessitated the repetition of the word, "listeners". The first indicates paying
attention to while the second signifies acceptance.

The clause: "they alter the words from their places", i.e., after the words have been put in their
proper places; it shows the attribute of "another people"; also with the same phrase is connected
the sentence: "saying: 'If you are given this, take it, and if you are not given this, be cautious.' "

It all shows that a group of the Jews were involved in a religious problem; their Book contained
clear divine order for it, but their scholars changed it knowingly; then they sent some people to
the Prophet (s.a.w.) to seek his judgement on that matter, enjoining them to accept his decision if
he decided according to their corrupted order, and be on guard if he decided otherwise.

The sentence: "and as for him whose temptation Allah desires, you cannot control anything for
him with Allah", is parentetical; it shows that the Jews in this affair are enmeshed in divine
temptation and trial; therefore the Prophet (s.a.w.) should set his mind at rest that this affair is
from Allah and it has to return to Him, and no one else has any authority on any of it; why
should he feel grieved for a matter from which no one except Allah can remove.

"Those are they for whom Allah does not desire that He should purify their hearts": Their hearts
continue to wallow in their original filth and dirtiness, because they are piling up sin over sin, so
Allah has left them to their error: ...but and He does not cause to err by it (any) except the
transgressors (2:26).
"they shall have disgrace in this world, and they shall have a grievous chastisement in the
hereafter": It is a threat that the Jews will be disgraced in this world - and it has already been
done - and shall have grievous punishment in the life hereafter.

QUR'AN: (They are) listeners of a lie, devourers of what is forbidden: ar-Raghib says in
Mufradatu'l-Qur'an: "as-Suht (rind, bark which is destroyed); Allah says: fa-yushitakum
bi-'adhab ('lest He destroys you by a punishment' (20:61)); it has also been recited as fa-
yashitakum; it is said: suhtuh and asuhtuh; from this root is derived as-suht, a forbidden thing
which brings shame to the user or doer, as though it destroys his religion and honour; Allah says:
devourers of what is forbidden; and the Prophet (a.s.), has said: 'All flesh that grows from
forbidden things, Fire is more entitled to it;' and bribe is named suht."

Thus every property obtained unlawfully is suht (forbidden). The context shows that in this verse
"what is forbidden" refers to bribe. This adjective as used here indicates that those Jewish
scholars who had sent that group to the Prophet (s.a.w.) had taken bribe in that matter for altering
the divine law; some people's safety was under threat because of that law, so they averted it with
bribery; they took bribe and changed the order of Allah.

It is now clear that the two phrases: "listeners of a lie, devourers of what is forbidden", taken
together describe the condition of the whole nation; but taken separately, the words, "listeners of
a lie", describe the attribute of preceding: those who are Jews, i.e. those who were sent to the
Prophet (s.a.w.) and their companions; and: "devourers of what is forbidden", points to the
preceding: another people who have not come to you. In short, the scholars of the Jews devour
bribe, and their followers, the general public, listen to their lies.

QUR'AN: therefore if they come to you, judge between them or turn aside from them, and if you
turn aside from them, they shall not harm you in any way; and if you judge, judge between them
with equity; surely Allah loves those who judge equitably: The verse leaves it to the Prophet's
discretion to judge between them - when they come to him for judgement - or to turn aside from
them. It is understood that the Prophet (s.a.w.) was not to choose either of the two without an
underlying reason and justification. In short, the matter was left to his own outlook. Further
elaborating this option, Allah says that if the Prophet turned aside from them refusing to judge
between them, they could not harm him in any way; and if he decided to judge, he was to judge
with justice and equity.

Ultimately, it means that Allah does not like them to be judged except according to His law; the
Prophet (s.a.w.) was to enforce divine law among them, if it was not acceptable to them, he
should not involve himself with them because he could not apply any other law anywhere.

QUR'AN: And how do they make you a judge and they have the Torah wherein is Allah's
judgement? Yet they turn back after that, and these are not the believers: The verse points to a
surprising behaviour of the Jews: They are a nation having their own Book and Shari'ah; they
reject your Prophethood, Book and shari'ah; then they are faced with a problem about which
their book contains a clear divine order; yet they turn back from the Torah with its divine order,
while they are not those who believe in it.
Accordingly, the phrase: "Yet they turn back after that", means: they turn back from the law
concerning that event although they do have the Torah, which contains divine commandments.
The phrase: "and these are not the believers", means: they do not believe in the Torah and its
law; they have abandoned belief in the Book and its law, and turned to disbelief.

It is possible to take the words: "Yet they turn back", as referring to their rejection of the
Prophet's judgement; and the phrase: "these are not the believers", as pointing to their disbelief in
the Prophet (s.a.w.), even though they had come to him and sought his judgement; or it could
refer to their disbelief in the Torah and the Prophet (s.a.w.) together. But the explanation we have
given earlier is more in keeping with the context.

The verse confirms to a certain extent the Torah now prevalent among the Jews. It is the book
collected by Ezra by the permission of Cyrus, king of Persia, after he conquered Babylon,
released the Children of Israel from captivity of Babylon, and allowed them to return to Palestine
and rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem. It is the same Torah, which was in their hands during the
time of the Prophet (s.a.w.), and it is the same, which they have with them today. The Qur'an
confirms that this present Torah contains laws of Allah, and it also says that alterations and
changes have corrupted it.

The above discourse proves that the present Torah, prevalent among the Jews today, contains
some parts of the original Torah sent down to Musa (a.s.), also many of its parts have been
changed and corrupted through addition, omission, change of word or context, etc. This is the
Qur'anic view of the Torah and extensive research leads to the same conclusion.

QUR'AN: Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets
who submitted themselves (to Allah) were judging (matters) for those who were Jews, and (so
did) the Divines and the scholars, as they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and
they were witnesses thereof; therefore fear not the people and fear Me, and barter not My signs
for a small price; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the
unbelievers: It gives the reason of what was explained in the preceding verse. This and the
following verses describe that Allah had laid down for these nations, in their successive times,
laws, and wrote them in the books revealed to them, in order that they should be guided by them
and acquire insight through them, and they should serve as reference points in matters in which
they differed; He ordered their prophets and scholars to judge matters by them; they were given
the responsibility to guard the books and protect them from corruption and alteration; they were
admonished not to accept any price for giving judgement - a price which was bound to be trivial
(in comparison to Allah's pleasure); they should not fear the people, rather they should fear
Allah.

He emphasized it again and warned them of following their low desires, lest the worldly people
seduce them from divinely revealed truth. He has appointed various sets of law for various
people in different times, so that He might try them thoroughly; it is because abilities of times
differ with changing eras, and two things which differ in strength and weakness cannot be
perfected with one factor with one style.
"Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light": There was in it some
guidance and some light with which the Israelites were led to some cognizance and laws
adequately suitable to their condition, conforming to their capabilities. Allah has described in His
book their general behaviour and the particulars of their national affairs and limits of their
understanding. Accordingly they were given a part of guidance and a part of light because they
had appeared on the scene in remote past and primitive age with simple understanding; Allah
says: And We wrote for him in the tablets admonition from every thing and clear explanation of
all things... (7:145).

"with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) were judging (matters) for those who
were Jews": The prophets followed Islam, i.e. submission to Allah, which is the religion with
Allah. This nomenclature has been used to show that there is only one religion, and that is to
submit to Allah and not to refrain from worshipping Him. A man who believes in Allah and
submits to Him has no right to reject any of His commandments and laws.

"and (so did) the Divines and the scholars as they were required to guard (part) of the Book of
Allah, and they were witnesses thereof: The Divines, i.e., those scholars whose knowledge and
action were exclusively devoted to Allah (if the word is derived from ar-Rab (Lord); it may also
be taken to mean those scholars who train and raise up people by their knowledge (if it is derived
from at-tarbiyah (to raise up). al-Ahbar are those knowledgeable and expert scholars who judge
according to the divine order, and who guard the shari'ah as contained in the Book of Allah; and
because they were its guardians and preservers, they were called its witnesses; the sacred book
was safe from change and alteration because they had memorized it perfectly. The clause: "and
they were witnesses thereof, is a sort of result of the phrase: "as they were required to guard
(part) of the Book of Allah". In other words, they were told to guard it, so they were guarding it
by being its witnesses.

This meaning of witnessing is supported by the context. Some people have said that it refers to
attesting about the Prophet's judgement of stoning that it is found in the Torah; some others have
said that it means testifying for the Book that it has come from Allah. But the context does not
support either of these two interpretations in any way.

"therefore fear not the people and fear Me, and barter not My signs for a small price": It branches
out from the clause: "Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light; with it
the prophets ..." Meaning: As the Torah was sent down by Us, and it contained the laws with
which the prophets, the divines and the scholars judged between you, therefore you should not
hide anything of it nor should you make any alteration in it, be it for fear or for greed. As for
fear, it may happen, if you fear the people and forget your Lord; but you should fear Allah only,
it will liberate you from people's fear; and as for greed, it may take place if you barter the signs
of Allah for a small price, like worldly riches or glory - all of which is transitory and ephemeral.

There is also another possibility: It could have branched out from the phrase: "as they were
required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof; because the
requirement to guard the Book is tantamount to take covenant for guarding it. Thus the meaning
will be as follows: We made covenant with them for guarding the Book and made them
witnesses for it, that they would not change it, would not be afraid of anyone except Me in
making it known and would not barter My signs for small price. Allah says: And when Allah
made a covenant with those who were given the Book: You shall certainly make it known to men
and you shall not hide it; but they cast it behind their backs and took a small price for it;...
(3:187). Then there came after them an evil posterity who inherited the Book, taking only the
frail good of this low life and saying: "It will be forgiven us." And if the like good came to them,
they would take it (too). Was not a promise taken from them in the Book that they would not
speak anything about Allah but the truth, and they have read what is in it? And the abode of the
hereafter is better for those who guard (against evil). Do you not then understand? And (as for)
those who holdfast by the Book and keep up prayer; surely We do not waste the reward of the
right-doers (7:169-70).

And this second meaning is more appropriate, keeping in view the forceful emphasis at the end
piece of the subsequent verse: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they
that are unjust.

QUR'AN: And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose,
and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds: The context, and
especially or the mention of reprisal in wounds proves that the aim here is to describe the law of
retribution in various types of felonies, like murder, cutting wounding. The contraposition in
"life for life" and subsequent phrases places the avenger against the felon. It means that a life is
taken in retaliation for life, an eye in reprisal of eye and so on. ba (for) is used here for exchange,
as you say: "I sold it for so much."

These sentences, then, give the following meaning: A life would be taken in place of a life, an
eye would be gouged for an eye, a nose would be cut for a nose, an ear would be severed for an
ear, a tooth would be extracted for a tooth and there is reprisal in wounds. In short, all limbs and
organs of man shall be avenged with similar limb and organ of the felon.

Probably that is the purpose of the suggestion offered by someone that: "life is for life", actually
has an omitted but understood predicate, 'avenged' or 'killed'. Otherwise, there is no need of this
supposition; sentences are grammatically complete without that addition.

The verse is not without a certain indication that this law is other than that for which they had
come to the Prophet (s.a.w.) and which has been mentioned in preceding verses; because the
context has changed with the verse: Surely We sent down the Tor ah in which was guidance and
light.

The law described in the verse under discussion is found in the present Torah, as will be quoted
in the forthcoming "Traditions", God willing.

QUR'AN: but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; and whoever did not judge by
what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust: If the possessor of the right of
retribution, like the heir of the slain, the victim of attack himself or the wounded forgives the
felon and remits the retribution, then "it", i.e. this remission shall be an expiation for the sins of
the remitter; or it shall be an expiation for the felon in that particular felony.
The meaning therefore is as follows: If the holder of the right of retaliation forgives the culprit, it
shall be an expiation for him; but if he does not forgive then he must decide according to the law
revealed regarding retaliation; and whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, those are
the unjust people. It clearly shows that:

First: The conjunctive: wa (and) in the clause: "and whoever did not judge", joins it with the
clause: "but he who foregoes"; i.e., it does not begin a new sentence. Also, the conjunctive, fa
(translated here as 'but') has the import of branching out, i.e. it makes the details grow from the
general order of retaliation. It is not unlike another verse of retaliation, which inter alia says:
...but if any remission is made to any one by his (aggrieved) brother, then (the demand for the
bloodwit) should be made according to the usage, and payment should be made to him in a good
manner (2:178).

Second: The clause: "and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed...", metaphorically puts
the reason in place of its effect. The full construction shall be as follows: and if he does not
forego, then he should judge by what Allah has revealed, because whoever did not judge by what
Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust.

QUR'AN: And We sent after them in their footsteps 'Isa, son of Mary am, verifying what was
before him of the Torah: at-Taqfiyah (to send something behind another thing); it is derived from
al-qafa (back); al-aathaar is plural of al-athar (track, trace, sign), it is mostly used for footsteps;
"after them" i.e. after the prophets.

The sentence: "And We sent after them in their footsteps 'Isa, son of Maryam", is an extended
metaphor, intimating that Allah made 'Isa (a.s.) to proceed on the same path on which had gone
the preceding prophets; and it is the way of invitation to monotheism and submission to Allah.

The clause: "verifying what was before him of the Torah", makes the preceding statement
clearer; it points to the fact that the call of 'Isa was the same as the call of Musa (peace be on
them both), without any difference at all.

QUR'AN: and We gave him the Injil in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was
before it of Torah, and a guidance and an admonition for those who are pious: As the verses
speak about the shari'ah of Musa, 'Isa and Muhammad (may Allah's blessing be on him and his
progeny and on them both), and as they have been revealed concerning their Books, it proves
that the Books tally with each other.

It follows that:

First: The Injil mentioned in this verse - and it means Good News - was a book revealed to 'Isa
(a.s.); it was not merely a "good news" without a book. But Allah has not given any detail in His
Book as to how it was revealed, contrary to what He has done regarding the Torah and the
Qur'an. He says about the Torah:

He said: "O Musa! Surely I have chosen you above the people with My messages and with My
words, therefore take hold of what I give to you and be of the grateful ones. "And We wrote for
him in the tablets admonition from everything and clear explanation of all things... (7:144-5).
...he took up the tablets, and in the writing thereof was guidance and mercy for those who fear
for the sake of their Lord (7:154).

And He says especially for the Qur'an:

The Faithful Sprit has descended with it, upon your heart that you may be of the warners, in
plain Arabic language (26:193-5). Most surely it is the Word of an honoured messenger, the
possessor of strength, having an honourable place with the Lord of the Throne, one (to be)
obeyed, and faithful in trust (81:19-21). In honoured books, exalted, purified, in the hands of
scribes, noble, virtuous (80:13-16). Although Allah has not mentioned anything regarding
revelation of Injil and its particulars, yet the verse under discussion mentions its revelation to 'Isa
(a.s.) side by side with the coming down of Torah on Musa (a.s.), and revelation of the Qur'an on
Muhammad (may Allah's blessings be on him and his progeny) and it proves that Injil too was a
book like the other two.

Second: Allah says about Injil: in which was guidance and light, parallel to what He had said
about Torah (in 5:44): Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light: these
words point to the cognition and laws contained in the Book. He says at the end of this very
verse 5:46 (about Injil): and a guidance and an admonition for those who are pious. By putting
the two phrases (about Injil) side by side, it is understood that the guidance mentioned in the
former phrase is something separate from the one mentioned in the latter phrase and which has
been explained as admonition. The former guidance is related to cognition, which guides in
matters of faith and belief, while the latter refers to that cognition which leads one to fear of
Allah and piety in religion.

Now, what is meant by light? It can only mean the laws and shari'ah; and meditation gives
support to this interpretation. The laws of religion are the light, which illuminates the path of life
and man proceeds in that light to his destination. Allah says: Is he who was dead then We raised
him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people,... (6:122).

It is now clear that the guidance, mentioned first in description of the Torah and the Injil, refers
to matters of faith and belief; like Oneness of God and resurrection; and the light in both places
denotes shari'ah and laws; while the guidance mentioned second time as attribute of the Injil
refers to sermon and admonition. And Allah knows better.

Also, now one may understand the reason of repetition of "guidance" in the verse; it is because
the second "guidance" is different from the first one; in the second instance, in the phrase: "a
guidance and an admonition", there is an explicative apposition, inasmuch as "admonition" gives
the meaning of "guidance". And Allah knows better.

Third: The phrase: "and verifying what was before it of Torah", as attribute of Injil, is not a
repetition for the sake of emphasis, etc.; rather it denotes that Injil follows the shari'ah of Torah,
because there was nothing in Injil other than confirmation of Torah's shari'ah and the call to
follow it. Of course, there were a few exceptions made by 'Isa (a.s.), as Allah quotes him as
saying: ...and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden you,... (3:50).
Its proof is seen in the next but one verse: And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth,
verifying what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it, as will be explained in the
"Commentary".

QUR'AN: and a guidance and an admonition for those who are pious: This clause has already
been explained. It proves that the Injil revealed to 'Isa paid special care to piety, in addition to
matters of belief and faith and practical laws which were found in the Torah. Although the
Qur'an does not verify totally the Torah which is in their hands today; and although the four
Gospels attributed to Mathew, Marks, Luke and John, are not the same Injil which Qur'an says
was revealed to 'Isa himself, yet they all confirm this matter, as will be explained later, God
willing.

QUR'AN: And the people of the Injil should have judged by what Allah revealed in it; and
whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors: Allah
had revealed in the Injil confirmation and verification of the Torah in its laws, except some
abrogated rules which were described in the Book revealed to 'Isa (a.s.); obviously when Injil
verified the laws of Torah and made lawful some things which had been forbidden in it, then
following the Torah in its laws - except those unlawful things which were made lawful by Injil -
was tantamount to obeying the law of Injil.

Some exegetes have claimed on the strength of this verse that Injil too contained, like Torah,
elaborated laws and shari'ah; but the explanation given above show the weakness of this claim.

The statement: "and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the
transgressors", puts emphasis on the order contained in the preceding sentence: "And the people
of the Injil should have judged ..." Allah has repeated this sentence three times with minor
difference all for emphasis; twice relating to the Jews and once regarding the Christians; as He
has said: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the
unbelievers (5:44).... those are they that are the unjust (5:45).... those are they that are the
transgressors (5:47). In this way, their disbelief, injustice, and transgression have officially been
put on record.

What is the reason that the Christians have been called transgressors while the Jews were
described as unbelievers and unjust? It is because the Christians changed monotheism to trinity
and abandoned the laws of Torah; they were misled by Paul who preached that 'Isa had brought
an independent religion, separate from that of Musa, and that that new religion had abrogated all
laws through 'Isa's atonement; thus the Christians went out of the fold of monotheism and its
shari'ah through mistaken interpretation; so they transgressed the boundary of the true divine
religion. Transgression means exit of a thing from its prescribed place, like exit of the core of
date from its cover.

As for the Jews, they had no doubt whatsoever about the religion of Musa (a.s.); they had
rejected knowingly the laws and beliefs, which they had, full knowledge of; and it was nothing
but injustice and disbelief in Allah's signs.

It should however be noted that the three verses, i.e.: and whoever did not judge by what Allah
revealed, those are they: that are the unbelievers', that are the unjust; that are the transgressors,
are unrestricted; they are not confined to any one group, religion or nation, although here they
have been applied to the People of the Book.

There is a difference of opinion among exegetes regarding the import of the unbelief of him who
does not judge by what Allah has revealed, e.g., a judge who decides a case contrary to what
Allah has revealed, or a ruler who rules against what Allah has revealed, or an innovator who
invents a system other than that of divine religion. This question comes under the purview of
fiqh. The fact is that violation of any rule of the shari'ah or any other established matter of
religion, when one knows that it is an established fact and then rejects it, is disbelief, if one
violates it, knowing its factuality but without rejecting it, it is transgression. But of one does not
know that it is an established religious matter and then rejects it, it is neither disbelief nor trans-
gression, because it is an excusable incapability (except if there was negligence in investigation
of facts and proofs). See books of fiqh for details.

QUR'AN: And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of
the Book and a guardian over it: Haymanah of a thing over another thing entails its authority
over it, involving its protection, safety and management. This describes the position of the
Qur'an, which Allah says is explanation of everything vis-a-vis the previous divine books. It
preserves from those books' contents, the permanent unchangeable fundamentals and abrogates
what deserves it from the subsidiary items that are liable to change and alteration, in order to
make it conform to man's position, keeping in view his step-by-step development and perfection
with passage of time. Allah says: Surely this Qur 'an guides to that which is most upright (17:9).
Whatever signs We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it
(2:106). Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet, the Ummi, whom they find written down
with them in the Torah and the Injil, (who) enjoins them good and forbids them evil, and makes
lawful to them the good things and makes unlawful to them impure things, and removes from
them their burden and the shackles which were upon them; so (as for) those who believe in him
and honour him and help him, and follow the light which has been sent down with him, these it is
that are the successful (7:157).

The phrase: "a guardian over it", is an explanatory conclusion of the preceding, verifying what is
before it of the Book; without it the mention of verification could cause a misunderstanding that
the Qur'an confirmed the laws of the Torah and the Injil and let them continue without any
change; but with this phrase in place, the verification only means that the Qur'an accepts that
those laws and cognitive matters had truly come from Allah and Allah has full power to manage
them as He pleases, He may abrogate them or may complete them with other laws, as He points
to it in this very verse: and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people,
but that He might try you in what He gave you.

Therefore, the words: "verifying what is before it", mean that the Qur'an has kept intact that part
of the law and knowledge of Injil which were suitable for this ummah, as such the consequent
addition, omission or abrogation was not contrary to this verification - in the same way as 'Isa
(a.s.) and his Injil had verified the Torah even when they had made lawful some things
prohibited by the Torah, as Allah quotes him as saying: And a verifier of that which is before me
of the Torah and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden you... (3:50).
QUR'AN: therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their
(low) desires (diverging) from the truth that has come to you: As the shari'ah, which has been
revealed to you and is contained in the Book, is truth, and as it is truth when it tallies with the
Books revealed earlier, and is truth when it goes against those Books, because it is a guardian
over them, therefore you are inevitably required to judge between the People of the Book (as is
apparently supported by the preceding verses), or between the people (as is supported by
following verses), by what Allah has revealed to you; you should not follow their desires or turn
away from the truth that has come to you.

The above discourse shows that the pronoun in: "judge between them", may refer to the People
of the Book or to the people in general. But the first alternative necessitates taking the phrase as
meaning, judge between them if you decide to judge, because Allah had not obligated him to
judge between the People of the Book, but had left it to his discretion whether he wanted to
judge or turned aside from them. He says: therefore if they come to you, judge between them or
turn aside from them (5:42). Moreover, Allah has at the beginning of this set of verses,
mentioned the hypocrites together with the Jews. So there is no reason why the pronoun, "them",
should be taken to refer to the Jews only when another group was mentioned together with them.
Therefore, looking at it in this context, the second alternative seems more appropriate, i.e. judge
between the peoole.

Obviously, the words: "do not follow their desires from the truth", are well connected and they
imply divergence from the truth.

QUR'AN: for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way: ar-Raghib says in his
Mufradatu'l-Qur'an: "ash-Shar' is the way of a clear path; it is said: 'I opened for him a path.'
ash-Shar' is a masdar, then it was used as a noun for open path; it is pronounced ash-shir', ash-
shar' and ash-shar i'ah; then it was used for the divine path; Allah says: a law and a way... Some
people have said, The shari'ah was given this name to liken it to drinking place.'"
Probably, the^case is vice versa, i.e., the drinking place was the original meaning which was then
borrowed for the law; because they knew clearly the ways to water holes, etc. which were
frequently visited by them. And he has said: "an-Nahj" is clear path; nahaja 'l-amr and anhaja
both mean the matter became clear; manhaj and minhaj of path mean open road."

Meaning of Shari'ah and Difference Between Shari'ah, Din,

and Millah in Qur'anic Usage
Shari'ah, as you have seen, means path and religion; likewise millah is an adopted path.
However, apparently the Qur'an uses the word, shari'ah in a meaning more particular than din
(religion). For proof, see the verse: Surely the religion with Allah is Islam... (3:19). And whoever
seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall
be one of the losers (3:85); when read together with the verse under discussion:^/- every one of
you did We appoint a law and a way, and the verse: Then We have made you follow a course in
the affair, therefore follow it... (45:18).
Thus, shari'ah is the way prepared for an ummah or a prophet who was sent with it, as we say,
shari'ah of Nuh, shari'ah of Ibrahim, shari'ah of Musa, shari'ah of 'Isa and shari'ah of
Muhammad (s.a.w.); and religion is the divine course and system which covers all nations; so
shari'ah is liable to abrogation but not religion in its wider sense.

There is one more difference: Religion is attributed to singular or plural whatever their position;
but shari'ah is not attributed to a singular unless it be its Legislator or its principle head who
manages it. They say: Muslims' religion, Jews' religion, Muslims' shari'ah, Jews' shari'ah; again
they say: Allah's religion, Allah's shari'ah, Muhammad's religion, Muhammad's shari'ah; Also
they say: Zayd's religion, 'Amr's religion, but they never say: Zayd's shari'ah or 'Amr's shari'ah.
May be it is so because the term, shari'ah, carries a hint of incidental happening, an allusion of
preparing and paving the path. It is perfectly right to say: the path prepared by Allah, the way
laid down for the prophet or for a certain ummah; but it is not right to say: the way which was
laid down for Zayd, because Zayd has no particular connection to it.

In any case, it is inferred from the above that shari'ah's meaning is more particular than that of
religion. As for the verse, 42:13 (He has prescribed for you of the religion what He enjoined
upon Nuh, and that which We have revealed to you, and that which We enjoined upon Ibrahim
and Musa and 'Isa.. .), it does not go against it, because it shows that the shari'ah of Muhammad
(s.a.w.), laid down for his ummah is the sum total of what was enjoined upon Nuh, Ibrahim,
Musa and 'Isa (peace be upon them), added to what was revealed to Muhammad (s.a.w.). It is
either an allusion to the fact that Islam (is a comprehensive religion which) combines the merits
of all previous shari'ah plus the excellence of Muhammad (s.a.w.)'s revelation, or it aims at
proving that all the laws do have a single reality and essence, even though they were somewhat
different among themselves because the people for whom they were sent had different
(intellectual and social) standards; as is hinted or proved by the words of verse 13 of chapter 42
coming after the clause quoted above: ...that establish the religion and be not divided therein.

Religion is one and unalterable, while laws differ (from nation to nation, time to time, and) are
liable to abrogation. The relationship of a particular shari'ah with religion is like that of minor
rules of Islam (with their abrogator and abrogated ones) with the basic religion. Allah has not
obligated His servants except to adhere to one religion, i.e. submission to Him; but He has taken
them to that destination through different paths, legislating for them various systems according to
their various abilities, and these are the laws of Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa, 'Isa and Muhammad (may
Allah's blessing be upon him and his progeny and on them); exactly as He sometimes abrogated
within one shari'ah some laws replacing them with others because the abrogated law had lost its
benefit and the abrogator one had become more appropriate and beneficial. See for example the
replacement of the punishment of life-imprisonment for a fornicatress with flogging and stoning,
etc. This is proved by the divine words: and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a
single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you...

As for millah, it is as though it points to norms and customs observed by people in their lives;
and it probably has a shade of meaning of imla' and imlal i.e., 'dictation'; as such it would be a
custom handed down by others; its root meaning is not so clear; therefore more likely it is
synonymous to shari'ah inasmuch as, contrary to religion, milla like shari'ah denotes a system
and way related to a particular group; yet there is difference between the two: shari'ah is used for
the system or way keeping in view the reality that it has been laid down by Allah for people's
use; while millah is used for the system as it is handed down practically among the people
generation after generation. Probably that is the reason that millah is not ascribed to Allah in
genitive construction, i.e. they never say, millah of Allah, while they say, religion of Allah,
shari'ah of Allah.

However, it is ascribed to a prophet to denote his tradition and habit, or to an ummah because
they follow and observe that custom and tradition. Allah says: ...the millah of Ibrahim, the
upright one, and he was not of the polytheists (2:135); and Allah quotes Yusuf (a.s.) as saying:...
surely I have forsaken the millah of a people who do not believe in Allah, and they are deniers of
the hereafter; and I follow the millah of my fathers, Ibrahim and Ishaq and Ya 'qub... (12:37-38).
And He quotes the unbelievers' threat to their prophets: ...We will most certainly drive you forth
from our land, or else you shall come back into our millah... (14:13).

It is thus seen that din (religion) in Qur'anic usage is more general than shari'ah and millah; and
these two are synonymous, with some difference in their usage.

QUR'AN: and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He
might try you in what He gave you: It gives the reason why there were sent various laws. Making
all a single people does not mean making them a single species, because all of them already
belong to a single species living in the same way, as Allah says: And were it not that all people
would have been a single nation, We would certainly have assigned to those who disbelieve in
the Beneficent God (to make) of silver the roofs of their houses and the stairs by which they
ascend (43:33).

Rather it means treating whole mankind as a single people considering them to be on a single
level of intellectual capacity and social behaviour, in which case a single set of laws would have
been made for all, because of proximity of their ranks. Accordingly, the clause: "if Allah had
pleased He would have made you (all) a single people", has metaphorically put the reason of
condition in place of condition; the idea is to make the meaning of the following clause clearer:
"but that He might try you in what He gave you", that is, He might test you with the favours He
bestowed on you. Naturally, the favours, pointed to in the verse, differed from nation to nation.
The differences were not based on their habitations, languages and colours, because Allah had
never sent more than one shari'ah in one period; rather the differences occurred by passage of
time because of man's gradual development intellectually and socially. Divinely prescribed
responsibilities and laid down laws are but means of trial with which Allah tests man in various
stages of life. In other words He brings man's potential to fulfilment, be it on the side of felicity
or infelicity. You may say that it is done for differentiating the party of Allah from the party of
Satan. These different expressions used above have been taken from the divine Book, and sum
total of all is the same. Allah says keeping in view the aspect of test: ...and We bring these days
to men by turns and that Allah may know those who believe and take witnesses from among you;
and Allah loves not the unjust; and that Allah may purge those who believe and eradicate the
unbelievers. Do you think that you will enter the Garden while Allah has not yet known those
who strive hard from among you, and (He has not) known the patient! (3:140-2). There are many
verses of this theme.
As for the bringing man's potential to fulfilment, Allah says: So if there comes to you guidance
from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, he shall not go astray nor be unhappy. And
whoever turns away from My remembrance, his shall surely be a straitened life, and We will
raise him, on the Day of Resurrection, blind (20:123-4).

And He says regarding the third aspect (i.e., distinguishing the party of Allah from that of Satan):
And when your Lord said to the angels: "Surely I am going to create a mortal of the essence of
black mud fashioned in shape ..." (Satan) said: "My Lord! Because Thou hast left me to stray, I
will certainly make (evil)/a/r seeming to them on earth, and I will certainly cause them all to
deviate, except Thy servants from among them, the freed ones." He said: "This is a straight path
with Me: Surely as regards My servants, thou hast no authority over them except those who
follow thee of the deviators. And surely Hell is the promised place of them all. "(15:28-43). There
are many such verses.

In short, Allah had bestowed on mankind different types of capabilities and potentialities in
different times and eras; also the divine laws, whose enforcement among them was essential in
order to complete their lives' felicity were sent for man's test which varies according to the
variance in examinees' abilities - all these factors together had caused difference in various laws.
That is why Allah has said that this difference of laws has happened because He has wished to
test and examine you in what He has bestowed on you of His favours, as He says: for every one
of you did We appoint a law and a way, and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all)
a single people.

The meaning of this verse is then as follows, and Allah knows better: For each nation from
among you We have laid down and legislated a different law and distinct way; if Allah had
pleased He would have made you (creatively) a single nation and legislated for you a single set
of law. But He has laid down for you different laws in order to test you in what He has given you
of various favours. This difference in favours demanded difference in test (which in their turn)
give rise to divine laws and legislations. Naturally there was difference in various laws.

The different nations mentioned here are those of Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa, 'Isa and Muhammad
(may Allah's blessing be upon him and his progeny and on them) as He says describing His
favors on this ummah: He has prescribed for you of the religion what He enjoined upon Nuh and
that which We have revealed to you, and that which We enjoined upon Ibrahim and Musa and
'Isa... (42:13).

QUR'AN: therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is the return of
all of you, then He will let you know that in which you differed: al-Istibaq (to vie, to compete) is
derived from the root as-sabq (to get ahead of someone); al-marja'  (return) is a masdar derived
from ar-ruju' (return). The speech has branched out as a concomitant from the preceding: for
every one of you did We appoint a law and a way. The meaning: And We have prescribed for
you this true shari'ah which is superior to all previous ones, and it contains your good and
welfare, therefore you should vie with each other to hasten to good deeds, i.e., the divinely
prescribed laws and responsibilities; you should not entangle yourselves in the differences that
are there between you and the others, because all of you are to return to your Lord, and then He
will let you know that in which you differed, and will judge between you clearly and decide with
justice.

QUR'AN: And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, ...many of the
people are transgressors: The beginning of the verse: "And that you should judge between them
by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires", corresponds with the clause in
the preceding verse: therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow
their (low) desires; then the two separate in their ramifications, and one realizes that the repeti-
tion has occurred for this purpose. The former verse tells them to judge by what Allah has
revealed and admonishes them not to follow their low desires - because this shari'ah revealed by
Allah is the one prescribed for the Prophet (s.a.w.) and his people. Therefore, it is incumbent
upon them to vie with one another in virtuous deeds. The latter verse orders them to judge by
what Allah has revealed and not to follow their low desires - explaining that if they turned back
from what Allah has revealed, it would show that Allah has left them in their error on account of
their transgression. Allah has said: ...He causes many to err by it and many He leads aright by it;
but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors (2:26).

It results from the above that this verse elaborates some themes of the preceding verse which
needed more explanation: The only reason that people of low desire turn away from following
what Allah has revealed with truth is that they are transgressors; Allah desires to afflict them on
account of some of their sins which have caused their transgression. This affliction apparently
means that He leaves them to err. Thus the clause: "And that you should judge between them by
what Allah has revealed", is in conjunction, as has been said, with the word, "Book", in the
preceding verse's opening sentence: And We have revealed to you the Book... In that case, it is
more appropriate to take the al (the) in, "the Book", as connoting a new occurrence; the meaning
then will be as follows: We have revealed to you the laws which have been prescribed for them,
and that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed.

"and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you from part of what Allah has revealed to you":
Here Allah warns His Prophet against their seduction and temptation, although he (s.a.w.) was
ma'sum and sinless through divine protection. It is because the power of 'ismah (sinlessness)
does not nullify the free will and choice, nor does it repeal the laws based on that will and
choice. Ismah is. in fact an academic and intellectual aptitude; knowledge and perception do not
deprive practical powers and faculties from their middle position between doing and not doing. It
is these faculties, which move the limbs and organs of a man and cause his activities.

For example, a sure knowledge that a certain food is poisoned prevents man from taking that
food. But the organs used in eating, like hand, mouth, tongue, and teeth may perform their
activities in this eating, or they may remain inert although they could possibly become active; so
the action is within power, although it has become like impossible to do because of that
knowledge.

We have written to some extent on this topic when explaining the verse: ...and they shall not
harm you in any way, and Allah has revealed to you the Book and the Wisdom, and He has
taught you what you did not know, and Allah's grace on you is very great (4:113).

"But if they turn back, then know that Allah desires to afflict them on account of some of their
faults": As mentioned above, it describes that they were left to err because of their transgression.
This clause reverts to the initial theme of this set of verses, where it says: O Messenger! Let not
those grieve you who strive together in hastening in unbelief... (5:41). The verse aims at putting
the Prophet's mind at rest and cheers him up; it teaches him that which would keep grief and
sorrow away from his heart. This is what Allah has done in most of the places where He has told
him not to grieve if the unbelievers turn away from the true Call or disdain to accept, that which
would lead them to the path of guidance and success. So Allah explained to him that they were
not going to weaken the kingdom of Allah, nor were they to overwhelm Him; it is Allah Who is
dominant in His affairs; it is He Who leaves them to err because of their transgression, makes
their hearts deviated because of their deviation, and puts uncleanness on them by removing His
help from them and luring them into evil. Allah says: And let not those who disbelieve think that
they shall come in first; surely they will not escape (8:59). So, as all matters are in Allah's hand,
and He drives away all types of uncleanness from His clean religion, so nothing can escape from
Him if He wants it; therefore there was no cause to grieve, as nothing was lost.

Probably, that is the reason that Allah has said: "but if they turn back, then know that Allah
desires to afflict them on account of some of their faults"; instead of saying, 'but if they turn
back, then Allah desires ...' or some other expression to that effect. In its present structure the
verse intends to teach the Prophet (s.a.w.) that their turning back is caused by divine subjugation,
as such it should not cause grief to the Prophet (s.a.w.); he is a Messenger inviting people to the
way of his Lord; if anything grieves him it should do so because Allah's will is predominant in
the affairs of religious Call. As nothing can overcome Allah's will, and it is He Who leads them
here and there by His subjugation, helping some and leaving some in their deception, therefore
there was no reason to be grieved.

Allah has explained this reality in other words: Then may be you will kill yourself with grief,
sorrowing after them, if they do not believe in this announcement. Surely We have made
whatever is on the earth an embellishment for it, so that We may try them (as to) which of them
is best in deed. And most surely We will make what is on it bare ground without herbage. (18:6-
8) Thus Allah has made it clear that the aim of sending messengers, and their coming with relig-
ious warning and good news was not that all people should enter into the fold of true religion, as
a man plans and thinks concerning his requirements and needs. The only purpose of this all is to
test the people and put them on trial, so that it may be known who is best in deed. Otherwise, this
world and all that is in it is going to perish very soon, nothing will remain except a bare ground,
free from these disbelievers who turn away from the speech of truth, and cleansed from all their
hearts' attachments. So, there is no reason to be sorry, because it is not going to bring any failure
in Our endeavours, nullify Our power or cause weariness in Our will.

"and most surely many of the people are transgressors": As mentioned earlier, it gives the reason
of the preceding sentence: then know that Allah desires to afflict them on account of some of
their sins.

QUR'AN: Is it then the judgement o/(the times of) ignorance that they desire? And who is better
than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?: This question branches out from the theme of the
preceding verse that describes their turning back from what is in reality the judgement of Allah
that was revealed to them and which, they knew very well, was truth. Also possibly the verse
may be taken as the conclusion of the themes of previous verses.

Its meaning: As these laws and rules are the truth revealed by Allah, and as other than these there
is no true shari'ah, there is nothing besides them except the system of the days of ignorance,
emanating from low desires. What do these people, who turn aside from judgement of truth, want
after all? There is noting else except the judgement of the Days of Ignorance. Do they then want
that judgement, when there is no one better than Allah to judge for these people who claim to be
believers?

So, the sentence: "Is it the judgement of (the time of) ignorance that they desire?" is a reprimand
in the form of question; and: "who is better than Allah to judge?" Is a question with implied
negative reply, i.e. no one is better than Allah to judge, and a judgement is followed because of
its good. The clause: "for a people who are sure", is an insinuation to them that if they are
truthful in their claim of believing in Allah, then they are sure of His signs; and those who are
sure of His signs deny that any one can be better than Allah in judgement.

It should be noted that these verses in several places turn from singular or plural first person
pronoun to that of third person and vice versa. For example, the clause: surely Allah loves those
who judge equitably, followed by: Surely We sent down Torah, which is followed by: as they
were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, after which comes: and fear Me, and so on.
Whenever the third person uses the proper Divine Name: Allah, it reflects on the importance of
the subject. Where the first person singular pronoun is used, it shows that all affairs are in the
hand of Allah alone, without any interference from any friend or intercessor. If the verse speaks
of any good promise or attraction, it is Allah who is going to manage it and He is the Most Noble
of those who fulfil their promise. If it contains a threat or warning then it is really most
troublesome and hardest and no friend or intercessor can avert it from man, because the matter is
in Allah's hand alone. And He (by using singular pronoun) has nullified every intermediate link
and rejected every intervening cause. Ponder on it; and some aspects of it have been described
earlier.

Traditions
Majma'u'l-bayan narrates under the verse: O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive
together in hastening in unbelief..., from al-Baqir (a.s.) that he said, "A woman of high status in
Khaybar committed adultery with a man of high rank from among them - and both had spouses.
So they did not like to stone them. They sent (some one) to the Jews of Medina and wrote to
them to ask the Prophet about it, hoping that he would allow them some latitude. So a group of
them, including Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf, Ka'b ibn Usayd, Shu'bah ibn 'Amr, Malik ibn as-Sayf and
Kinanah ibn Abi 'l-Haqiq, etc., went (to the Prophet, s.a.w.) and said, 'O Muhammad! Tell us
about a fornicator and a fornicatress, when they have their spouses, what is the prescribed
punishment for them?' He said, 'And will you agree to my judgement in this?' They said, 'Yes.'
So Jibril came down with (the order of) stoning. (The Prophet) told it to them; they refused to
accept it. Jibril said, 'Make Ibn Suriya (arbitrator) between you and them;' and gave his
particulars to (the Prophet).

"So the Prophet said, 'Do you know a young man, beardless, white, one-eyed, who lives in Fadak
and is called Ibn Suriya?' They said, 'Yes.' He said, 'What position does he have among you?
They said, '(He is) the most knowledgeable Jew (living on the face of the earth) of what Allah
had revealed to Musa.' He said, Then you send (message) to call him.' They did so, and 'Abdullah
ibn Suriya came to them.

"So the Prophet said to him, 'I adjure you by Allah, that which there is no god but He, and Who
sent down Torah to Musa, and parted the sea for you, and delivered you and drowned the people
of Pharaoh, and made the clouds to give shade over you and sent to you manna and quails, do
you find in your Book (the punishment of) stoning for the one who commits adultery while
having a spouse?' Ibn Suriya said, 'Yes. By Him Whom you have reminded me, if it were not for
the fear that the Lord of Torah would burn me down if I lied or changed, I would not have
confessed to you. However, (now) you tell me how it is in your Book, O Muhammad!' He said,
'When four witnesses of approved probity testify that he had entered into her as kohl stick enters
kohl container, then he becomes liable to stoning.' Ibn Suriya said, 'Exactly like it had Allah
revealed to Musa in Torah.'

Then the Prophet said to him, 'What was the first time you became lax in the judgement of
Allah?' He said, '(It was our custom that) when a man of status committed adultery, we did
nothing to him, and when a weak person did so, we enforced the punishment to him; thus
fornication increased in our high class society, until a cousin of one of our kings committed
adultery and we did not subject him to stoning. Then another man committed the same and the
King wanted to stone him. But the man's people told the King, "Never, until you stone that
person, i.e., the King's cousin." So we said, "Come together, so that we lay down something
below stoning that will be applied to men of high and low status both." Thus we laid down
flogging and tahmim, that is, the fornicator and fornicatress should each be flogged forty strokes,
then their faces be blackened, and they be put on two donkeys their faces being towards the
donkey's posterior, and they be made to go round (the town). They prescribed it in place of
stoning.'

"The Jews then said to Ibn Suriya, 'How quickly you told him (everything); you did not deserve
what we had said about you, but you were absent, and we did not like to slander your reputation.'
He said, 'He adjured me by Torah, otherwise I would not have informed him.'

The Prophet gave his judgement and the two were stoned near the door of his mosque. And he
said, 'I am the first to revive your judgement when they had made it dead.' Then Allah revealed
in this connection: O People of the Book! Indeed has come to you Our Messenger making clear
to you much of what you concealed of the Book and passing over much. Then Ibn Suriya stood
up and put his hands on the knees of the Messenger of Allah and said, This is the place of the one
who seeks protection by Allah and you, that you should not mention to us the "much" which you
have been told to pass over.' So the Prophet did not mention it.

"Then Ibn Suriya asked him about his sleep. He (the Prophet) said, 'My eyes sleep but my heart
does not sleep.' He said, 'You said the truth; now tell me (why) a child resembles his father and
has no resemblance with his mother at all, or resembles his mother without having any
resemblance to his father.' He said, The water of whichever of the parents tops that of the other,
his or her resemblance will prevail.' He said, 'You said the truth; now tell me which parts of the
child belong to the man and which to the woman?'" (The Imam, a.s.), said, "Then the Messenger
of Allah went into trance for a long time; then he came out of it, with ruddy face and pouring
sweat; and he said, 'Flesh, blood, nail and fat belong to the woman, and bone, sinew and veins
belong to the man.' He said, 'You said the truth; your affairs are those of a prophet.'

"So Ibn Suriya accepted Islam at this stage. And he said, 'O Muhammad! Which of the angels
comes to you?' He said, 'Jibril. He said, 'Describe his attributes to me; and the Prophet described
it.' He said, 'I bear witness that he is in Torah as you have said and that you are truly the
Messenger of Allah.'

"When Ibn Suriya accepted Islam, the Jews quarrelled with him and abused him.

"When they wanted to leave, Banu Qurayzah caught the hold of Banu 'n-Nadir and said, 'O
Muhammad! (These are) our brothers, Banu 'n-Nadir, our father is one, and our religion is one,
and our prophet is one. When they slay one of us, (the slain one) is not avenged (i.e. his killer is
not killed), rather they give us his blood money seventy wasaq (weight) of date; and when we
slay one of them, they kill the killer and take from us double the amount, one hundred and forty
wasaq of date. If the slain one is a woman, they kill (in her retaliation) one of our men, and (they
kill) two of our men in place of their one man,, and one of our free men in place of their slave;
and our wounds are recompensed at half of their wounds. Therefore, you judge between them
and us. So, Allah revealed the verse about stoning and retaliation.' "

The author says: at-Tabrisi has also narrated in Majma'u'l-bayan, through a group of exegetes,
in addition to his narration from al-Baqir (a.s.). Also, there are traditions in Sunni tafsirs and
collections of ahadith, somewhat nearer to the beginning of the above story, narrated through
several chains from Abu Hurayrah, Bara' ibn 'Azib, 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar, Ibn 'Abbas and others.
The traditions are nearer in meaning to each other. The end part of the tradition has been narrated
in ad-Durru'l-manthur from 'Abd ibn Hamid and Abu 'sh-Shaykh from Qatadah, and from Ibn
Jarir, Ibn Ishaq, at-Tabarani, Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ibnu'l-Mundhir and others from Ibn 'Abbas.

As for the confirmation (in the tradition) by Ibn Suriya that the order of stoning was found in the
Torah, and that it was the meaning of the verse: And how do they make you a judge and they
have the Torah ..., it is also supported by the fact that nearly similar order is found in the Torah
which is prevalent among them, as may be seen in the Deuteronomy, ch. 22, vs. 22-24:

22. If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them
die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from
Israel.

23. If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and
lie with her;

24. Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with
stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he
hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from
among you.
As you have seen, this reserves stoning for some eventualities.

As for the report in the tradition that they had also asked the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) about
the law of blood money, apart from their question regarding the law of adultery, it has been
written earlier that the verses are not without some support to it. As for the order of retaliation of
slaying and wounding which the verse says was prescribed in the Torah, this too is found in the
present Torah, as may be seen in Exodus, ch. 21, vs. 12-13 & 23-25:

12. He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.

13. And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a
place whither he shall flee..........

23. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

24. Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

25. Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

Further, the Leviticus, ch. 24, vs. 17-20, says:

17. And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death.

18. And he that killeth a beast shall make it good; beast for beast.

19. And if a man causes a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him;

20. Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall
it be done to him again.

as-Suyuti narrates through Ahmad, Abu Dawud, Ibn Jarir, Ibnu'l-Mundhir, at-Tabarani, Abu'sh-
Shaykh and Ibn Marduwayh from Ibn 'Abbas that he said, "Surely Allah revealed: and whoever
did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.... that are the
unjust.... that are the transgressors. He revealed it about two groups of the Jews, one of them
subdued the other in the Era of Ignorance, until they reconciliated and made peace (on the
condition) that if the mighty group slayed someone of the weaker group, his blood money should
be fifty wasaq, and if the weaker one slayed a member of the mighty group, his blood money
should be a hundred wasaq. This continued until the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) came to
Medina. The" two groups came down to welcome the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and he had
not overpowered them yet. Then the weaker group stood up and said, 'Was there ever such a
thing between two tribes? Their religion is one, their lineage is one and their town is one and
(yet) blood money of one is half of that of the other? Certainly, we had given it to you only
because of the injustice you did to us and in fear of you. But now that Muhammad has arrived,
we shall not give in to you.' War was almost to erupt between them, and then they agreed to
make the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) (Arbitrator) between them. Then the mighty group thought
it over and said, 'By Allah! Muhammad is not going to give you from them the double of what he
would give them from you;' and they have truly said that they had not given it to us but because
of (our) injustice and coercion to them. So, they engaged in secret intrigue against the Messenger
of Allah (s.a.w.). Allah informed His Messenger of all their affairs and what they wanted. Then
Allah revealed: O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive together... and most surely
many of the people are transgressors." (5:41-49) Then he said, "By Allah! It was revealed about
them." (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: al-Qummi has narrated this story inter alia in a lengthy tradition in his at-
Tafsir; and it says that it was 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy who talked on behalf of Banu 'n-Nadir - and it
was the mighty one - and tried to frighten the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) of them, and that it
was he who had said: If you are given this, take it, and if you are not given this, be cautious.

But the first tradition is truer in text, because its meaning is more in conformity with the context
of the verses; the first parts of the verses - particularly the first two - do not fit the story of the
blood money between Banu 'n-Nadir and Band Qurayzah, as is not hidden from a person who
recognizes the literary styles. It is not unlikely that it is an attempt to apply the story to the
Qur'an, as is the case with a lot of traditions purporting to describe the reason of revelation of
verses. It is as though the narrator found this story applicable to the verse: And We prescribed to
them in it that life is for life, ... and preceding ones; then he found that the verses are connected
with one another beginning from: O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive together...
so he took all these verses as revealed in this story, and became oblivious of the story of stoning.
And Allah knows better.

Sulayman ibn Khalid said, "I heard Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), saying, 'When Allah intends good for a
servant, He scratches up a white spot in his heart, and deputes to him an angel who keeps him on
right (path); and when He intends evil for a servant, He scratches up a black spot in his heart, and
closes the hearing of his heart, and deputes to him a Satan who leads him astray.' Then he recited
this verse: Therefore (for) whomsoever Allah intends that He would guide him aright, He
expands his breast for Islam; and (for) whosoever He intends that He should leave him to err,
He makes his breast strait and narrow as though he were ascending into the sky... (6:125). Then
he said: Surely those against whom the word of your Lord has proved true will not believe
(10:95); and he said: ...Those are they for whom Allah does not desire that He should purify their
hearts; ... (5:41)." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

(al-Kulaynl) narrates through his chain from as-Sakuni that Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said, "as-Suht
(forbidden) is the price of dead body, and price of dog, and dowery for fornication, and bribe in
judgement and wage of al-kahin (fortuneteller, soothsayer)." (al-Kafi)

The author says: The tradition describes a number of forbidden and unlawful earnings, without
encompassing all such things. There are a lot of unlawful earnings as detailed in traditions. There
are many traditions of this theme narrated from the Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt

'Abd ibn Hamid has narrated that 'Ali ibn Abi Talib was asked about suht, he said, "Bribe." It
was said to him, "In judgement?" He said, "That is disbelief." (ad-Durru'l-manthur)
The author says: "That is disbelief points to what has come in the verses under discussion in
condemnation of suht and taking bribe in judgement: and barter not My signs for a small price
and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers. Many
traditions from al-Baqir and as-Sadiq (a.s.) have repeatedly said that: 'As for taking bribe in
judgement, it is disbelief in Allah and His Messenger.' There are numerous traditions in exegesis
of suht and its prohibition, narrated through Shi'ah and Sunni chains and recorded in their
collections of ahadith.

Ibn Abi Hatim, an-Nahhas (in his an-Nasikh wa 'l-mansukh), at-Tabarani, al-Hakim (saying that
it was correct), Ibn Marduwayh and al-Bayhaqi (in his as-Sunanu'l-kubra) have narrated from
Ibn 'Abbas that he said, "Two verses of this chapter - i.e. The Table' - were abrogated: the verse
of al-qalaid (sacrificial animals with symbolic garlands) and: therefore if they come to you,
judge between them or turn aside from them. Thus the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had option, if
he wished he would judge between them and if he wished he would turn aside from them and
return them to their laws. Then was revealed (the verse): And that you should judge between
them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires." (Ibn 'Abbas) said, "So the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was ordered to judge between then according to our Book." (ad-
Durru'l-manthur)

Abu 'Ubayd, Ibnu'l-Mundhir and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said
about the verse: judge between them or turn aside from them, that it was abrogated by the verse:
And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, (ibid.)

The author says: as-Suyuti has also narrated it through 'Abdu 'r-Razzaq from 'Ikrimah.
However, the theme of the verses does not agree with this claim of abrogation. The clear context
of the verses shows them to be interlinked and proves that they were revealed all together. As
such there is no sense in saying that some of its verses have abrogated some others. Moreover,
the verse: And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, is not
independent in its meaning; it is connected with the preceding verses; therefore there is no reason
to treat it as an abrogating one. (However, if abrogation is OK with all these difficulties, then the
clause: therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, in the preceding verse, has
more right to be treated as abrogating.) Apart from that, you have seen that the pronoun, them,
in, judge between them, more manifestly refers to the people in general, rather than the People of
the Book or particularly the Jews. Moreover, we have described in the beginning of this chapter
that the chapter of "The Table" is abrogating, and not abrogated.

Abu 'Amr az-Zubayri narrates from Abu ' Abdillah (a.s.) that he said, "Surely the things because
of which one deserves Imamah are: Purification, cleanliness from sins and grave offences which
make one liable to the hell; then enlightened - and another copy says, (hidden) knowledge of all
that the ummah needs, its halal and haram, knowledge of its Book, its particular and general,
decisive and ambiguous, intricacies of its knowledge and marvels of its interpretation, its
abrogating and abrogated."

"I said, 'What is the proof that Imam cannot be except he who has the knowledge of these things
you have mentioned? He said, The word of Allah regarding those whom He has given
permission to rule and made them deserving to it: Surely We sent down the Torah in which was
guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) were judging
(matters) for those who were Jews, and (so did) the Divines and the scholars, ...So these are the
Imams, below the prophets, who raised up the people by their knowledge; and as for al-ahbar,
they are the scholars, below the Divines; then Allah gave information and said: as they were
required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah; and He did not say, they were put under the burden
of the Book.'" (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

The author says: It is a very fine argument presented by the Imam (a.s.); it shows a wonderful
connotation of the verse, finer than the previously given explanation: It describes that the
sequence used in the verse - the prophets, then the Divines, then the scholars - points to their
descending ranks in excellence and perfection; thus the Divines are below the prophets and
above the scholars, and the scholars are those men of religious erudition who have been entrusted
with its knowledge through teaching and learning.

Allah has described the mode of the Divines' knowledge in these words: as they were required to
guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof. If the idea were to show its
similarity to the scholars' knowledge, it would have been said, as they were placed under it, as
Allah says: The similitude of those who were placed under the Torah, then they did not hold it...
(62:5). It is because al-istihfaz means to ask someone to guard; it implies obligating him to guard
and protect; it is similar to the words of Allah: That He may question the truthful of their truth,...
(33:8), i.e. that He may obligate them to display the attribute of truthfulness that is hidden in
their souls.

This guarding of the Book and its witnessing cannot be complete without 'ismah (sinlessness)
which Allah does not grant to non-ma'sums. 'Ismah's essentiality is understood from the fact that
Allah has based His permission to them to judge on their guarding of the Book, and has given
credence to their witnessing based on the same; and it is impossible to give credence to their
witnessing if there were any possibility of their falling into error or committing any mistake -
because it is on their testimony that the Book is confirmed.

So, this guarding and witnessing is something quite different from the protection and the
testimony, which we are familiar with, in our society. Rather it is of the type of the protection of
deeds and witnessing that has been mentioned in the verse: ...that you may be the witnesses for
the people and (that) the Messenger may be a witness for you... (2:143). Its explanation was
given in the first volume of the Book.

This guarding and witnessing is ascribed to all, although only some of them were going to do it,
in the same way as witnessing of deeds has been ascribed to the whole ummah, although only a
few shall do it. Such usage is common in the Qur'an; e.g. Allah says: And certainly We gave the
Book and the Wisdom and the Prophecy to the Children of Israel... (45:16). Of course, the
scholars too were given the responsibility of guarding and witnessing and covenant was taken to
that effect from them too. But it was only a subjective religious affirmation, quite apart from real
affirmation that depends on real guarding, free from mistake and error; and divine religion
cannot be complete without this as it cannot be without that.

It is now established that there is a position between those of the prophets and the scholars, and it
is the position of the Imams. Allah has told us about it in His word: And We made of them Imams
to guide by Our command as they were patient, and they were certain of our signs (32:24). It
does not go against the verses, which say: And We gave him Ishaq, and Ya 'qub, as a further gift,
and We made (them) all good ones. And We made them Imams, to guide (people) by Our
command,... (21:72-73). It is because joining of prophethood and Imamate in a group does not
prevent separation of the two positions in others. Some details about Imamate have been given in
the first volume under the divine words: And (remember) when his Lord tried Ibrahim with
certain words,... (2:124).37

In short, the divines and Imams, who hold the middle rank between the prophets and the
scholars, do have the knowledge of the Book as it should be known, and do bear witness thereof
as it should be done.

The verse speaks about the divines and Imams of the Children of Israel. But the verse shows that
it was because Torah was a Book revealed by Allah which contained guidance and light, i.e.,
matters of belief and deed required of the ummah; and if that demanded this guarding and
witnessing which can only be done by the divines and Imams, then the same will apply to every
Book revealed by Allah which contained divine gnosis and practical laws. And this proves our
intended purpose.

Therefore, the Imam's words, 'so these are the Imams below prophets', mean that the Im5ms' rank
is below that of the prophets, according to the sequence given in the verse; likewise, the scholars
are below the Imams. The words, they bring up the people with their knowledge, make it clear
that the Imam has taken the word, ar-rabbani as being derived from at-tarbiyah (to bring up) and
not from ar-rububiyyah (lordship). The meanings of other clauses are clear from earlier
explanation.

Perhaps this meaning was intended by al-Baqir (a.s.) when he said that the verse: Surely We sent
down the Torah in which was guidance and light... required to guard (part) of the Book of
Allah..., was revealed about the Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.). Malik al-Juhani narrates that Abu
Ja'far (a.s.) said about the above verse, "About us was it revealed." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashl)

Tafsiru'l-burhan writes under the verse: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed,
those are they that are the unbelievers, that (al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from
'Abdullah ibn Muskan that he said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said, 'Whoever judged
about two dirhams a judgement of injustice, then enforced it by coercion, he shall be from among
the people of this verse: and whoeverr did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that
are the unbelievers! I said, 'And how does he coerce in this matter?' He said, 'He will be having
whip and prison; so he gives judgement against someone; then if he agreed to his judgement,
(well and good); otherwise, he would beat him with his whip and put him in prison.'"

The author says: ash-Shaykh has narrated it in at-Tahdhib through his chain from Ibn Muskan,
from the Prophet (s.a.w.); and al-'AyyashThas narrated it in his at-Tafsir from him. The
beginning of the hadith is narrated through other chains too from the Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.).

In this tradition, the judgement is made conditional on coercion. It implies that the judgement
should be of "such a nature as would produce an affect; it would be a decree, which by its very
nature would show some definite result. Otherwise, mere utterance is not called judgement.

Sa'id ibn Mansur, Abu 'sh-Shaykh and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he
said: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the
unbelievers, ...that are the unjust, ...that are the transgressors, (were revealed) especially about
the Jews. (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: The three verses are unrestricted and there is no cause to justify their
restriction; place of application does not permit change in word's generality. Apart from that, the
third verse is related to the Christians, not the Jews. Moreover, a contrary tradition is narrated
from the same Ibn 'Abbas.

'Abd ibn Hamid narrates from Hakim ibn Jubayr that he said, "I asked Sa'id ibn Jubayr about
these verses of The Table'; I told (him) that a group thinks that they were revealed to the
Children of Israel, and not to us. He said, 'Recite what is before it and what is after it,' so I recited
them before him. So he said, "No; but it was revealed to us.' Then I met Muqassim, mawla of Ibn
'Abbas; and I asked him about these verses in The Table'; I told (him) that a group thinks that
they were revealed to the Children of Israel, and not to us. He said, 'It was revealed to the
Children of Israel and revealed to us, and whatever was revealed to them and to us, it is for them
and for us.'

"Then I went to 'Ali ibn al-Husayn (a.s.), and asked him about these verses in The Table'; and I
told him that I had asked Sa'id ibn Jubayr and Muqassim about them. He (the Imam) said, Then
what did Muqassim say?' So I informed him of it." (Hakim) said, "The Imam said, 'He has said
truth; but it is an unbelief, not like the unbelief of polytheism; and a transgression, not like the
transgression of polytheism; and an injustice, not like the injustice of polytheism.' Then I met
Sa'id ibn Jubayr and informed him of what he (the Imam) had said. Sa'Td ibn Jubayr said to his
son, 'How did you find him?' (He said), 'Indeed I found for him excellence over you and
Muqassim." (ibid.)

The author says: The earlier given commentary shows that the tradition fits the apparent
meaning of the verse.

al-Kulayni narrates in al-Kafi through his chain from al-Halabi from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.); and
al-'Ayyashi narrates in his at-Tafsir from Abu Basir from the same Imam (a.s.) that he said about
the verse: but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; "Shall be expiated from his
sins as much as he will forego of his wound or other things."

Ibn Marduwayh has narrated from a man from the Helpers that the Prophet (s.a.w,a.) said
regarding the words of Allah: but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him. "A man,
his tooth is broken, or his hand is cut, or any organ of his body is cut or wounded, and he
foregoes it, so (similar) quantity of his faults is reduced from him. If it was one-fourth of blood-
money, then one-fourth of his faults, and if it was one-third, then one-third of his faults; and if it
was (full) blood-money (all) his faults will fall down from him in similar way." (ad-Durru'l-
manthur)
The author says: A similar tradition has been narrated by ad-Daylami from Ibn 'Umar.
Probably, what this and the preceding traditions say that the expiation is divided according to the
division of foregoing, is inferred from the fact that in the shari'ah, blood-money, which is
divisible, has the same position as retaliation; then retaliation and blood-money together are
weighed vis-a-vis expiation of sins, and this too is divisible. Therefore part of it would stand
opposite to part of that, as the whole stands opposite to the whole.

al-Qummi narrates in his at-Tafsir, under the verse: for every one of you did We appoint a law
and a way, that he (a.s.) said: "For every prophet was a shari'ah and a way."

Tafsiru'l-burhan writes under the verse: Is it then the judgement of (the times of) ignorance that
they desire?, that (al-Kulaynl) narrates through his chain from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn
Khalid from his father from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said, "Judges are four (types), three are
in the Fire and one is in the Garden; a man judges unjustly and knowingly, so he is in the Fire;
and a man judges unjustly and he does not know, so he is in the Fire; and a man judges justly but
he does not know, so he is in the Fire; and a man judges justly and he knows, so he is in the
Garden."

And he (a.s.) said, "Judgements are (of) two (categories): Judgement of Allah and judgement of
(the Era of) Ignorance; so whoever misses the judgement of Allah, judges according to the (Era
of) Ignorance."

The author says: There are many traditions of these two themes from the Shi'ah and Sunni
chains, recorded under the chapters of judgement and evidence. The verse hints at, rather clearly
denotes both meanings. As for the first meaning, it is because judging unjustly - whether he
knew it to be unjust, or judged without knowledge and it chanced to be unjust - and likewise
judging justly but without knowing it, all this is following the low desire, and Allah has
forbidden it in His words: therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not
follow their low desires (diverging) from the truth that has come to you. In this verse, Allah
warned against following low desires and has put it parallel to the judgement by the revealed
truth. It is understood from it that permission of judgement is conditional on knowledge of truth;
otherwise giving judgement is not allowed because it is merely following the low desires.
Moreover, the name, judgement of the Era of Ignorance, is applicable to it, which stands face to
face with the judgement of Allah.

As for the second theme, i.e., the division of judgement between that of Allah and that of the Era
of Ignorance, it is inferred from the apparent meaning of the words of Allah: Is it then the
judgement of (the times of) ignorance that they desire? And who is better than Allah to judge...?
See how the two judgements stand opposite each other.

at-Tabari has narrated in his at-Tafsir from Qatadah, under the verse: Surely We sent down the
Torah in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah)
were judging (matters) for those who were Jews, and (so did) the Divines and the scholars, that
he said, "As for the Divines, they were jurisprudents of the Jews; and as for the ahbar, they were
their scholars." He (also) said, "And it has been reported to us that the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.)
said, when this verse was revealed, "We do judge the Jews and the others from people of (other)
religions."

The author says: as-Suyuti too has narrated it under the same verse through 'Abd ibn Hamid
and through Ibn Jarir from Qatadah.

This tradition apparently shows that the reported utterance of the Prophet (s.a.w.) is related to
this verse, i.e., the verse is the proof of this statement. But the difficulty is that the said verse
proves only that the judgement was based on the Torah and was reserved for the Jews because it
contains the word: for these who were Jews; it did not extend to non-Jews, or to judging by other
than Torah, contrary to what appears from the tradition. It could be said that the Prophet's word,
"We do judge", means that the prophets do so; but it is a ridiculous meaning and has no
relevance to the verse.

However, it appears that one of the narrators has erred in quoting the verse, and that the Prophet
(s.a.w.) had spoken those words after revelation of the verse: And We have revealed to you the
Book with the truth, ...therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not
follow their low desires... This hypothesis fits on what has earlier been mentioned that apparently
the pronoun in, judge between them, refers to the people and not particularly to the Jews.
However, the narrator has quoted one verse (5:44) in place of the other (5:48).

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 51-

54
 
‫ْض َو َمن يَتَ َولَّهُم ِّمن ُك ْم فَإِنَّهُ ِم ْنهُ ْم إِ َّن هّللا َ الَ يَ ْه ِدي ْالقَوْ َم‬ ٍ ‫ضهُ ْم أَوْ لِيَاء بَع‬ ُ ‫صا َرى أَوْ لِيَاء بَ ْع‬ َ َّ‫وا ْاليَهُو َد َوالن‬
ْ ‫وا الَ تَتَّ ِخ ُذ‬
ْ ُ‫يَا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬
َ َ ْ ْ َ ‫هّللا‬ َ
‫ح أوْ أ ْم ٍر‬ ِ ‫صيبَنَا دَآئِ َرةٌ فَ َع َسى ُ أن يَأتِ َي بِالفَ ْت‬ ُ
ِ ُ‫ار ُعونَ فِي ِه ْم يَقُولونَ ن َْخ َشى أن ت‬ ِ ‫} فَتَ َرى ال ِذينَ فِي قُلوبِ ِهم َّم َرضٌ يُ َس‬51{ َ‫الظَّالِ ِمين‬
ُ َّ
‫وا بِاهّلل ِ َج ْه َد أَ ْي َمانِ ِه ْم إِنَّهُ ْم لَ َم َع ُك ْم‬
ْ ‫وا أَهَـؤُالء الَّ ِذينَ أَ ْق َس ُم‬ ْ ُ‫} َويَقُو ُل الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬52{ َ‫وا فِي أَ ْنفُ ِس ِه ْم نَا ِد ِمين‬ ْ ُّ‫ُوا َعلَى َما أَ َسر‬ ْ ‫ِّم ْن ِعن ِد ِه فَيُصْ بِح‬
َّ‫وا َمن يَرْ تَ َّد ِمن ُك ْم عَن ِدينِ ِه فَ َسوْ فَ يَأْتِي هّللا ُ بِقَوْ ٍم يُ ِحبُّهُ ْم َوي ُِحبُّونَهُ أَ ِذل ٍة‬ ْ ُ‫} يَا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬53{ َ‫ُوا خَ ا ِس ِرين‬ ْ ‫ت أَ ْع َمالُهُ ْم فَأَصْ بَح‬ ْ َ‫َحبِط‬
{ ‫اس ٌع َعلِي ٌم‬ ِ ‫ك فَضْ ُل هّللا ِ ي ُْؤتِي ِه َمن يَ َشاء َوهّللا ُ َو‬ َ ِ‫ين أَ ِع َّز ٍة َعلَى ْال َكافِ ِرينَ يُ َجا ِه ُدونَ فِي َسبِي ِل هّللا ِ َوالَ يَخَافُونَ لَوْ َمةَ آلئِ ٍم َذل‬ ‫َعلَى ْال ُم ْؤ ِمنِ َـ‬
}54
{51} O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of
each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them;
surely Allah does not guide the unjust people. {52} So you will see those in whose hearts is a
disease, hastening in them, saying: 'We fear lest a calamity should befall us;" but it may be that
Allah will bring the victory or a thing from Himself, so that they shall be regretting on account of
what they hid in their souls. {53} And those who believe will say: "Are these they who swore by
Allah with the most forcible of their oaths that they were most surely with you? Their deeds shall
go for nothing, so they shall become losers.". {54} O you who believe! Whoever of you turns
back from his religion, then soon Allah will bring a people that He shall love them and they shall
love Him, lowly before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers, they shall strive hard in
Allah's way and shall not fear the censure of any censurer; this is Allah's grace, He gives it to
whom He pleases, and Allah is Ample-giving, knowing.
 

Commentary
It is difficult to say anything about these verses' connection with the preceding ones or the ones
that follow, like: Only Allah is your Guardian... then surely the party of Allah are they that shall
be triumphant; and then its connection with that which follows: Oyou who believe! Do not take
for guardians..., and finally their connection with the verse: O Messenger! Deliver what has
been revealed to you...

But as for the four verses under discussion, they speak about the Jews and the Christians. The
Qur'an had not talked about them in the Meccan verses, because there was no such need at that
time. It however describes their maneuvers in the verses revealed at Medina. Even then, the ones
revealed in the early Medinan period are not concerned with the Christians, because Muslims in
those days were involved with the Jews. They had to mingle with them, live with them, keep
good relations with them, or avert their deceit and neutralize their plot. They were entangled with
the Christians in the latter half of the Prophet's stay at Medina. Therefore, probably these four
verses were revealed in that period; and perhaps the Victory' alludes to the conquest of Mecca.

But it has been mentioned earlier that more reliably the chapter of "The Table" was revealed in
the year of the Last pilgrimage, when Mecca was already conquered. So, does this victory refer
to some conquest other than that of Mecca? Or, were these four verses revealed before Meccan
conquest, and before the complete chapter was revealed? Again, is the last verse: O you who
believe! Whoever of you turns back from his religion, then soon Allah will bring a people..., con-
nected with the three preceding ones? Which was the group whose apostasy was expected? Who
were those people whom Allah promised to bring in place of the apostates? All these unanswered
questions have compounded the confusion. The narratives giving the reason of revelation are
varied and conflicting; actually they are merely personal opinions of the ancient exegetes, as is
the case with most of such traditions. This excessive contradiction perplexes the mind and it fails
to understand the verses' meaning. Add to it the intermingling of sectarian prejudice with
personal interpretations, as you will see later in the traditions and exegetes' writings - both
ancient and modern.

Meditation on these verses proves that the four are interlinked and independent; having no
relation with the preceding and the following verses; and the fourth one completes the intended
theme. However one must be wary, in looking for its meaning, of laxities and carelessness
indulged in by exegetes who have based their interpretations on personal views, especially
regarding the attributes mentioned in the verses.

In a nutshell, Allah warns the believers against taking the Jews and the Christians for friends, and
threatens them most severely; then points in an apocalyptical way where such friendship was to
take them and how it would turn into ruins the magnificent structure of religious character; then
Allah will bring on scene a people who will manage the affairs and restore the religion's structure
to its original splendor.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are
friends of each other: Majma'u'l-bayan says: "al-Ittikhaadh means to rely on a thing in
preparation for an affair; it is on the stem of ifti'al from the root, al-akhdh (to take). The same
has happened with al-itti'aad from al-wa'd (to promise). al-Akhdh (to take) is used in various
ways: You say, 'He took the book (when he placed it in his hand)', 'He took the offering (when
he accepted it)', "Allah took him from his refuge (when He caused him to die);' it originally
means passing of a thing from one direction to another."

ar-Raghib says in Mufradatu'l-Qur'an: "al-Wila' and at-tawalli denotestwo or more things

appear together in such a way that nothing extraneous comes between them. As an extended
metaphor, it is used for proximity and nearness - in place, in relationship, in religion, in
friendship, belief and mutual helping." More will be explained later.

In short, al-wilayah is a sort of proximity, which removes barriers and partitions between two
things, keeping in view the purpose of that proximity. If the proximity is with respect to piety
and help, then waliyy is the helper whom nothing can prevent from helping the person who is
near him. If it is in respect of harmony and love (which is spiritual attraction) then waliyy is the
beloved before whom man cannot keep his own will and gives him whatever he desires; and if it
is in respect of relationship, the waliyy is the one who inherits him without any hindrance; and if
it is with respect of obedience, then the waliyy is the one who controls his affairs in any way he
pleases.

Allah, the Sublime, in His words: "do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends", has not
put any condition or specialty on friendship; it is unrestricted (and as such should be prohibiting
any kind of nearness). But the words in the next verse: But you will see those in whose hearts is
a disease, hastening towards them, saying: "We fear lest a calamity should befall us", show that
wilayah in this verse is a sort of proximity and joining which is in affinity with the excuse
offered by them, "We fear lest a calamity should befall us." As such it points to the turn of
fortune, which alternates between the people. Such calamities could befall them through other
than the Jews and Christians in which case these hypocrites hoped to get help from these two
groups by taking them for awliya', in the meaning of helpers; in the same way they were afraid
of calamities befalling them from these two groups, and hoped to avert it by taking them for
awliya', in the meaning of nearness in love and friendship.

Wilayah in the meaning of nearness in love and friendship gives both benefits of help and
spiritual blending. Therefore, it is the meaning intended in the verse. We shall describe under the
last verse, O you who believe! Whoever of you turns back from his religion..., that wilayah here
means only friendship, nothing else.

An exegete has forcefully claimed that wilayah in these verses means wilayah of helping - two
persons or two groups enter into alliance or covenant that when need arises each party would
help the other. His argument runs as follows:

"The verses - as their apparent meaning shows - were revealed before the Last Pilgrimage, in the
early days of hijrah, when the Prophet (s.a.w.), and the Muslims were not finished with the
affairs of the Jews in Medina and around it in Fadak and Khaybar, etc. and beyond them were the
Christians. Those Jews and Christians had entered into pacts and covenants of mutual help with
various Arab tribes.

"This statement might fit on what has been narrated (in reasons of revelation) that 'Ubadah ibn
as-Samit (from Banu 'Awf ibn al-Khazraj) disavowed Banu Qaynuqa' when they fought the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and up to that time there was a wilayah of covenant between him
and them; but 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy (the leader of the hypocrites) did not separate from them and
hastened towards them, saying: 'We fear lest a calamity should befall us.'
"Or, as has been narrated in the story of Abu Lubabah that when the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.),
sent him to Banu Qurayzah, so that he should make them come out of their fortress and accept
the Prophet's judgment, he pointed with his hand to his throat, hinting to them that it meant
slaughter.

"Or, as is narrated that some of them used to write the news of Medina to the Christians of Syria,
and some were reporting to the Jews of Medina in order to benefit from their wealth, even if it be
a loan.

"Or, as is reported that after the killings and defeat in the battle of Uhud, some of them said that
he would attach himself to so-and-so Jew or Christian.

"All these narratives almost unanimously claim that it were the hypocrites who had said: We fear
lest a calamity should befall us.'

"In short, the verses forbid entering into covenant and wilayah of mutual help between the
Muslims and the Jews and the Christians.

"Some people have emphasized it, claiming that linguistically the words and context of the verse
totally oppose taking wilayah in it in the meaning of wilayah of love and reliance; it is also
opposed by the reason of revelation and the overall condition under which the Muslims and the
People of the Book lived in the era of revelation.

"How can the verse be taken to prohibit living and mingling with them even if they were
dhimmis or had pact with Muslims? We know that the Jews lived with the Prophet (s.a.w.) and
the Muslims in Medina, and the Muslims dealt with them with total equality."

COMMENT: All this shows a laxity and carelessness in finding out the verse's connotation:

What has he said that the verses were revealed before the year of the Last Pilgrimage - and it was
the year when the chapter of "The Table" was revealed - presents not much difficulty; but it does
not prove that the wilayah denotes entering into covenant and not wilayah of love.

As for the narrated reasons of revelation that show that the verses were revealed particularly
about the covenant and the wilayah of mutual help between some Arab tribes and the Jews and
the Christians, the following comments apply to them:

First: The said reasons of revelation are mutually contradictory arid do not present a single
connotation which could be relied upon;
Second: It does not cover the wilayah of the Christians, even if it covers somehow that of the
Jews, because the Arabs did not have any wilayah of covenant with the Christians.

Third: We agree to the reasons of revelation in what they say; yet you have been told several
times that most of those traditions, apart from being weak, are merely attempts to apply historic
events on the Qur'anic verses which appear to have some relevance to them - although we find
no difficulty in it.

However, the idea, that such narrated events particularize or restrict the generality of a Qur'anic
verse, is not tenable, nor does its apparent meaning support it. If the apparent meanings of the
verses were particularized or restricted because of some specialty of reasons of revelation,
without taking it from the wordings of the verse, the Qur'an would have died with the death of
those about whom such verses were revealed, and it could not be used in any argumentation
related to any later event or incident; such an idea is not approvable by the Book or the Sunnah
nor by reason.

He has also claimed, "Linguistically the words, and context of the verse totally oppose taking
wilayah here in the meaning of wilayah of love and reliance. It is also opposed by the reason of
revelation and the overall condition under which the Muslims and the People of the Book lived
in the era of revelation." Ponder on it as much as you like but you cannot deduce any worthwhile
meaning from it. When apparent meaning of a verse does not go against application of a theme to
it, reason of its revelation and overall prevailing condition of the time become irrelevant. You
have known that there is no justification in restricting the verse to its reason of revelation and to
the overall condition of the era. Rather, the argument goes totally against it, because a verse in its
unrestricted appearance is in itself an authentic proof. You have seen that this verse too is
unrestricted (and nothing points to its being restricted); therefore, it is an authentic authority in
its unrestricted meaning, i.e., the wilayah in the meaning of love.

The claim that meanings of single words used in the verse and its context disavow totally taking
wilayah in the meaning of love is really astonishing. Would that I knew what he has meant with
this total disavowal, and more than that he has used the 'context' too in this argument!

How can the wording or context of the verse reject this meaning, when the clause: "do not take
the Jews and the Christians for friends", is followed by the clause: "they are friends of each
other", and doubtlessly wilayah in this latter clause denotes love, unity and affection, and not
wilayah of covenant and pact. There is no sense in saying: 'Do not make a covenant with the
Jews and the Christians; they have covenant with each other.' Whatever unity and relation there
was among the Jews, it was the wilayah of national love. The same was the case with the
Christians; there was no pact or covenant made by them, it was only the love and unity based on
religion.

Likewise, the words of Allah, coming after this clause, prove this meaning: and whoever
amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them. The reason that turns a friend
of a group into a member of it, is this: Love unites scattered things, unites different souls;
because of love perceptions of the lovers become one, their characters mirror one another; their
actions reflect each other's. The two lovers, when love overwhelms them, become as if they are
one person, having a single psyche, a single will, doing a single action; one does not go against
the other in the passage of life and in social norms.

This is what makes a lover of a group a member of that group and unites him with it. It has been
said: Whoever loves a people, he is one of them; also (it is said): A man is with whom he loves.
And Allah has said forbidding to love the polytheists: O you who believe! Do not take My enemy
and your enemy for friends: would you offer them love while they deny what has come to you of
the truth,... (60:1). The verses go on in the same vein, until it says: ...and whoever makes friends
with them, these are the unjust (60:9). Also He says: You shall not find a people who believe in
Allah and the latter day befriending those who act in opposition to Allah and His Messenger,
even though they were their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their kinsfolk;... (58:22).
Allah has also said regarding the love of the unbelievers - and the wording is general which
includes the Jews, the Christians and the polytheists - Let not the believers take the unbelievers
for friends rather than the believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing (to do) with
Allah, except (when) you guard yourselves against (them) for fear from them; and Allah
cautions you of Himself;... (3:28). The verse clearly speaks about the wilayah of love and
affection rather than that of covenant and pact. Remember that when the third chapter, "The
House of 'Imran", was revealed; the Prophet (s.a.w.) had already concluded pacts and truce with
the Jews and the polytheists.

In short, the wilayah that makes one people attached to another people is that of love and
affection, and not that of covenant and help; and it is quite clear. If the clause: and whoever
amongst you takes them as awliya', then surely he is one of them, is taken to mean, whoever
among you entered into a pact of mutual help after this prohibition, then surely he because of his
going against this prohibition would be unjust, and would be joined to those unjust people in
injustice, then it would be a vulgar meaning and would need additional conditions to be attached
to the speech.

If the Qur'an prohibits something which was hitherto lawful, it always points to its being lawful
until then; it does so to preserve the honor of that order which is now being changed; and to keep
the sanctity of the Prophetic tradition and practice. Ponder on these verses: O you who believe!
The idolaters are nothing but unclean, so they shall not approach the Sacred Mosque after this
year;... (9:28).... Wherefore now be in contact with them and seek what Allah has written for
you, and eat and drink until the white thread becomes distinct unto you from the black thread (of
night)... (2:187). It is not allowed to you to take women afterwards, nor that you should change
them for other wives,... (33:52); and many other such verses.

Now, it is clear that the language of the verse, in meanings of words and in context, does not
disallow wilayah to be taken for love and affection; if there is any rejection, it rejects other
meanings.

As for their claim that clause: in whose hearts is a disease, refers to the hypocrites, you will soon
see that the context does not support it.

Thus, the clause: "do not take the Jews and the Christians for awliya'" clearly forbids loving
them or having any affection towards them; because such feelings pull the souls and spirits
towards each other and it creates mutual moral effects on both sides; and if Muslims are
influenced by un-Islamic behavior, their society will diverge from its religious way (which is
based on the felicity of following the truth) to the way of unbelief (which is based on following
the low desires and worshipping the Satan); and thus it will go astray from the path of the natural
life.

Allah has used for them their names of Jews and Christians, instead of saying, the People of the
Book; because the phrase: "People of the Book", indicates that they are somewhat nearer to the
Muslims, which in its turn gives rise to some affection and love which is opposite to what this
verse orders that they should not be taken as friends. However, a coming verse mentions them as
being given the Book: O you who believe! Do not take for guardians those who take your
religion for a mockery and a joke, from among those who were given the Book before you and
the unbelievers;... (5:57). They were given the Book and yet they take the divine religion for a
mockery and a joke. This mockery and joke turns the good point of their being given the Book
into utmost condemnation. When the people who were given the Book which invited to the truth
and made it clear, began ridiculing the religion of truth and playing with it, they certainly
deserved to be shunned and avoided; they should not be taken as friends; the believers must
avoid living with them, mingling with them and having any soft feeling towards them.

"they are friends of each other": As explained earlier, wilayah here means friendship, because
their hearts are nearer to each other and their souls have mutual attraction. Consequently, they
think in similar way; they join hands in following their low desires, and their haughtiness leads
them to reject the truth; they strive together to extinguish the light of Allah, and help each other
in fighting against the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the Muslims. It seems, as all of them are one person
of one religion. Although actually they are not of one religion, yet they have joined their forces
and have become one power against the Muslims, simply because Islam calls them to truth and
opposes what in their eyes is the greatest goal: To follow their low desires and licentiousness in
objects of desire and enjoyment of worldly attractions.

It is this factor that has made the Jews and the Christians - inspite of their mutual discord and
enmity - into one society; they come near each other and return to one another; the Jews love the
Christians and the Christians love the Jews; Jewish groups love each other, and the Christian
nations are attracted to one another. That is why the clause: "they are friends of each other", has
been left vague (so that it may cover all situations). This clause explains the reason of the
foregoing one: "do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends." It means as follows: 'Do not
take them for friends because, in spite of their internal discord and mutual enmity, they are fully
united against you; you will not get any benefit from going near them with love and affection.'

It is possible to infer another meaning from this clause: "they are friends of each other." Do not
take them for friends; because with this friendship, you expect the group, which you have
befriended to help you against another group, which is not your friends; but your expectation can
never materialize, because they are friends of each other, so naturally they will not help you
against their own people.

QUR'AN: and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them;
surely Allah does not guide the unjust people: at-Tawalli (to take as friend); min (from, part).
The meaning is as follows: Whoever from amongst you takes them for friend; he is a part of
them. This is an attachment brought into effect by revelation and it makes some believers
members of Jewish and Christian groups. It shows that faith is a reality which has different
stages, some blemished, some pure; some adulterated, some clean. This is inferred from Qur'anic
verses like: And most of them do not believe in Allah without associating others (with Him)
(12:106). This blemish and turbidity is what Allah describes as the disease of hearts: So you will
see those in whose hearts is a disease, hastening in them, ...

Thus, those who love the Jews and the Christians, Allah has counted them as belonging to the
Jewish and Christian communities, although apparently they were believers. It shows at least that
they were proceeding, not on the path of guidance (that is, belief), but on a way used by the said
communities, it leads them where they are being led and takes them where they are taken.

That is why Allah has explained the reason of their adherence to them by the clause: "surely
Allah does not guide the unjust people." The meaning: A man from amongst you who takes them
as a friend, then surely he is one of them, and he is proceeding on a path other than yours,
because the path of belief is the path of divine guidance; this man who befriends them is unjust
like them, and Allah does not guide the unjust people.

As you see, the verse just shows that the position of the believers who befriend the Jews and the
Christians is the same as theirs; but it does not go ahead, i.e. does not describe the effects
branching from it. The wording is unrestricted; yet because it describes a fundamental reality
(like the clauses: ...and that you fast is better for you... (2:184); ...surely prayer keeps (one) away
from indecency and evil... (29:45), etc.). It is inevitably vague, and if one wants to prove from it
a subsidiary law, one should refer to the sunnah; and it is fiqh that looks into such orders.

QUR'AN: So you will see those in whose hearts is a disease, hastening in them,...: It sprouts
from the preceding statement: surely Allah does not guide the unjust people. As the divine
guidance does not cover them, so they are in error, they do hasten in them and offer an excuse
that does not deserve attention. Allah has said, "hastening in them," instead of 'towards them'; so
they are a part of them, occupying their place in error. They hasten in them not because they are
afraid of befalling a calamity over them; actually they had no such fear; it was an excuse they
had contrived for averting the admonition and blame they expected from the Prophet (s.a.w.) and
the Muslims. In fact, this hastening emanated from their friendship with, and love of those Jews
and Christians.

Every injustice and falsity is bound to vanish and disappear any day; its ignominy becomes
exposed before public eyes; and anyone who seeks to attain unlawful objects through wrongful
means disguised as truthful, has to be bitterly disappointed; as Allah has said: surely Allah does
not guide the unjust people. Consequently, it was definitely expected that Allah would bring a
victory or a thing from Himself, then they would be regretting on account of what they were
doing, and the believers would clearly see through their falsehood and pretence.

The above talk makes it clear how the clause: "So you will see those in whose hearts is a
disease," branches from the preceding: surely Allah does not guide the unjust people. We have
somewhere earlier have written the meaning of the unjust people not getting any guidance in
their injustice.

The group mentioned in these verses were hypocrites, because they showed to the Prophet
(s.a.w.) and the believers what was not in their hearts. They claimed that they hastened in the
Jews and the Christians, lest a calamity should befall them, while the real cause (which
conformed to what was in their hearts) was their love of, and inclination towards Allah's
enemies. This was the aspect of their hypocrisy. But they were not hypocrites, in the meaning of
unbelievers pretending to be believers, because the context does not agree with it.

Some exegetes have written that the verses refer to the hypocrites, in the latter meaning, like
'Abdullah ibn Ubayy and his companions, as appears from the traditions giving reason of
revelations. Those hypocrites participated with the believers in their gatherings and dealt with
them in an amicable way; on the other hand they had made with the Jews and the Christians
covenants and pacts of mutual help. This double-dealing was done in the hope of getting benefits
from both sides, and as a matter of precaution to safeguard their personal interests. In this way,
they hoped to triumph either way; they would be safe from calamity on whichever side it befell.

But this interpretation of theirs is not in agreement with the context, because it contains a hope
that they shall be regretting because of the victory or a thing from Allah. The victory may refer
to the conquest of Mecca or taking the fortresses of the Jews and the Christians' towns, or so on.
But in all these situations there was no reason why they should be regretting, as they had taken
the precaution to protect their both flanks, and there is no regret in precaution. Their regret could
be in place if they had totally separated from the believers and joined the Jews and the
Christians, and then calamity had befallen on their group. Likewise, the forfeiture of their deeds
and the loss mentioned in the next verse, (their deeds shall go for nothing, so they shall became
losers), have no relevance with their hypocrisy, as the hypocrites practiced precaution to
safeguard their interests; and if someone does so for fear of some untoward happening, and
perchance that happening does not take place, he suffers no loss and won't be called a loser. In
fact, precaution is a wise method in practice and does not entail any blame or condemnation.

It could be claimed that they became liable to condemnation because they went against divine
prohibition and had no faith in the divine promise of victory. There is nothing wrong in this idea
in itself, but the verse's wording does not support it.

QUR'AN: but it may be that Allah will bring the victory or a thing from Himself, so that they
shall be regretting on account of what they hid in their, souls: 'Asa (may be), in divine speech,
like other talks, denotes a hope, an expectation - as we have already explained that the said
expectation relates to the listener, or to the situation. But this verse contains a definite association
that shows that the expected event must certainly take place. The clause aims at confirming the
truth of the preceding one: surely Allah does not guide the unjust people; as such what it says
must happen without fail.

The victory which Allah has mentioned - and has presented it as an alternative to a thing which is
unknown to us - probably supports the view that "the" in "the victory" denotes generic noun, not
a particular victory. As such it does not point to the victory of Mecca, which the Prophet (s.a.w.)
was promised in verses like: Most surely He Who has made the Qur 'an binding on you will
bring you back to the destination... (28:85); . . .you shall most certainly enter the Sacred
Mosque, if Allah pleases... (48:27), and others.

Although the word, "victory" when used in the Qur'an, refers in most of the places to the
conquest of Mecca, yet in some places it is not possible to apply it on that usual theme. For
example: And they say: "When will this victory take place, if you are truthful?" Say: "On the day
of victory the faith of those who (now) disbelieve will not profit them, nor will they be respited."
Therefore, turn away from them and wait, surely they too are waiting (32:28-30). Allah declares
here that when this victory comes the faith of those who had hitherto disbelieved will not profit
them, and that the unbelievers were waiting for it. Obviously, these two attributes do not apply to
the Meccan conquest, nor to any other victory which Muslims have achieved upto this time. (For
this reason the word, al-fath is rendered in many Qur'anic translations as "judgement".)

We can think of only two situations where the faith, repentance, will not be of any profit, as we
have described when writing about Repentance One: With change of this world with the next
world when there will remain no free will and power. Two: If a man acquires such
characteristics and traits that his heart becomes stone hard, and every hope of repentance and
returning to Allah is lost. Allah says: ...On the day when some of the signs of your Lord shall
come, its faith shall not profit a soul, which did not believe before, or earn good through its
faith... (6:158). And repentance is not for those who go on doing evil deeds, until when death
comes to one of them, he says: "Surely, now I repent;" nor (for) those who die while they are
unbelievers... (4:18)

In any case, if the victory refers to the conquest of Mecca or victory over the Jewish fortresses or
Christian towns, so be it; but there is a vagueness in application of the clauses: "they shall be
regretting ..." and the verse: And those who believe will say. . ., on this meaning.

And if the victory denotes victory of Islam over disbelief and clear judgment between the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and his people, then it is a Qur'anic apocalyptic text which points to
the happenings which this ummah is to face in future; and it fits what has been stated in the
chapter of "Yunus": And every nation had a messenger; so when their messenger came, the
matter was decided between them with justice and they shall not be dealt with unjustly. And they
say: "When will this threat come about, if you are truthful? "... every nation has a term; when
their term comes, they shall not remain behind for an hour, nor can they go before (their time).
Say: "Tell me if... What! Now (you believe)! And already you wished to have it hastened on."...
And they ask you: "Is that true?" Say: Aye! By my Lord! It is most surely the truth, and you will
not escape." ...and they will manifest regret when they see the chastisement.... (10:47-56).

"so that they shall be regretting on account of what they hid in their souls": One happens to
regret when one does what should not have been done or neglects what should not have been
neglected; and those people had done some undesirable thing; and Allah describes in the next
verse, that their deeds were forfeited and they had incurred loss. It was because they had hid in
their hearts love of the Jews and the Christians, in order to accomplish through it and by
hastening in them what those enemies of Islam had wanted, i.e., to extinguish the light of Allah
and acquire the worldly objects of desire - without there being any hindrance from religion.
Probably, this was what they hid in their hearts and for this purpose hastened in them; and they
soon shall be regretting when their endeavors shall come to naught when Allah will grant victory
to the truth.

QUR'AN: And those who believe will say: "Are these they who swore by Allah with the most
forcible of their oaths that they were most surely with you? Their deeds shall go for nothing, so
they shall become losers": Yaqulu (will say) has also been recited yaqula in which case it will be
in conjunction with: so that they shall be regretting; and then the meaning will be, they shall be
regretting while the believers will be saying... This recital is preferable because it is more in
conformity with the context. Their regretting on account of what they hid in their souls, and the
believers' statement all are a rebuke to them because of their love of, and hastening in the Jews
and the Christians. The demonstrative pronoun, in "Are these they" points to the Jews and the
Christians; while the second person plural pronoun in "with you" addresses those in whose hearts
there is a disease; also it may be vice versa; likewise, the pronouns in the clauses: "Their deeds
shall go for nothing, so they shall become losers", may point to the Jews and the Christians or to
those in whose hearts there is a disease.

However, the context shows that "with you" refers to those in whose hearts there is a disease, and
the demonstrative pronoun points to the Jews and the Christians; while the clauses: "Their deeds
shall go for nothing ...", are a reply to an unasked question. The meaning: It may be that Allah
will bring the victory or a thing from Himself, then those who believe will say to those of weak
faith when the wrath of Allah will overtake them, 'Are these Jews and Christians they who swore
by Allah so forcefully, with the most forcible of their oaths that they were most surely with you?
So why they are not doing something to benefit you?' Then arose in minds the unspoken
question: 'So what was the ultimate result of those who loved these Jews and Christians?' And
the reply came: 'Their deeds were forfeited and they became losers.'

A Discourse on the Meaning of Disease of Heart

The phrase: in whose hearts is a disease, clearly says that hearts become diseased; conversely it
shows that they also may be healthy, because health and disease are opposite each other; if one is
found in a subject, inevitably that subject is capable of accepting its opposite, like blindness and
eye-night. Don't you see that a wall is not called sick because it does not accept the attribute of
healthiness?

In all places where Allah ascribes disease to hearts, He describes such conditions and attributes
of hearts, which prove that they have gone out of straight nature and deviated from right path.
For example: And when the hypocrites and those in whose hearts was a disease began to say:
"Allah and His Messenger did not promise us (victory) but only to deceive" (33:12). When the
hypocrites and those in whose hearts was disease said: "Their religion has deceived these
(Muslims)"... (8:49). So that He may make what the Satan casts a trial for those in whose hearts
is disease and those whose hearts are hard;... (22:53), apart from other verses.

In short, heart's disease means its involvement with a sort of suspicion and doubt that pollutes the
faith in Allah and removes confidence in His signs; it blends faith with polytheism. That is why
such a heart experiences such conditions, and such a man commits such deeds as have affinity
with disbelief in Allah and rejection of his communications.

Conversely, heart's health and freedom from disease means its being steadfast in straight nature
and its adherence to the right path; it leads man to sincerity in monotheistic belief and reliance on
Allah, discarding all things to which his low desires are attracted. Allah says: The day on which
neither property will avail, nor sons, except him who comes to Allah with a heart free (from
evil), (26:88-89).

It is evident from above that those in whose hearts is a disease, is other than the hypocrites, as
the Qur'anic expression in so many places shows: the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a
disease. It is because the hypocrites are those who believed with their tongues and their hearts
did not believe, while total disbelief is the death of the heart, not a disease. Allah says: Is he who
was dead then we raised him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the
people,... (6:122). Only those accept who listen; and (as to) the dead Allah will raise them,...
(6:36).

Obviously, the heart's disease, in Qur'anic expression, means the doubt and suspicion that
overwhelms man's perception regarding Allah and His signs, which makes the heart unable to
adhere to a religious belief.

Thus, those in whose hearts is a disease are the people of weak faith who listen to every loud-
mouthed person; and like a weathercock turn with winds; this phrase does not refer to the
hypocrites who pretended to believe and kept their disbelief hidden, caring for their worldly
interests, is order that they might get benefits from the believers - through their manifested belief
- and from the disbelievers through their hidden disbelief.

Of course, sometimes the Qur'an calls them hypocrites analytically, because both groups in their
inner selves are devoid of faith. It is separate from using the phrase: those in whose hearts is a
disease, for those whom are unbelievers pretending to believe. Allah says: Announce to the
hypocrites that they shall have a painful chastisement, those who take the unbelievers for
guardians rather than believers. Do they seek honor from them? Then surely all honor is for
Allah. And indeed He has revealed to you in the Book that when you hear Allah's
communications disbelieved in and mocked at, do not sit with them until they enter into some
other discourse; surely then you would be like them; surely Allah will gather together the
hypocrites and the unbelievers all in Hell. (4:138-40)

As for the words of Allah in the chapter of "The Cow": And there are some people who say: "We
believe in Allah and in the last day"; while they are not at all believers... There is a disease in
their hearts, so Allah added to their disease…And when it is said to them: "Believe as the people
have believed", they say: "Shall we believe as the fools have believed?"... (2:8-13); it goes on
describing their double-faced nature up to verse 20; and it gives a picture of their hearts’ journey
from doubt in truth to its denial; and declares that in the beginning they were diseased because
they wrongfully claimed to be believers while they were in doubt and had not believed yet; so
Allah added to their disease, until they perished because they disbelieved in truth and mocked it.

Allah has explained that the heart's disease, like that of the body, sometimes goes on increasing
until it becomes deep-rooted and chronic and ends in perdition; it happens when harmful things
are taken or done - which in this case is disobedience of Allah. Allah says: There is a disease in
their hearts, so Allah added to their disease... (2:10). And whenever a chapter is revealed, ...And
as for those in whose hearts is a disease, it adds uncleanness to their uncleanness and they die
while they are unbelievers. Do they not see that they are tried once or twice in every year, yet
they do not turn (to Allah) nor do they mind? (9:124-6). Then Allah comments in a general way:
Then evil was the end of those who did evil, because they rejected the signs of Allah and used to
mock them (30:10).

Allah then says that the cure of this disease is to believe in Him; as He says in a general way:
...their Lord will guide them by their faith;... (10:9). Also He says: To Him do ascend the good
words; and the good deed, lifts them up;... (35:10). Therefore, if a heart-patient wants to cure his
disease, he must repent and return to Allah; in other words, he must believe in Him and must
practice good thought and good deed, as the above-mentioned verse alludes to it: ...yet they do
not turn (to Allah) nor do they mind (9:126).

Allah has revealed a comprehensive statement on this subject in the chapter of "Women": O you
who believe! Do not take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers; do you desire that
you should give to Allah a manifest proof against yourselves? Surely the hypocrites are in the
lowest stage of the Fire, and you shall not find a helper for them; except those who repent and
amend and holdfast to Allah and are sincere in their religion to Allah; these are with the
believers, and Allah will grant the believers a mighty reward (4:144-6). It has been explained
that it means returning to Allah with belief, remaining steadfast on it and adhering to the Book
and the Sunnah,
and being sincere in all this.

End of discourse.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Whoever of you turns back from his religion,...: al-Irtidad
literally means to turn back. In Muslims' terminology, turning back from religion means
apostasy, forsaking belief for disbelief, no matter whether that belief was preceded by disbelief
or not. If an unbeliever accepts Islam and then apostatizes, he is called murtadd milli; if a born
Muslim turns back from Islam, he is called murtadd fitri. This terminology is either laid down by
the shari'ah or by the Muslims themselves.

It may appear at the first glance that the turning back in this verse denotes the terminological
meaning in which the Muslims use this word. As such the verse will have no connection with the
preceding verses. It would be an independent verse showing that Allah might dispense with
belief of one people replacing it with that of the others. But this likelihood is removed, when one
meditates on this and the preceding verses. The verse in fact makes the believers remember that
Allah has power that He should be worshipped in His earth, and He will soon bring there a
people who would not turn back from His religion, they would adhere to it to the end. He says:
...therefore if these disbelieve in it, We have (already) entrusted with it a people who are not
disbelievers in it (6:89). ...and whoever disbelieves, then surely Allah is Self-sufficient
(independent) of the worlds (3:97).... If you disbelieved, you and those on earth all together,
most surely Allah is Self-sufficient, Praised (14:8).
Such a sublime position does not demand more than paying attention to the basic theme, i.e.,
appraising them that Allah would bring a community of believers who would not turn back from
His religion. The other attributes that they shall love Allah and He shall love them, and that they
will be lowly before the believers and mighty against the unbelievers, etc. are additional
characteristics that have been described here keeping in view additional requirements of context
and condition.

Looking at it from another angle, we realize that the said attributes are not without some
connection with the theme of the preceding verses regarding befriending the Jews and the
Christians rather than the believers. Taking them as friends rather than the believers, shows a
certain inclination of heart towards them, a connection of love and affinity; and how could such a
polluted heart contain the love of Allah — as Allah says: Allah has not made for any man two
hearts within him;... (33:4).

This friendship would lead the believer to become lowly before the disbelievers and mighty
against the believers and show haughtiness before them, as Allah says:... Do they seek honor
from them? Then surely all honor is for Allah (4:139).

Another concomitant of this friendship is that they would show laxity in fighting against those
disbelievers and would shrink from jihad; they would not have any patience if they were
deprived of any comfort in the way of Allah, nor would they be ready to cut off all social
contacts with them. But Allah says: O you who believe! Do not take My enemy and your enemy
for friends: would you offer them love while they deny what has come to you of the truth, ...If you
go forth fighting in My path and seeking My pleasure, would you manifest love to them"?...
(60:1). Further Allah says: Indeed, there is for you a good example in Ibrahim and those with
him when they said to their people: "Surely we dissociate from you and from what you worship
other than Allah; we renounce you, and enmity and hatred have appeared between us and you
forever until you believe in Allah alone";... (60:4).

Likewise, irtidad, in its literal meaning, or by analytical process, is applicable to befriending the
disbelievers, as Allah has said in the preceding verse: and whoever amongst you takes them for a
friend, then surely he is one of them. Also He has said (in this context): ...and whoever does this,
he shall have nothing (to do) with Allah, .. (3:28); ...surely then you would be like them;...
(4:140).

The above discussion shows that the verse has some connection with the preceding ones; and it
makes it clear that Allah's religion does not need such people who are prone to fall into the pit of
disobedience and befriend the Jews and the Christians, because hypocrisy has crept into their
community, and now it contains a lot of people with diseased hearts. They sell religion for
worldly benefits, and covet the fallacious honor and transient influence rather than the honor and
power, which are reserved for Allah, His Messenger, and the believers. They do not care for the
real felicity, which covers life of this world as well as that of the next.

The verse expounds it by giving information about a future upheaval: If religion suffers from
unsteady capricious behavior of these people of weak faith who prefer love of other than Allah
over that of Allah, seek honor near enemies of Allah, show laxity in fighting in His way and fear
blames and admonition of His enemies, then certainly soon Allah will bring a people who shall
love Him and He shall love them; who shall be lowly before the believers, mighty before the
unbelievers, and who shall fight in the way of Allah and shall not fear the censure of any
censurer.

Although many exegetes were aware that the verse contains information of a future cataclysm,
and spent much time on deciding whom the verse should be applied to; yet they did not take
trouble to properly explain its wordings. As a result, they failed to correctly interpret the
attributes mentioned in it. Consequently, they treated the divine speech just like a human talk
which includes many a loop-holes and inaccuracies.

No doubt, the Qur'an uses the same words, which the Arabs did, and construction of its sentences
is not different from the usual Arab style - in short, its oratorical system is the same as the Arabs
of the time of revelation were familiar with. Yet it totally differs from other speeches in one
aspect: When we speak, no matter whether we are eloquent or not, we base our talk on the
meanings we understand, and our understanding is drawn from the social life which we have
created through our human social nature. This nature usually passes a judgment in accordance
with analogy. This opens before us the door of inexactitude and inaccuracy. We start saying 'Ali'
in place of 'most', and 'ever-lasting' instead of 'long-lasting'. We take an analogical statement as
unconditional truth; we confuse 'rare' with 'non-existent', and 'a little' with 'extinct'. We
unreservedly say: This is good, that is bad; this is liked, that is disliked; this is praiseworthy, that
is condemnable; this is beneficial, that is harmful; this man is noble, that one is evil, and so on.
We give unconditional judgment. But in reality it is correct only in some conditions, with some
assumptions, in view of a few people, in comparison to some things only - but not unreservedly.
However, we treat a few contrary situations as non-existent, thus showing a laxity in its
perception and the judgment. This concerns those items, which actually exist independently. As
for those things of which man is oblivious because of his limited perception of related matters,
they are even more numerous. Therefore, whatever man speaks about and about which he
assumes some knowledge and perception, is all based on inexactitude in some aspects, and
ignorance of others. If we could comprehend the reality and then tried to apply that speech on it,
we would find that it was merely a joke. Ponder on it.

This is the condition of human speech, which is based on the knowledge acquired by man. As for
the divine speech, it must be above such short-comings, because Allah encompasses all things in
His knowledge; and He says about His speech: Most surely it is a decisive word, and it is not a
jest (86:13-14).

And it guides us how we should explain the divine words without attaching to it any condition
when the said words are unrestricted and are not followed by any joint or separate condition; and
this is how we should look at the attributes mentioned therein as they point to the underlying
reason of the statement. When Allah says: He shall love them, then He shall not dislike them in
anything and in any manner - otherwise He would have attached an exception. And when He
praises them as being lowly before the believers, it implies that they would be lowly before them
because of their belief in Allah, and they would remain lowly in all conditions and in all
situations; otherwise it would not be a decisive word.
Of course, there are some attributes ascribed to a large group while in reality it applies to a select
band from among them - when both groups are united in a way that justifies such usage. Allah
says: And certainly We gave the Book and the Wisdom and the Prophecy to the Children of
Israel, and We gave them of the goodly things, and We made them excel the nations (45:16)....
He has chosen you and has not laid upon you any hardship in religion;... (22:78); You are the
best of the nations raised up for the (benefit of) men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the
wrong... (3:110); ...that you may be witnesses for the people and the Messenger may be a witness
for you... (2:143); And the Messenger cried out: "O my Lord! Surely my people have treated this
Qur'an as a forsaken thing. (25:30), apart from other verses which describe sociological
attributes which are found in individuals and society. Such expressions are not based on any
laxity; they are attributes ascribed to a part and the whole, to the society as well as to an
individual, because of some relevance. For example, we have a handful of earth containing a
gem; now we may say, there is earth in our hand; and equally truthfully it may be said that there
is a gem in our hand, and the real purpose is to take that gem.

Now, let us return to our original topic:

"O you who believe! Whoever of you turns back from his religion": As explained earlier, turning
back from religion here means taking the Jews and the Christians for a friend. The verse, like the
preceding one, is addressed to the believers. The main theme is to declare that the true religion
does not need such people's belief, which is polluted with love of the enemies of Allah. Allah has
counted such friendship as disbelief and polytheism, as He has said: and whoever amongst you
takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them. It is because Allah is the Guardian and
Helper of His religion, and as an aspect of His help to His religion, He will certainly bring a
people who will renounce the enemies of Allah, and love His friends and will not love any
except Him.

"then soon Allah will bring a people": Allah has ascribed the bringing to Himself to confirm the
meaning of His help to His religion. The context makes it clear that this religion has got a
Helper, besides Whom it does not need any helper - and that is Allah Himself.

The speech puts the help to religion given by these people vis-avis the national help sought by
those who love Allah's enemies. Likewise, the word, "people", and mention of their attributes
and related verbs in plural show that the people whose appearance is promised, will be a
community not one or two individuals. In other words, it does not say that Allah will bring in
every period a person who will love Allah and whom Allah will love, and who will be lowly
before believers and mighty before disbelievers, and who will fight in the way of Allah and will
not be afraid of the censure of any censurer.

Bringing of these people is attributed to Allah. It does not mean that He will create them,
because there is no creator except Allah. He has said: Allah is the Creator of everything...
(39:62). Rather this bringing connotes that it is He Who shall arouse them to take the opportunity
to help the religion; and shall enhance their honor by loving them and being loved by them; He
will help them in being lowly before His friends and mighty against His enemies, and in fighting
in His way and ignoring every censurer's comments. Therefore, their help to the religion is
Allah's help to it through them and by means of them. Whether this promise is implemented at
once or after sometime is all the same for Allah, although our mind because of its limitation
differentiates between nearness and farness.

"He shall love them and they shall love Him": Love is unrestricted with any attribute or
adjective; thus this mutual love is for 'person' only without any condition. They love Allah; it
follows that they give preference to their Lord over anything else, be it wealth, honor, family, or
other such things. They do not love anyone among the enemies of Allah; if they love any one, it
is reserved for the friends of Allah because of the love of Allah.

As for His love to them, it means that they are free from every injustice, clean of every spiritual
uncleanness, be it disbelief or sin. They attain this cleanness through divine protection, or
through divine forgiveness resulting from repentance. It is because Allah does not love any
injustice or sin as He says: ...then surely Allah does not love the unbelievers (3:32); ...and Allah
does not love the unjust (3:57); ...surely He does not love the extravagant (6:141); ...and Allah
does not love the mischief-makers (5:64); ...Surely Allah does not love those who exceed the
limits (2:190); ...surely He does not love the proud (16:23); ...surely Allah does not love the
treacherous (8:58); apart from other such verses.

These verses condemn all evils. When these evils are removed from man, as Allah's love to him
testifies, he will acquire their opposite virtues. After all man cannot be devoid of both
characteristics; he must compulsorily adhere to this side or that.

In short, they are the true believers whose belief is not tainted with injustice, and Allah has said:
Those Who believe and do not mix up their faith with injustice, those are they who shall have the
security and they are those who go aright (6:82). So, they are protected from going astray; and
Allah has said:... surely Allah does not guide him who leads astray,... (16:37). Thus, they are
under divine protection against every straying and are led by divine guidance onto His straight
path. They because of their faith - confirmed by Allah - are guided to following the Messenger
and total submission to him, as they have surrendered totally to Allah. Allah says: But no! By
your Lord! They do not believe until they make you a judge of that which has become a matter of
disagreement among them, and then do not find any straitness in their hearts as to what you
have decided and submit with total submission (4:65).

When they shall reach that stage, then the words of Allah shall be truly applicable to them: Say:
"If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you ..." (3:31) It also clearly proves that
following the Prophet (s.a.w.) and being loved by Allah are concomitants and inseparable;
whoever follows the Prophet, Allah loves him; and Allah does not love anyone unless he is a
follower of His Prophet (s.a.w.).

When they shall follow the Messenger, they will acquire every good, which Allah loves and is
pleased with, like piety, justice, magnanimity, patience, reliance on Allah, repentance, cleanness,
and other such virtues. Allah says: ...then surely Allah love the pious (3:76); ...surely Allah loves
the doers of good (2:195J; ...and Allah loves the patient (3:146); surely Allah loves those who
fight in His way in ranks as if they were a firm and compact wall (61:4); ...surely Allah loves
those who trust (in Him) (3:159);... surely Allah loves those who turn much (to Him), and He
loves those who purify themselves (2:222), apart from other such verses.

If you search and ponder on the verses which expound the effects of these qualities and their
concomitant virtues, you will come upon a great many good characteristics; and you will find
that all lead to the conclusion that the people having those virtues are the heirs who shall inherit
the earth, and for them will be the good end of the abode, as the verse under discussion (O you
who believe! Whoever of you turns back...) points to it; and Allah has stated it in a short but
comprehensive sentence: ...and the (good) end is for piety (20:132). We shall explain the
underlying theme of this verse in another relevant place, God willing.

QUR'AN: lowly before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers: al-Adhillah and al-a'izzah
are plurals of al-dhalil (lowly) and al- 'aziz (mighty) respectively. It is an allusion that they
should be gentle to the believers in respect to Allah Who is their friend and they are His friend;
and should not pay any attention to the false honor which the unbelievers manifest and to which
the divine religion does not attach any importance. Allah has guided His Prophet to this reality
when He has said: Do not strain your eyes after what We have given certain classes of them to
enjoy, and do not grieve for them, and make yourself gentle to the believers (15:88). Probably,
the preposition 'ala (on, over) has been used for adhillah (lowly) because it contains the meaning
of love and compassion or of bending down, as has been claimed.

QUR'AN: they shall strive hard in Allah's way and shall not fear the censure of any censurer;...:
Fighting in the way of Allah has been especially singled out from among their numerous virtues
because the context demanded it, as Allah has declared that He will raise them for helping His
religion. The phrase: "and shall not fear the censure of any censurer", is apparently a conditional
clause related to all preceding sentences and not with the immediately preceding one (they shall
fight in Allah's way), although it is the safest interpretation in such constructions. No doubt,
fighting in the way of Allah is often faced by the censurers’ censure who warns the believers that
if they went for jihad, they would be in danger of losing their wealth, lives, and would have to
bear untold hardships and difficulties. But the same is the case of being lowly before the
believers and mighty against the unbelievers. After all, the latter have, in their hands, worldly
embellishments, desirable luxuries, and necessities of life, which the believers do not have. And
if one turns away from those unbelievers, he invites censure of the censurers. Yet the true
believers do not fear such things.

The verse contains a prophecy of undesirable unseen events that were to appear in future, and we
shall discuss them, God willing, under "A Qur'anic-Cum-Traditional Discourse and Discussion".

Traditions
as-Suyuti writes under the verse: O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for
friends: Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir, Ibnu'l-Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Abu 'sh-Shaykh, Ibn Marduwayh,
al-Bayhaqi (in his ad-Dalail)and Ibn 'Asakir have narrated from 'Ubadah ibn al-Walid that
'Ubadah ibn as-Samit said, "When Banu Qaynuqa" fought the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.),
'Abdullah ibn Ubayy ibn Salul held fast to them and stood by them, while 'Ubadah ibn as-Samit
went to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and renounced their covenant before Allah and His
Messenger, he was from Banu 'Awf ibn al-Khazraj, and he had got a covenant with them just as
they had got a covenant with 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy; so ('Ubadah ibn as-Samit) renounced them
before the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and said, 'I love Allah and His Messenger and the
believers, and renounce before Allah and His Messenger the covenant of these unbelievers and
their friendship.'" (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The same book says that it was about 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy that these verses were revealed: O
you who believe! Do not take the Jews...then surely the party of Allah is they that shall be
triumphant (5:51 &56).

The same book says: Ibn Abi Shaybah and Ibn Jarir have narrated from 'Atiyyah ibn Sa'd that he
said, '"Ubadah ibn as-Samit (from Banu'l-Harith ibn al-Khazraj) came to the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.), and said, 'O Messenger of Allah! I have numerous friends among the Jews and I adhere
to Allah and His Messenger getting clear of the friendship of the Jews, and I love Allah and His
Messenger.' Then 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy said, 'I am a man who fears lest a calamity should befall
me, I shall not renounce the friendship of my guardians.' So the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said
to 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy, 'O Abu'l-Hubab! Do you think that what you have spoken of the Jews'
friendship is for you against 'Ubadah?' He said, Then I'll accept.' So Allah revealed (the
following) verses: O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and...and Allah will protect you
from the people;... (5:51-67)."

Again the same book narrates: Ibn Marduwayh narrates from Ibn 'Abbas that he said, '"Abdullah
ibn Ubayy ibn Salul accepted Islam; then he said, 'Surely there is a pact between me and Banu
Qurayzah and Banu 'n-Nadlr, and I fear calamities;' so he turned back and became an unbeliever.
And 'Ubadah ibn as-Samit said, 'I renounce the pact of Qurayzah and an-Nadir turning towards
Allah, and I love Allah and His Messenger.' Then Allah revealed: O you who believe! Do not
take the Jews and the Christians for friends;... So you will see those in whose hearts is a disease,
hastening in them, (i.e. 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy)... Only Allah is your Guardian and His Messenger
and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the zakat while they bow (i.e. 'Ubadah
ibn as-Samit and the companions of the Messenger of Allah, s.a.w.). He (Ibn 'Abbas) said
(reciting the verse): "And had they believed in Allah and the Prophet and what was revealed to
him, they would not have taken them for friends, but most of them are transgressors (5:81)."

The author says: This story has been narrated through other chains too. However, we have
repeatedly explained that such "reasons of revelation" are merely the personal opinions of
exegetes who have applied the stories to the verses that seemed somehow relevant. There are
other signs in them that point to this fact. How could these stories have caused revelation of these
verses, when they mention the Christians with the Jews, and there was no trace of Christians in
the events of Banu Qaynuqa' nor in the affairs of Banu Qurayzah or Banu 'n-Nadir? The Muslims
had no dealing with the Christians in all those happenings. And there is no reason justifying their
uncalled for inclusion in divine speech. There are many verses in the Qur'an describing the Jews'
condition in the happenings that had taken place between them and the Muslims. Also where it
deals with the hypocrites' meddling it particularly mentions the Jews and has not said anything
about the Christians, as for example in the chapter of "The Mustering" and others. So how can
we treat the mention of the Christians in these verses as uncalled for?

Moreover, the tradition says that not less than 17 verses (5:51-67) were revealed about 'Ubadah
ibn as-Samit and 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy. However:

First: These verses are not inter-connected, so that it may be claimed that they were revealed at
one go.

Second: There is among them the verse (of wilayah): Only Allah is your Guardian... (5:55), and
there are mutawatir traditions narrated by the Shi'ahs and Sunnis that it was revealed about 'Ali
(a.s.).

Third: There is also the verse (of balligh): O Messenger! Deliver what has been revealed to you
from your Lord... (5:67), and it has no connection with the narrated stories.

Apparently, the narrator looked at the story of 'Ubadah and 'Abdullah, and then found that some
of the above verses have some relevance to it; so he applied the story to the verses. There can be
no other explanation. However, the application was not done properly, as he put seventeen verses
in place of three, just because they all speak about the People of the Book.

as-Suyuti narrates, through Ibn Jarir and Ibnu'l-Mundhir, from 'Ikrimah that (he said), "The
verse: O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends
of each other, was revealed about Banu Qurayzah; when they committed treachery and broke the
pact they had made with the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), by writing to Abu Sufyan ibn Harb,
calling them and the Quraysh to enter into their fortresses. So the Prophet (s.a.w.) sent Abu
Lubabah ibn Abdu'l-Mundhir to them in order that he might urge them to come down from their
fortresses. When they agreed to come down, he pointed to his throat - meaning slaughter. At the
same time, Talhah and az-Zubayr were corresponding with the Christians and the Syrians. And I
have been told that some companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) were afraid of being afflicted with
poverty and indigence, so they corresponded with the Jews of Banu Qurayzah and Banu 'n-
Nadir, giving them news about the Prophet (s.a.w.), (expecting) to seek from them loan and
(other) benefits (afterwards). So they were forbidden it." (ad-Duru'l-manthur)

The author says: There is no difficulty in (accepting) this tradition. It explains the wilayah in
the verse as love and affinity, and the preceding discourse supports it. If that was really the
reason of revelation, then the verses are unrestricted and will also apply to other similar
situations; and if the tradition is merely an application, then the case are clear.

Majma 'u'l-bayan writes under the verse: O you who believe! Whoever of you turns back from
his religion, then soon Allah will bring a people He shall love them and they shall love Him. And
it has been said, They are: the Leader of the faithful 'Ali (a.s.) and his companions, when he
fought those who fought against him - the nakithin (pledge-breakers), the qasitin (deviators from
the truth), the mariqin (heretics). It has been narrated from 'Ammar, Hudhayfah and Ibn 'Abbas;
and it is also narrated from Abu Ja'far and Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.).

The author says: (at-Tabrisi) has written in Majma 'u'l-bayan after quoting the above tradition,
"This statement is supported by the fact that the Prophet had praised 'Ali (a.s.), with the very
attributes mentioned in the verse. He said about him when he called him to conquer Khaybar
(after dismissing previous standard-bearers one after the other when they came back accusing the
people of cowardice while the people accused them of the same), 'Surely, tomorrow I will give
the standard to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger, and Allah and His Messenger love
him; repeatedly attacking, never fleeing; he will not return until Allah gives victory on his hand;'
and then he gave the standard to him.

"As for the attributes of being gentle with the believers and hard against the unbelievers, and
waging war in the way of Allah, without being afraid of a censure of any censurer, nobody can
deny that 'Ali (a.s.), fully deserved these virtues. His jihad against polytheists and unbelievers is
well known, and everyone is aware of his strivings in strengthening of Islam and helping the
religion, as well as his gentleness before the believers. "It is also supported by the warning given
by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), to the Quraysh that 'Ali might fight them after him. It
happened when Suhayl ibn 'Amr came to him with a group; they said: 'O Muhammad! Our
slaves have come to you and you return them to us.' Thereupon, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.),
said, 'You should desist (from such behavior), O people of Quraysh! Otherwise, Allah will
certainly raise over you a man who will beat you on the interpretation of the Qur'an as I had
beaten you on its revelation.' Some of his companions said, 'who it is, O Messenger of Allah?
Abu Bakr?' He said, "No; rather it is the repairer of shoes inside the room. And 'Ali (a.s.) was
(then) repairing the shoes of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.).

"It has been narrated from 'Ali (a.s.), that he said on the day of Basrah, 'By Allah! The people of
this verse were not fought against till today;' then he recited this verse.

"And Abu Ishaq ath-Tha'labi has narrated in his at-Tafsir through his chain from az-Zuhri from
Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said, 'Will come
to me on the Day of Resurrection a group of my companions, and they will be removed from the
hawd; so I will say, "O my Lord! My companions, my companions"; and it will be said, "Surely
you do not know what they did after you, surely they fell back (from religion)."'"

What at-Tabrisi has written fits on 'Ali (a.s.). There is no doubt that he is the best example of the
attributes mentioned in the verse; but there is a question about its application on the whole group
who were with him in the battles of the Camel and Siffin, because many of them had changed
after that, while the words in the verse: He shall love them and they shall love Him, have come
without any exception, and you have known its meaning.

Also ath-Tha'labi says, "And it has been narrated that the Prophet (s.a.w.), was asked about this
verse, and he tapped his hand on Salman’s shoulder and said, 'He and his people.' Then he said,
'If the religion were fastened to the Milky Way, certainly some people from Persia would have
got it.'"

The author says: The comment mentioned above applies here also, except if it is taken to mean
that they would be raised from his people.

ath-Tha'labi goes on to record, "And it has been said that they are the people of Yemen. They are
most gentle-hearted, mildest in temper; the faith is Yemenite, and the wisdom is Yemenite.
'Ayad ibn Ghanam al-Ash'ari said, 'When this verse was revealed, the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) pointed to Abu Musa al-Ash'ari and said, "They are his people.'""
The author says: This theme has been narrated in ad-Durru l-manthur, through several chains;
and the preceding comment applies here too.

at-Tabari narrates through his chain from Qatadah that he said, "Allah revealed this verse and He
certainly knew that a group of people would soon apostatize; when Allah took away His Prophet
Muhammad (s.a.w.), most of the Arabs turned back from Islam except three mosques: people of
Medina, people of Mecca and people of Bahrain. They (i.e. the others) said, 'We shall pray but
we shall not pay zakat, and our wealth shall not be taken by force.' So Abu Bakr talked (with
companions) about it, and it was said to him, 'Surely if they had its knowledge they would pay it
and increased over it.' But he said, 'No, by Allah! I will not separate a thing which Allah has
joined; and if they refused (to give) a cord which Allah and His Messenger have made
compulsory, we should fight them for it.’ Then Allah raised a group with Abu Bakr, and he
fought on what the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.) had fought on, until he captured, killed and burned
into fire many people who had turned back from Islam and had refused zakat; and he fought
them until they agreed to pay zakat, with humility and inferiority...."

The author says: as-Suyuti has narrated it in ad-Durru l-manthur through 'Abd ibn Hamid, Ibn
Jarir, Ibnu'l-Mundhir, Abu 'sh-Shaykh, al-Bayhaqi and Ibn 'Asakir from Qatadah; and also from
ad-Dahhak and al-Hasan.

The wording of the narrative clearly testifies that it is merely an application based on personal
opinion. Therefore, the objections against previous narratives would also apply in this case.
These battles and fighting contain many happenings and affairs, and among the fighters were
people like Khalid ibn al-Walid, Mughrah ibn Shu'bah, Busr ibn al-Artah, and Sumrah ibn
Jundab. History records about them in these battles and in later days such injustice and sins
which do not leave any chance to apply to them the verse: He shall love them and they shall love
Him.. You should study history books and then ponder on the verse's meaning, which we have
given.

An exegete has indulged in such an exaggeration in this idea that he shows his astonishment on
someone's saying: 'The verse is more clearly applicable to the Ash'arites from Yemen than to
those who had fought the apostates.’ We append below a gist of his comments:

"The verse is general and covers all those who helped the religion from among those good
Muslims who had got the virtues mentioned in it; right from the believers during the time of the
Prophet (s.a.w.), to those who came after him; and it fits on all the previously mentioned
traditions, like the one saying that it is about Salman and his people (in spite of its weakness),
and the one that it concerns Abu Musa Ash'ari and his people, and the one that it is about Abu
Bakr and his companions. However, it does not fit on the tradition which says that the verse is
about 'Ali (a.s.), because the verse contains the word, people, and it is not used for one person, as
it is made for a group."

This is the gist of his opinion. It only shows that he has treated the divine speech with its praising
phrases, just like poetries in which the praise of the subjects is entirely based on imagination.
Whatever the poet can imagine, he applies it to his praised one, without caring whether it was
true or false, but Allah says: and who is truer of word than Allah? (4:122) Or he has taken it as
our usual talk, which is generally based on laxity and carelessness; and whenever somebody
objects on any such expression, we offer the excuse of indulgence. But Allah says: Most surely it
is a decisive word, and it is not a jest (86:13-14). You have understood from the preceding
explanation that if the verse is taken in its proper meaning with all the attributes that it contains,
it will be clear that its application has not appeared yet. Read that part again, think over it, and
then decide for yourself.

Even more astonishing is his comment at the end (that it does not fit on 'Ali because the word
people is not used for one person): Whoever has mentioned 'Ali, has said, "Ali and his
companions"; just as others have mentioned: Salman and his people, Abu Musa and his people,
and Abu Bakr and his companions. Likewise, the traditions about 'Ali (a.s.) - and some have
been mentioned earlier - speak about 'Ali and his companions. No one has said that it was
revealed for 'Ali (a.s.) alone, so that it could be said that the verse's wordings fit on a group, not
on an individual.

Of course ath-Tha'labi has written in his at-Tafsir that it was revealed about 'Ali (a.s.). Also it is
narrated in Nahju'l-bayan (of al-Shaybani) from al-Baqir and as-Sadiq (a.s.) that it was revealed
about 'Ali (a.s.). But looking at them in conjunction with other traditions, it becomes clear that
these too mean 'Ali and his companions who stood with him to help the religion in the battles of
the Camel, Siffin and the Khawarij.

Apart from that, there are a lot of traditions narrated through Sunni chains that the verse: Only
Allah is your Guardian and His Messenger and those who believe, those who keep up prayers...,
was revealed for 'Ali (a.s.) although it uses plurals.

Moreover, there is another objection on the traditions of Qatadah, ad-Dahhak and al-Hasan: The
verse: O you who believe! Whoever of you turns back from his religion, then soon Allah will
bring a people He shall love them and they shall love Him ..., very clearly shows that there shall
be an exchange and that Allah does not need these people who are present now; no matter
whether the verse is addressed to those who were present at the time of its revelation, or to the
combined group of those present and those not yet born. The aim is to declare to a group of
believers that if they all or some of them turned away from the religion, Allah shall soon bring in
their place a people He shall love them and they shall love Him - and obviously neither He does
love apostates nor they do love Him - and who shall have such and such good characteristics and
they shall help His religion.

It is clear that the promised group shall be different from the people who were present at the time
of revelation. But those who fought against the apostates so soon after the Prophet's death were
present at the time of revelation and it is they who were addressed with the clause: O you who
believe!... Therefore, the promise: soon Allah will bring a people He shall love them and they
shall love Him...;cannot be applied to them.

The verse runs on the line of the verse: ...and if you turn back He will bring in your place
another people, then they will not be like you (47:38).
an-Nu'mani narrates in his at-Tafsir, through his chain from Sulayman ibn Harun al-'Ijilli that he
said, "I heard Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), saying, 'Surely, the master of this matter has (companions)
reserved for him; if all the people went away, Allah would bring his companions; and it is they
about whom Allah, the Mighty, the Great, has said: ...therefore if these disbelieve in it, We have
already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it (6:89); and about them He has
said: then soon Allah will bring a people He shall love them and they shall love Him, lowly
before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers.

The author says: This connotation has been narrated by al-' Ayyashi and al-Qummi in their
books of tafsir.

A Qur'anic-Cum-Traditional Discourse and Discussion

We have repeatedly hinted previously that when Qur'an puts too much emphasis on a certain
topic, and imperatively asserts and goes to the utmost limit in affirming it, it gives an indication
that the causes and factors that were then present would surely join forces to push man to the
pitfalls of perdition and make him liable to the wrath of Allah. Look, for example, at the verses
of interest and of the love of the kindred, etc.

This inference springs from the nature of speech. When a wise speaker gives a simple and easy
to comply with order, and then goes to the extreme in emphasizing it; or when he addresses a
respected personality in a way that such people are not talked to in that manner (for example, a
divine scholar, deep-rooted in self-denial and worship is openly admonished not to commit
heinous debauchery), it shows that there is some hidden reason behind it, and that there lies
ahead a great dangerous situation and an imminent perdition.

The Qur'anic talks of this style were certainly followed by such events and happenings that
confirmed that allusion, or let us say, prophecy; although those who heard the verse on the day of
revelation probably were not aware of the hints and allusions it contained.

Look at how the Qur'an ordered people to love the Prophet's kindred, and how it emphasized it
until it was counted as the wage of messengership, and then see how the Muslims inflicted
calamitous oppressions and massacres on his family-members, to such an extent that if they were
ordered to do such things they could not do more.

The Qur'an forbade discord and disagreement, and emphasized this prohibition to the utmost
degree; and then the ummah was disunited and divided into so many sects that exceeded the
disunity of the Jews and the Christians. The Jews had divided into seventy one sects and the
Christians into seventy two, but the Muslim went to seventy-three sects. This was only in matters
of belief and theology; as for their divisions in social orders and political systems, etc., nobody
can fully compute it.
The Qur'an forbids judging by what Allah has not revealed. It prohibited creating discord
between various classes, and clearly told the ummah not to transgress the boundary or to follow
their low desires, etc. In spite of all this emphasis there happened what we all are aware of.

This prohibition of taking the unbelievers and the People of the Book as friends did not fare any
differently from other forcefully emphasized Qur'anic prohibitions. It may rather be said that no
other prohibition in the circle of the branches of religion reaches near this forbiddance. Its
importance was raised to such a level that Allah counted the friends of the People of the Book
and the unbelievers as being one of them: and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then
surely he is one of them; He declared that they are not from Allah: ...and whoever does this, he
shall have nothing (to do) with Allah,... (3:28); He warned them most forcefully, and said time
and again: ...and Allah cautions you of Himself;... (3:30); and we have explained under the verse
that it indicates that what they had been warned of, was bound to happen without any change.

If you want more clarification then think over the verses 111 and 113 of chapter 11 (Hud): Allah
has before that given the stories of the peoples of Nuh, Hud, Salih and others and described the
discord of the Jews in their books. Then He says: And your Lord will most surely pay back to all
their deeds in full; surely He is aware of what they do. Stand fast then (in the right path) as you
are commanded, as also he who has turned (to Allah) - Note that the address is to the community
- and be not inordinate (O men!), surely He sees what you do. Now, ponder on the next verse:
And do not incline to those who are unjust, lest the Fire touch you, and you have no guardians
besides Allah, then you shall not be helped.

The verse is unrestricted and, therefore, the fire shall touch them in this world too before the
next; and He has threatened them by the clause: and Allah cautions you of Himself; this touching
of the Fire is explained in the verse: ...This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your
religion, so fear them not, and fear Me.... (5:3). It makes it clear that what the believers were
afraid of regarding their religion, until this verse was revealed, from the disbelievers, i.e. the
polytheists and the People of the Book, now they are safe from it; therefore, they should not fear
them about their religion; rather they should fear their Lord. What were they afraid of regarding
their religion from the disbelievers? It was because they were aware that the only goal that the
disbelievers had before their eyes was to extinguish the light of religion, and to snatch away this
precious commodity from their hands by any means available. They were under this
apprehension before today; but revelation of the chapter of "The Table" brought a feeling of
security to them, and their hearts became tranquil. Even so, they should fear their Lord, lest He
takes away their light and deprives them of their religion.

It is known that Allah does not inflict any misfortune or punishment on any people unless they
fully deserve it. He says: This is because Allah never change a bounty which He has conferred
upon a people until they change their own condition;...(8:53). Thus, He made it clear that His
changing of bounty does not take place unless the people concerned deserve it, which is then
followed by change of bounty. Allah has called religion or religious guardianship a favor or
bounty, as He says soon after it: This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed
My favor on you and chosen for you
Islam as religion.

If this favor is changed it is through their own agency. It is expected that they would go out of
divine protection by cutting relation from Him, inclining towards the unjust people and taking
the disbelievers and the People of the Book for friends. It is incumbent on them to fear Allah
concerning their selves, - fearing His wrath which nobody can avert; He has threatened them of it
in these words and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them;
surely Allah does not guide the unjust people (5:51). Allah in these words has declared that He
will not guide them to their felicity; and it is this felicity with which guidance is connected. Their
felicity in the world means that they would live on religious tradition and general Islamic custom
in their society.

When the structure of this system comes down, its manifest bearings are disrupted, like enjoining
the good and forbidding the evil, which had preserved its real meaning; general Islamic practices
give way to disbelievers' traditions; this un-Islamic behavior gradually takes firm roots and is
permanently established - and this is the situation of Muslims' society in these days.

Ponder on general Islamic behavior arranged by the Book and the Sunnah, which they try to
establish among the Muslims. Then look at this corrupt behavior burdened over the Muslims'
shoulders today. Lastly think over the divine words: then soon Allah will bring a people He shall
love them and they shall love Him, lowly before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers,
they shall fight in Allah's way and shall not fear the censure of any censurer (5:54). Then you
will realize that all the evils which have today encompassed our Muslim society, and have taken
deep roots - that we had borrowed from the unbelievers and then it has grown and generated - are
the opposites of what Allah has mentioned as the attributes of the people whose appearance He
has promised. In other words, all our bad characteristics are encapsulated in the fact that our
people today do not love Allah, nor does He love them, they are lowly before the unbelievers,
haughty against the believers; they do not fight in Allah's way and fear the censure of every
censurer.

It was this degeneration that the Qur'an had read in those people's faces. You may say that it was
a news of the unseen which the knowing God had given the Prophet (s.a.w.): That the Islamic
society will turn back from the religion; it would not be the terminological apostasy; rather it
would be a degradation for which Allah says: and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend,
then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people (5:51); And had they
believed in Allah and the Prophet and what was revealed to him, they would not have taken them
for friends, but most of them are transgressors (5:81).
Allah had promised to help them if they would help Him, and to weaken their enemies if the
Muslim themselves did not strengthen and help them. He says: ...If you help Allah, He will help
you (47:7); ...and if the People of the Book had believed, it would have been better for them; of
them (some) are believers and most of them are transgressors. They shall by no means harm you
but with a slight distress; and if they fight you they shall turn (their) backs to you, then they shall
not be helped. Abasement is brought down upon them wherever they are found, except under a
protection from Allah and a protection from men... (3:110-12). It is not far-fetched to infer from
the words: except under a protection from Allah and a protection from men, that they could
come out of that abasement if they established friendship with people or if Allah gave them
mastery over people.

Then Allah promised the Muslim society - and we have seen its condition - that He shall bring a
people that He shall love them and they shall love Him, lowly before the believers, mighty
against the unbelievers, they shall fight in Allah's way and shall not fear the censure of any
censurer.

These attributes, which Allah has ascribed to them, are the very characteristics that the today's
Islamic society does not have. If you ponder on them, you may infer the detail of the evils, which
the verse alludes, shall soon afflict the Islamic society.

Those evils are enumerated in a lot of traditions giving the news of the upheavals of the last
days; they are narrated from the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.). Despite
their great numbers, on the whole they are not free from the defects of interpolation and
alteration; yet among them are traditions whose authenticity is confirmed by subsequent events
and happenings. Those traditions are recorded in the books compiled by ancient scholars a
thousand years or more before our time. Their authorship is established and people have been
quoting from them during all that period.

Moreover, those traditions spoke about such events and happenings that had not taken place at
that time, nor had the people in those days ever expected such things to happen. Therefore, we
have no option but to admit their authenticity and accept that they have come from the fountain-
head of revelation.

For example, al-Qummi has narrated in his at-Tafsir, from his father, from Sulayman ibn Muslim
al-Khashshab, from 'Abdullah ibn Jarih al-Makki, from 'Ata' ibn Abi Riyah, from 'Abdullah ibn
'Abbas that he said: "We performed hajj - the Last Pilgrimage - with the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.), and then he took hold of the door of Ka'bah, thereupon he (stood) facing us said, 'May I
inform you of the Signs of the Day of Resurrection?' Salman al-Farisi (r.a.), who was the nearest
of all there, replied, 'Surely, O Messenger of Allah!'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Verily, amongst the Sings of the Hour is that people will
neglect the prayer (i.e., will not pray at all, or will pray without fulfilling its conditions, or will
not pray in the preferred time), and will follow their own desires (desires will supersede the
commands of Allah, they will follow only those rules which will appeal to them, and will leave
other rules), and will incline towards their own preferences, and will respect the wealthy people
(forgetting the Islamic criterion of honor, i.e., piety), and will sell the religion for worldly
benefits (for example, the greed of worldly riches will instigate them to go to such places where,
they very well know, it would be difficult to observe religious commands); at that time the heart
and soul of the believer will melt (from grief) as salt melts in water, because he will see the
unlawful things (and actions) and will not be able to change them.'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! At that
time their rulers will be tyrant, the ministers transgressors, the leaders unjust and the trustees
embezzlers.'

"Salman (r.a.), said: 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! Verily
at that time evil will become virtue, and virtue will become evil; embezzlers will be trusted, and
trustworthy people will be thought untrustworthy; and the liars will be authenticated, and the
truthful one will be considered a liar.'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! At that
time, women will be rulers and concubines will be consulted; (it may mean the governments of
the women and/or the domination of women over their husbands - so much so that the husbands
will not, or cannot, ask them to remain within the limits of the shari'ah, leaving them free to go
wherever they want in whatever clothes they like) and the children will sit upon minbars
(pulpits). (It may mean that children will sit upon pulpit of the Prophet even though they cannot
appreciate the sanctity of the minbar. Or it may mean that such people will ascend the pulpit who
will not deserve such honor. The minbar was created for delivering the commands of Allah to
His servants. Its only purpose was to enjoin good and to forbid evil, and later on the narration of
the tragedy of Karbala' was included in it, because the fadilah (superiority) and sufferings of the
Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.) are important parts of religion. If someone wants to exhort others to do good,
he must sincerely follow the shari'ah himself; and if he wants to forbid others from doing evil,
he, first of all, must abstain from the sins himself. Unfortunately, nowadays anyone who can
recite a few poems of Iqbal or Rumi, and who is unrestrained enough to invent fadail and masaib
of the Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.) on the spur of the moment, is given the titles al-'allamah, mawlana and
dhakir and is offered heavy fee to demonstrate his oratorical power, even if he shaves his beard,
even if he knows nothing about Qur'an and Hadith, even if he expresses his own opinions against
the sayings of the Holy Prophet and the Imams (peace be on them all), even if he uses the pulpit
to mislead the masses); and the lie will be considered as cleverness; and zakat will be (disliked)
as fines; and the booty of war will be like personal property (or in present days' context, public
property will be squandered as personal property); and man will be tyrant to his parents and
generous to his friend; and at that time comets will appear.'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! At that
time woman will become a partner of her husband in trade; (it means, more probably, that she
will help her husband in the shop, acting as sales-girl, accountant and what not); and the rain will
be very hot; (its meaning is not clear yet. Does it mean radioactive rain?), and virtuous people
will remain very sorrowful; and the poor person will be humiliated; at that time, the markets will
come nearer; (it has already happened, thanks to the fantastic developments in the means of
communications, like teleprinters, fax and internet. A man sitting in New York buys and sells in
Tokyo). Then this will say. "I did not sell anything" and that will say, "I did not get any profit".
Thus, you will see none who is not complaining against Allah.'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes; By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! And
then it will happen that their rulers will be such people that if they talked, they would kill them
and if they remained silent, they would confiscate their wealth, would put their honor under their
feet and would shed their blood - and the people's hearts will fill with fear; then you will not find
anyone but that he would be afraid, fearful, awed and in terror.'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! Verily
at that time some things will be brought from the East, and some things from the West, and my
ummah (Muslims) will be dyed in them. (It means that un-Islamic behavior and character will be
imported from the East and the West and Muslims will imitate those things and will be dyed in
un-Islamic color.) Then woe be unto the weaker people of my ummah from them; and woe be
unto those (un-Islamic agents) from Allah. They will not have mercy upon the little ones and will
not respect the old ones; and will not pardon anyone who committed a mistake. Their bodies will
be of human beings, and their hearts will be of Satans.'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! And at
that time males will satisfy their lust with males; and females will satisfy their lust with females;
and minor boys will be mounted upon like the women; and the males will liken themselves to
females (i.e., will look like females); and females will look like males. (The clean-shaved faces
and long hair on one side, and pants and bell-bottoms on the other are proof of the fulfillment of
this forecast), and females will ride the saddles (i.e., horses, cycles, scooters and motor-cycles).
So there will be curse of Allah upon those women of my ummah.'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! Verily,
at that time mosques will be decorated (by gold, etc.) as are synagogues and cathedrals; and the
(copies of the) Qur'an will be beautified (with designs and golden colors, etc.); and the minarets
(of the mosques) will be high, and the lines of the people standing in prayers will increase but
their hearts will be hating each other and their talks will be different from each other, (i.e.,
though the external show of religion will be on the increase, the spirit of religion will disappear.
Even when they will pray together, the Islamic brotherhood and unity will be absent. They will
hate each other; they will not speak with one voice.)'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! At that
time males will use golden ornaments. (In many marriages, bridegroom wears golden ring. I
wonder why it is thought necessary to start the married life by defying the command of Allah.
Will such willful affront to religion bring the blessings of Allah and the Fourteen Ma'sumin
(a.s.), upon the newly-weds?); and they (the males) will wear silk and (people) will use cheetah-
skins.'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! And at
that time "interest" will appear (everywhere), and people will deal with (the help of) backbiting
and bribe; and the Religion will be suppressed, and the world (worldly affairs) will be raised (in
importance).'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! At that
time, divorce will increase. And the hudud (punishments of various crimes and sins prescribed in
Islam) of Allah will not be established (i.e., the penal code given by Allah will not be followed,
as is the case nowadays). But it will not do any harm to Allah. (It will harm them only; they will
suffer.)'
"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! And at
that time will appear female singers and musical instruments ("will appear" means "will be
openly used"); and will rule upon them most evil of my ummah (worst people will rule upon the
Muslims).'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! And at
that time the rich of my ummah will go to pilgrimage for recreation, and the middle class for
trade (What about foreign exchange, gold, watches and radios?), and the poor to show off. Thus,
at that time, there will be people who will learn the Qur'an for other than Allah (i.e., for earning
worldly benefits) and will treat the Qur'an as musical instrument (as is happening today in
Islamic countries where the Qur'an is recited on the radios, not to make people follow the
religious commands, but just to entertain the listeners).'

'And there will be people who will study religion for other than Allah (i.e., for earning prestige
or wealth, as is happening today when the main purpose of religious studies in many circles is to
become a good orator, so that higher and higher fees may be demanded from the audience) and
the number of illegitimate children will increase; and people will sing the Qur'an, and will fall
upon one another in greed of the worldly (riches).'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! This
will happen when honours will be defiled, and sins will be committed, and the evil people will
have authority upon good people, and falsehood will be prevalent, and disputes will appear (talks
will be full of obstinacy), and poverty will be wide-spread and people will be proud of their
clothes (fine clothes will be the criterion of greatness), and there will be rains at wrong times;
and they will like chess and gambling apparatus and musical instruments; and will dislike
enjoining the good and forbidding the evil; so much so that the (true) believer will, at that time
have less respect than a slave-girl; and the reciters (of the Qur'an) and those who spend their time
in worshipping God will blame each other. (Mudslinging amongst apparently religious people is
not an uncommon sight nowadays.) Those are the people who will be called unclean and filthy in
the kingdom of heavens.'
"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! At that
time the rich will not fear (anything) except the poor so much so that a beggar will continue
begging between two Fridays and will not find anyone putting anything in his hands.'

"Salman (r.a.), said, 'And is this to happen, O Messenger of Allah?'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Yes, By (Allah) in Whose hand is my soul, O Salman! At that
time will talk Ruwaybidah.'

"Salman asked, 'And what is Ruwaybidah? O Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be
made your ransom!'

"The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), said, 'Such persons will talk about public affairs who had not talked
in such matter before. Then in a short time chaos will appear upon earth, and every nation will
think that chaos was only in their land (but it will cover the whole world).

"They will remain in that condition so long as Allah would wish them to remain; then the earth
will throw out the pieces of its heart -gold, silver and other minerals' - (Then the Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.), pointed towards the pillars, and said) 'like these (in size), but on that day neither gold
nor silver will be of any benefit to anyone. And this is the meaning of the words of Allah: So
surely did come its (i.e., qiyamah's) Signs (47:18)."' (Biharu'l-anwar, vol.3).

(al-Kulayni) narrates in ar-Rawdatu'l-Kqfi, from Muhammad ibn Yahya, from Ahmad ibn
Muhammad, from some of his companions. Also 'Ali ibn Ibrahim narrates from his father, from
Ibn Abi 'Umayr; both from Muhammad ibn Abi Hamzah, from Humran that he said: "Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.), said - when it was mentioned before him about those (in power), and the bad
condition of the Shi'ahs near them - 'I (once) went with Abu Ja'far al-Mansur, and he was in his
procession. He was on a horse, and before him and behind him were many horses (i.e. riders);
and I was at his side on a donkey. So he said to me, "O Abu 'Abdillah! It were proper if you had
been glad at the power Allah had given us and the honor He had opened to us; and you should
not tell people that you and your family have more right for this affair (i.e. caliphate) than we
have - thus inciting us against yourself and them.'" "He (the Imam), said, 'So I told him,
"Whoever has brought it to you from me is a Her." He said to me, "Do you swear (by Allah) for
what you have said?1" He (the Imam) said, 'I said, "Surely the people are enchanters, i.e., they
desire to turn your heart against me, therefore you should not listen to them, because we have
more need of you than you have of us." Then he (al-Mansur) said, "Do you remember the day I
asked you, 'Is there any kingdom (decreed) for us?' And you said, 'Yes. Long, wide, strong; you
will continue in respite in your affair and spaciousness in your world, until you afflict us with a
sacred blood in a sacred month in a sacred town?’ " ' He (the Imam) said, 'So I knew that he has
memorized the hadith, and I said, "May be Allah will suffice you, because I had not said it
particularly for you, it was only a hadith which I had narrated, then may be some other person
from your family would do it." So he became silent.
" 'When I returned to my residence, one of our followers came to me and said, "May I be made
your ransom! By Allah! I saw you in the procession of Abu Ja'far; you rode a donkey and he was
on a horse, and he talked to you looking down on you as you were under him. So I thought in my
mind: 'He is the Allah's proof on the creation, and the master of this authority who is followed,
while this other one commits oppression, murders the children of the prophets and indulges in
bloodshed in the earth which Allah does not love; and yet he is in his procession and you are on a
donkey.’ This created such a doubt in my heart that I was afraid about my religion and my life."

"The Imam (a.s.), said, 'I said to him, "Had you seen the angels who were around me, before and
behind me, and on my right and left, you would have looked at him and his splendor with
disdain." Then (the follower) said, "Now I am satisfied."

" 'Then he asked, "Up to how long will they continue to rule? When will release from them
come?" I said, "Don't you know that there is a (fixed) term for everything?" He said, "Yes." Then
I said, "Will it benefit you to know that when this thing came it would be quicker than the
twinkling of an eye? If you were to know what and how was their condition before Allah, the
Mighty the Great, you would most forcefully hate them; and if you and all the inhabitants of the
earth were to strive to make them enter into the most serious sin they do, they would not be able
to do so. So the Satan should not unsettle you, because honor is only for Allah, and His
Messenger, and the believers, but the hypocrites do not know. Don't you know that whoever
waits for our affair (power), and remains patient on what he experiences of harm and fear, he
will be tomorrow in our group?

"'"So when you see:

- that truth has died and truthful people have gone;

- that oppression has encompassed towns;

- that the Qur'an has become old and such things have been innovated in it, which were not
therein, and it is interpreted according to desires;

- that religion has retreated as water goes back in its hole;

- that people of falsity tower over people of truth;

- that evil is manifested, and not forbidden; and evil men are absolved from guilt;

- that sin is wide-spread;

- that men  content themselves with men, and women with women;
- that the believer is silent, his words are not accepted;

- that the sinner speaks untruth and his falsity and lie is not rebutted;

- that the younger looks at the elder with disdain;

- that relationships are cut off;

- that the one who is praised for sin, laughs at it and does not refute it;

- that a boy offers what a woman offers;

- that women marry women;

- that praise has increased;

- that man spends wealth in other than Allah's obedience and he is not forbidden nor his hand
caught;

- that an onlooker seeks protection of God from the endeavors of a believer;   

- that neighbor troubles his neighbor and nobody stops him;

- that the unbeliever is glad with the condition he sees the believer in, happy on the mischief he
sees in the earth;

- that intoxicants are drunk openly and gather on it those who do not fear Allah, the Mighty the
Great;

- that enjoiner of good is humiliated;

- that sinner (committing) what Allah does not like, is powerful, praised;

- that people of Qur'an and hadith are disdained, and so is the one who loves them;

- that the path of good is closed; and the path of evil well-trodden;

- that the House of Allah is abandoned and order is given to leave it;

- that man says what he does not do;

- that man are desirous of men and women of women;

- that a man lives on the earning of his posterior, and a woman on that of her vulva;

- that women hold gatherings (of amusements) like men;

- that femininity has appeared in the Children of 'Abbas, they use hair-dye and comb (their hair)
as a woman combs (i.e. makes herself up) for her husband;

- that men are given wealth for their genitals, people vie with each other for a man, and jealousy
is shown about men;

- that a wealthy person is more honoured than a believer;

- that interest is openly (taken and given), without any shame;

- that women get praised for fornication;

- that woman cajoles her husband to establish sexual relations with men;

- that most of the people - and the best household - are those who help (their) women in their
sins;

- that the believer is sorrowful, humiliated and disdained;

- that innovations and fornication are wide-spread;

- that people give credence to false witnesses;

- that unlawful is made lawful, and lawful is made unlawful;

- that religion is (explained) by opinion, and the Book and its laws are suspended;

- that people do not wait for night (to commit their debaucheries) because of their boldness
against Allah;

- that a believer has no power to negate (an evil) except in his heart;

- that a great many wealth is used in (things that bring) the wrath of Allah, the Sublime, the
Mighty;
- that the rulers bring the disbelievers nearer to themselves and keep the good people at distance;

- that the (rulers and) judges take bribe for judgement;

- that rulership is given to whoever increases his bid;

- that women of prohibited degrees are married, and are thought sufficient;

- that man is killed on suspicion and on insinuation;

- that man shows jealousy for man and spends his soul and wealth on him;

- that man is put to shame for his going to the women;

- that man eats from his wife's earning through debauchery - he knows it and stands for it;

- that a woman subdues her husband, and does what he does not want, and spends on her
husband;

- that a man leases his wife or maid on hire, and is pleased with food and drink of inferior
quality;

- that too much of false oaths are sworn in the name of Allah, the Sublime, the Mighty;

- that gambling is widespread, and intoxicant is openly sold, without any hindrance;

- that women offer themselves to the unbelievers;

- that (instruments of) amusements have spread, people pass by them but no one stops anyone,
nor anyone dares to stop them;

- that a noble person is humiliated by someone whose power people are afraid of;

- that nearest person to the rulers is the one who is praised for abusing us, the Ahlu'l-Bayt;

- that the one who loves us is accused of lying and his evidence is rejected;

- that people compete with one another in falsehood;

- that listening to the Qur'an has become a burden for the people; while listening to falsehood is
(considered) refreshing;

- that a neighbour shows respect to his neighbour for fear of his tongue;

- that the divinely prescribed punishments are suspended; and deeds are (done) according to
desires;

- that mosques are embellished;

- that the most truthful man in the eyes of the people is the one who is a Her, caluminater;

- that evil has gained ground as well as hastening with slander;

- that wrong has spread;

- that backbiting is enjoyed and people greet each other with it;

- that hajj and jihad are sought for other than Allah;

- that the sultan humiliates a believer to please a disbeliever;

- that ruin is changed to structure;

- that man earns his livelihood by giving short measure and weight;

- that bloodshed is considered unimportant;

- that man seeks leadership for the sake of the world; and makes himself notorious for evil
tongue in order that he is feared and entrusted with the affairs;

- that prayer is disdained;

- that man has a lot of wealth, which he has not paid zakat of since he became its owner;

- that dead body is exhumed from its grave, is troubled and its shroud is sold;

- that disturbance has increased;

- that a man remains intoxicated in evenings and mornings, without caring for the people's
condition;
- that cattle are abused sexually;

- that cattle gore one another;

- that man goes to his place of prayer and returns without any of his clothes on him;

- that people's hearts have become hard and their eyes are dry, and remembrance (of Allah)
weighs heavily on them;

- that unlawful earning is spread and vied for;

- that one prays to show the people;

- that a faqih learns jurisprudence for other than religion, seeking the world and leadership;

- that people attach themselves to whoever gains ascendancy;

- that one who seeks his livelihood through lawful means is criticized and put to shame; and one
who seeks it through unlawful means is praised and respected;

- that in Mecca and Medina things are done which Allah does not like (but) no one stops them
nor anyone puts obstacles between those evils and their doers;

- that instruments of amusements are openly used in Mecca and Medina;

- that if a man speaks some truth, enjoins good, and forbids evil, someone stands up to admonish
him and says: 'It is no concern of yours';

- that people look at each other and follow the people of evil;

- that the path of good and its way is empty, nobody uses it;

- that a dead body is shaken and nobody feels pity for it;

- that every year innovation and evil takes place more than it was before;

- that people and gatherings do not follow except rich ones;

- that a needy person is paid for being laughed at, and is shown mercy for other than Allah's
sake;
- that nobody is afraid of the heavenly signs;

- that people cohabit together like cattle; nobody forbids a bad thing for fear of people;

- that man spends a lot in other than Allah's obedience, and refuses a small amount in Allah's
obedience;

- that disobedience of parents is wide-spread and parents are disdained; they (live) with the child
in the most wretched condition, and he is glad if they are slandered;

- that women have taken possession of the kingdom and gained ascendancy over everything,
nothing is done except what they desire;

- that a son slanders his father and invokes God against his parents and becomes happy on their
death;

- that if a day passes for a man in which he did not commit a great sin - debauchery, giving short
weight or measure, fornication, or drinking intoxicants - he would remain depressed and
melancholy, thinking that that day of his life was a loss;

- that the sultan hoards food-stuff (with intention of increasing the price);

- that the money (Allah has given to the Prophet's) kindred is distributed in wrong ways, and
used  in gambling and drinking intoxicants;

- that intoxicants are used for medicine, and are prescribed to patients and cure is sought in them;

- that all people are equally guilty of abandoning enjoinment of good and forbiddance of evil;
they do not consider it a part of religion;

- that hypocrites live in clover and the people of truth are in oblivion;

- that adhan is given on wages, and prayer is led on wages;

- that the mosque is full of people who do not fear Allah, and have gathered there for backbiting
and eating the flesh of the people of truth, and describe to one another (various kinds of)
intoxicants;

- that an intoxicated person leads the people in prayer without understanding anything;

- that intoxication is not disgraced, and when a man is drunk, he is accorded respect and is
feared, he is left without punishment and excuse is found for his intoxication;

- that the one who eats orphans' property is praised for his goodness;

- that the judges judge contrary to what Allah has ordered;

- that the rulers have trust in embezzlers for greed;

- that the rulers have allotted the inheritance to sinners who are audacious against Allah; they
take (something) from them and leave them to do whatever they like;

- that the pulpits are used to enjoin piety, but the speaker himself does not do what he enjoins;

- That prayer's times are given no importance;

- that sadaqah is (given) on recommendation, not for the sake of Allah, and is paid in pursuit of
people;

- that people's only concern is their stomachs and their genitals, they do not care what they eat
and with whom they cohabit;

- that the world is advancing towards them;

- that the standards of truth have become faded;

then be on guard, and seek deliverance from Allah, the Sublime, the Mighty; and be sure that
the people are under the wrath of Allah, the Sublime, the Mighty, and He is giving them respite
only for something intended for them; so remain anticipating and strive hard that Allah should
see you in a condition contrary to theirs. Then if chastisement is sent down to them and you are
among them, you will hasten to the mercy of Allah; and if you are delayed, they shall be put on
trial and you shall be out and away from the insolence against Allah, the Mighty, the Great, in
which they are entangled. And know that surely Allah does not waste the reward of the doers of
good, and surely Allah's mercy is near to the doers of good (9:120 & 7:56).'""

The author says: There are numerous traditions narrated from the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the
Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.) of these connotations. The two ahadith we have quoted above are
most comprehensive of all. Those traditions expounding the condition of the last days give a sort
of detail of what is contained in the noble verse: O you who believe! Whoever of you turns back
from his religion, then soon Allah will bring a people He shall love them and they shall love
Him, lowly before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers, they shall fight in Allah's way
and shall not fear the censure of any censurer...
And Allah knows better.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 55-

56
 
َ‫} َو َمن يَتَ َو َّل هّللا َ َو َرسُولَهُ َوالَّ ِذين‬55{ َ‫صالَةَ َوي ُْؤتُونَ ال َّز َكاةَ َوهُ ْم َرا ِكعُون‬ ْ ُ‫إِنَّ َما َولِيُّ ُك ُم هّللا ُ َو َرسُولُهُ َوالَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬
َّ ‫وا الَّ ِذينَ يُقِي ُمونَ ال‬
ْ
}56{ َ‫ب ِ هُ ُم الغَالِبُون‬ ‫هّللا‬ ْ
َ ‫آ َمنُوا فَإ ِ َّن ِح ْز‬
{55} Only Allah is your Guardian and His Messenger and those who believe, those who keep up
prayers and pay zakat while they bow. {56} And whoever takes Allah and His Messenger and
those who believe for a Guardian, then surely the party of Allah are they that shall be triumphant.
 

General Comment
The two verses, as you see, are placed between the verses, which prohibit taking the People of
the Book and the unbelievers for a helper or guardian. That is why a group of Sunni exegetes has
tried to join these two with the preceding and following verses in a single context; they have
taken the whole group in one connotation, aiming to describe the believers' responsibility
regarding people's wilayah (in the meaning of helping), and prohibition of taking the Jews, the
Christians and the unbelievers as a helper. It confines the wilayah to Allah, His Messenger, and
those believers who establish prayers and pay the zakat while they are bowing - they indeed are
true believers. Thus it excludes the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease; leaving the
true believers whose wilayah is incumbent. The verse gives the same import that is shown by a
collection of such verses as: ...and Allah is the Guardian of the believers (3:68); The Prophet has
a greater claim on the believers than they have on themselves...(33:6); (and about the believers
that)... these are guardians of each other;... (8:72); And (as for) the believing men and the
believing women, they are guardians of each other, ...(9:71). (According to these exegetes) the
verse under discussion makes Allah, His Messenger and the believers awliya' (here meaning
helpers) of the believers.

However, there remains the difficulty of the circumstantial clause, "while they bow", which is
attached to the clause, and pay zakat. They have tried to remove this difficulty by taking the
bowing in a metaphorical sense, i.e., they submit themselves to Allah; or they are financially in a
low position, etc. The verse then would mean: The Jews, the Christians and the hypocrites are
not your guardian; rather your Guardians are Allah, His Messenger and those believers who keep
up prayers and pay zakat, and they in all this surrender themselves to Allah with total obedience
or, they pay zakat while they themselves are poor and in straitened condition.

This was the explanation given by them. But if you ponder on, and look minutely at the two
verses and the ones surrounding them, and then at the general position of this chapter, you will
reach at a conclusion different from what they have said.
The first thing which goes out of window is their claim that all these verses were in a single
context, and that their aim was to describe the wilayah of helping and to differentiate between
genuine and false help.

Yet, although it is accepted that the chapter was revealed during the last days of the Messenger
of Allah' (s.a.w.) in the Last Pilgrimage; but it is also accepted that all its verses were not
revealed together in one go; the chapter contains verses which were doubtlessly revealed before
that time, and their meanings clearly show it; also their narrated reasons of revelation support
their earlier revelation. If a verse is placed before or after a verse it does not give an indication
that their context is one; nor does some affinity between one verse and another show that they
were revealed together or in one context.

Moreover, the preceding verses (0 you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for
friends... ) forbid the believers to befriend the Jews and the Christians, and put to shame the
hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease for hastening to them and looking after their
interests, without addressing the Jews and the Christians or talking to them. And the following
ones (0 you who believe! Do not take for guardians those who take your religion for a mockery
and a joke, from among those who were given the Book before you and the unbelievers;... Say:
"0 People of the Book! Do you find fault with us (for aught) except that we believe in Allah...,
and that most of you are transgressors), prohibit taking them for guardians and expose their
condition by ordering to talk to them and put them to shame for hypocrisy and transgression.
Thus the aims in the two sets of verses are quite different from each other. So, how the context
can be the same?

Apart from that you have seen in the commentary of preceding verses (0 you who believe! Do
not take the Jews and the Christians for friends ...) that the wilayah in the meaning of help is not
suitable in that context, and the particularities of those verses and especially the words, they are
friends of each other, and the words, and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then
surely he is one of them, are not appropriate for such interpretation. Establishing the wilayah of
help and its undertaking between two nations does not make the two into one nation nor does it
attach one to the other. Also such prohibition cannot be justified by saying that, they are friends
of each other. Such expressions can only be used when the aim is to prohibit wilayah of love,
because love creates psychological and spiritual blending of both parties, and permits each to
affect psychological and spiritual management in the other's life affairs; it brings two groups near
each other in character and activities in a way that obliterates national characteristics.

Not only that. It is not correct to count the Prophet (s.a.w.) as a waliyy (in the meaning of helper)
of the believers, while its opposite is correct. This help which is given by Allah, and the Qur'an
mentions it in many of its verses, is the help in religion. Accordingly, it is proper to say that the
religion belongs to Allah in the meaning that He has established it and laid down its shari’ah.
Thus the Prophet (s.a.w.) or the believers or both together are exhorted to help it, or some helpers
are invited to help Allah regarding the laid down religion, as He says: ...The disciples said: "We
are helper of Allah"... (61:14);... if you help Allah, He will help you... (47:7); And when Allah
made a covenant with the prophets: "... you must believe in him, and you must aid him. "... (3:8
1); apart from other many such verses.
Also, it is proper to say that the religion belongs to the Prophet (s.a.w.) in the meaning that it is
he who has called to it and conveyed it to us, for example. Or that the religion belongs to Allah
and His Messenger in the meaning of legislation and guidance, and so they call people to help it
or praise the believers for helping it; as Allah says: ...so those who believe in him and honor him
and help him, ...(7:157);... seeking grace of Allah and (His) pleasure, and assisting Allah and His
Messenger... (59:8);... and those who gave shelter and helped... (8:72); and other such verses.

Likewise, it is proper to say that the religion belongs to the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the believers in
the meaning that they are obligated to follow its laws and act on it, so it is said that Allah is their
Guardian and Helper; as He says: ...and surely Allah will help him who helps Him. (22:40); Most
surely We help Our messengers, and those who believe in this world's life and on the day when
the witnesses shall stand up (40:5 1);... and helping the believers is ever incumbent on Us.
(30:47), apart from other such verses.

However, it is not correct to ascribe the religion to the believers alone, thus making them as
principal and putting the Prophet (s.a.w.) aside, and then to count the Prophet (s.a.w.) as their
helper in their affairs; because whatever religious dignity there is, the Prophet (s.a. w.a.) has the
lion's share in it. That is why we do not find a single example in the Qur'an where the Prophet
(s.a.w.) has been mentioned as the believer's helper. Far be it from the divine speech to neglect
the noble divine decorum in any instance.

This is one of the strongest proofs that wherever the Qur'an ascribes wilayah to the Prophet, it
means the wilayah of Guardianship and authority or that of love and affection, as Allah says: The
Prophet has a greater claim on the believers than they have on themselves.... (33:6); Only Allah
is your Guardian and His Messenger and those who believe, ...(5:55); note that the verse is
addressed to the believers, and as you have been told earlier, there is no meaning in counting the
Prophet (s.a.w.) their waliyy in the meaning of helper.

It is now clear that these two verses are different in the context from the preceding ones, even if
we take the wilayah in the meaning of helping; do not be confused by the clause: the party of
Allah are they that shall he triumphant, because triumph and prevailing points to the connotation
of helping as much as it does to that of management and authority, and to that of love and
affinity. Triumph of religion - the topmost desire of the people of religion takes place when the
believers attach themselves to Allah and His Messenger with any possible means. Allah has
clearly announced it to them in His words: Allah has written down: I will most certainly prevail,
I and My Messengers;... (58:21); And certainly Our word has already gone forth in respect of
Our servants, the messengers: most surely they shall be the assisted ones, and most surely Our
host alone shall be the victorious ones (37:171-3).

On top of all, there are a lot of traditions declaring that these two verses were revealed about 'Ali
(a.s.) when he gave his ring in charity while he was praying. Thus these verses are reserved for
him and are not general. God willing, many of those traditions will be quoted under "Traditions".

If such numerous and so many accumulated traditions pointing to the reason of revelation can be
ignored while explaining a verse, then obviously not a single verse could be explained with the
help of the narrated reasons of revelation in the whole Qur'an. Therefore, there is no justification
for generalizing the two verses and claiming that they point to the believers' friendship with one
another.

However, the exegetes have objected to these traditions - although they should not have done so
in view of their overwhelming numbers as follows:

First: These traditions are against the context of the verses that apparently point to the wilayah of
help, as mentioned above.

Second: They want us to use plural and mean singular; because according to them, the clauses:
those who believe and those..., refer to 'Ali, but language does not support it.

Third: According to these traditions, zakat would mean giving the ring in charity, and it is not
called zakat.

Based on these objections, they say that the verses are general, and restrict the wilayah to the
group mentioned therein. The hypocrites were hastening to the help of the People of the Book
and emphasizing its importance; so Allah forbade it and said that their only helpers are Allah,
His Messenger and the true believers, rather than the People of the Book and the hypocrites.
There would remain only one difficulty: that this explanation did not agree with the apparent
meaning of the conditional clause: while they bow. But, it could easily he removed if we took it
in its metaphorical meaning, i.e. while they are humble before Allah; or even when they are
themselves in need, in wretched condition.

This was the gist of their objections. But if you meditate on this and other similar verses, you
will see that none of these stands on its legs.

As for the verse's position in the context of the ones denoting wilayah of help: You have seen
that those verses do not give the meaning of help; and even if we suppose that the previous
verses denote that meaning, this verse is not compatible with it.

As for the problem of using plural and meaning singular: You have seen the detailed reply to it
under the verse of Mubahalah (3:61) in volume three (volume 6 in English) of this book. Also, it
was explained there that there were two ways of speaking:

1. To use a plural word and mean a singular, a single entity.

2. To describe a general proposition, using a plural word, in order that it may be applied to all
suitable candidates, even if at present there be only one person or thing to which it could be
applied.

The language rejects the first style; but the second one is very common in use.

Would that I knew what would they say about the verse: 0 you who believe! Do not take My
enemy and your enemy for friends; would you offer them love while they deny what has come to
you of the truth, ...would you manifest love to them?... (60: 1). It is undoubtedly known that the
verse refers to one man, Hatib ibn Abi Balta'ah, when he corresponded with the Quraysh.

Or about the verse: "They say: "If we return to Medina, the mighty will surely drive out the
meaner there from,"... (63:8). It is well known that the speaker one man, was 'Abdullah ibn
Ubayy ibn Salul.

Or about the verse: "They ask you as to what they should spend ..." (2:215), and the questioner
was one man.

Or about the verse: "(As for) those who spend their wealth by night and by day, secretly and
openly, they shall have their reward ..." (2:274). It is narrated that the spender was 'Ali or Abu
Bakr.

There are a lot of such verses in the Qur'an.

A very strange phenomenon appears before our eyes when we look at the clause: (they say), "We
fear lest a calamity should befall us;"... (5:52). The speaker was 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy, according
to the narrated reason of revelation, which the objectors themselves do accept; and it is in
between the verses under discussion. (They find no difficulty in applying the plurals to one man
in this clause!)

It could be said that in the above-mentioned verses there were many people who agreed with that
one person's views, or were pleased with their action; therefore Allah has used plurals in order
that it may cover the doer together with those who agreed with him. However, it would show that
using a plural for a single person was justified if there was a good reason for it. The verse under
discussion too would come into this category; as it would prove that the religious nobilities
including the said wilayah ? is not confined to one person to the exclusion of the others; rather it
only depends on priority in sincerity and deeds.

Moreover, all the narrators of these traditions were the companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and
their disciples who were with them in that very era. All of them were pure Arabs whose language
was not perverted and whose tongues were not mixed up. if such usage was not allowed in the
speech and people were not familiar with such expressions, they would not have accepted these
narrations, rather they would have been the first to put forward this objection; but none of them
is on record to speak against it on this ground.

As for the saying that charity of a ring is not called zakat: It should be kept in mind that the use
of the word, zakat, specifically in its terminological meaning took place in the Muslim's
expressions after the Qur’an laid it down as an obligatory act of religion; but in its literal sense it
covers that terminological meaning and other spending altogether. When it is used without any
restriction or joined with keeping up prayer, it indicates spending the property for the sake of
Allah. See, for example, what Allah has mentioned regarding the previous prophets: He says
about Ibrahim, lshaq, and Ya'qub: ...and We revealed to them the doing of good and the keeping
up of prayer and the giving of zakat, ...(21:73); and He says about Ismai’l: And he enjoined on
his family prayer and zakat, and was one in whom his Lord was well pleased (19:5 5); and He
quotes 'Isa (a.s.) saying in the cradle: ...and He has enjoined on me prayer and zakat so long as I
live (19:3 1). And it is known that their shari'ah did not have the zakat of wealth as we
understand it in Islam.

Likewise, look at the following verses, which were revealed in Mecca in early days of
prophethood when the zakat (as we know it) was not legislated yet:

He indeed shall be successful who pays zakat, and remembers the name of his Lord and prays
(87:14-15); (He) who gives away his wealth for zakat (92:18); Those who do not give zakat and
they are unbelievers in the hereafter. (41:7); And who are givers of zakat (23:4). Would that I
knew what did the Muslims understand from the word, zakat, in these verses!

Even the verse of zakat itself: Take alms out of their wealth, you would cleanse them and purify
them thereby, and pray for them; surely your prayer is a relief to them, ...(9:103), shows that
zakat is a sort of alms and charity, and it has been named zakat (lit: purification) only because
charity cleanses and purifies in general; and then its was predominantly used for that particular
alms.

All of it clearly shows that there is no hindrance in calling general alms and spending in the way
of Allah as zakat. Also it is evident that there is no reason for interpreting the word, bowing, in
metaphorical sense. Similarly, there is no reason to look for far fetched justifications as to why
Allah used in the beginning of the verse the word: your Guardian, in singular and brought in its
predicate: those who believe, in plural. Think over it.

Commentary
QUR’AN: Only Allah is your Guardian and His Messenger and those who believe: ar-Raghib
has said in his Mufradatu'l-Quran: "al-wilayah" and "at-tawallah" denote that two or more things
are so positioned as nothing extraneous comes between them. Metaphorically it is used to
indicate proximity in place, or affinity, or friendship, and in help, or in belief al-wilayah is help,
and/or management of affairs. It has been said that al-walayah and al-wilayah both are one like
al-dalalah and al-dilalah and it really means management of affairs; and al-waliyy add al-mawla
denote this meaning, and both are used as nomen agentis, i.e. guardian/manager; and as nomen
patientis, i.e. one whose affairs are managed. A believer is called waliyy of Allah, but nowhere is
he referred to as mawla of Allah; while Allah is called waliyy of the believers, as well as their
mawla.

Further he says: "They say, tawalli when used without any preposition, gives the meaning of
wilayah, indicating that it is related to the nearest objective; they say, 'I turned my ears/eyes/face
to so and so. Allah says: ...so We shall surely turn thee to a qiblah which thou shall be pleased
with; turn then thy face towards the Sacred Mosque; and wherever you are, turn your faces
towards it,.... (2:144); but when it is followed by preposition min (from) clearly or implied, it
means turning away and leaving the proximity."
Apparently, man perceived the proximity (pointed to by wilayah first of all physically in bodies
and their places and times; then it was borrowed for immaterial nearness, opposite to the
abovementioned idea. We know that primitive man began his perceptive journey with the
material things perceived through the five senses and was involved with them long before
thinking about rational propositions and immaterial ideas and their related things.

When wilayah - a special proximity - is affected in spiritual/ immaterial affairs, it follows that
Analyst has a right and an authority over the mawla, which others do not have (except through
him). All such managerial aspects that may be delegated to another will automatically be taken
over by the waliyy e.g. the waliyy of a deceased person. The estate, which the deceased used to
manage by right of ownership, his heir, has the right to manage it by wilayah of inheritance.
Likewise, the guardian of a minor manages that minor's financial affairs by wilayah of
guardianship; and the helper manages the affairs of the helped one strengthening him in his
defense; and Allah is the Guardian (waliyy) of His servants and manages their affairs in this
world and the hereafter ? there is no guardian except Him. So Allah is the Guardian of the
believers, inasmuch as He manages the affairs of their religion through guiding, calling, and
helping them and so on. And the Prophet is the Guardian of the believers inasmuch as he has the
authority to decide between them, for them and against them through legislation and judgment.
Likewise, the hakim (ruler, judge) is the guardian of the people over whom he rules within his
jurisdiction. The same is the case with other examples of wilayah, like that of emancipation,
covenant, protection, neighborhood and divorce; similarly, the wilayah of a cousin, of love and
of a designated successor, and so on.

Also, His word: they shall turn (their) backs to you (33:15), i.e. they shall turn their backs
towards the war and ignore its demands.

And His word: you turned back (5:92), i.e. you turned away from accepting it; you faced its
opposite direction by turning away from it.

In short, looking at wilayah in its different usages, we get the meaning of a sort of proximity that
gives its subject some authority of management and possession of planning.

Looking at the context of the verse under discussion: "Only Allah is your Guardian and His
Messenger and those who believe", we find that the meaning of wilayah (guardianship) for all
the guardians is the same, because "Allah, His Messenger and the believers", have all been
ascribed to one word: "your Guardian", and clearly guardianship of each has the same meaning.
This is also supported by the clause at the end of the second verse: then surely the party of Allah
are they that shall be triumphant, as it indicates or clearly shows that all the guardians are the
party of Allah, because they are under His Guardianship; thus the guardianship of the Messenger
and of those who believe sprout from the root of Allah's Guardianship.
Allah has ascribed to Himself the following aspects of wilayah:

al-Wilayatu ‘t-Takwimiyyah (The Authority Over Creation): Through this authority He

manages everything and disposes the creatures' affairs as He pleases and in whatever way He
pleases. He says: Or have they taken guardians besides Him? But Allah is the Guardian....
(42:9);... you have not besides Him any guardian or any intercessor; will you not then mind?
(32:4);... Thou art my guardian in this world and the hereafter;... (12: 10 1);... he has no guardian
after Him;_ . (42:44). The same is the implication of the verses: ...and We are nearer to Him than
his life vein. (50:16);... and know that Allah intervenes between man and his heart, ...(8:24).

Possibly related to it is the wilayah of help, which Allah ascribes to Himself. That is because
Allah is the Protector of those who believe, and because the unbelievers shall have no protector
for them (47:11);... then surely Allah it is Who is his Guardian, ...(66:4); and the same
connotation is seen in the verse: ...and helping the believers is ever incumbent on Us (30:47).

al-Wilayatu 't-Tashri’iyyah (The Authority Over Legislation): Allah has ascribed to Himself
this wilayah which concerns the believers' religious affairs: Legislation of the laws, guidance,
advice, help and so on. He says: Allah is the Guardian of those who believe; He brings them out
of the darkness into light, ...(2:257);... and Allah is the Guardian of the believers (3:68); and
Allah is the Guardian of the pious... (45:19) The same is the theme of the verse: And it is not for
a believing man nor for a believing woman to have any choice in their affairs when Allah and
His Messenger have decided a matter; and whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he surely
strays off a manifest straying (3 3:3 6).

This is what Allah has described related to His wilayah, and it concerns the authority over
creation and authority over legislation andYou may also call them the real wilayah and the
wilayah from a subjective point of view.

Then Allah has mentioned for His Prophet (s.a.w.) the wilayah which is reserved for him, and it
is al-Wilayatut-Tashri’iyyah: The Prophet (s.a.w.) has the right and authority to legislate the
laws, call people to it, train the ummah accordingly, rule over them and decide in their affairs.
Allah says: The Prophet has a greater claim on the believers than they have on themselves....
(33:6). The same is the connotation of the verses: Surely We have revealed the Book to you with
the truth that you may judge between people by means of that which Allah has taught you;...
(4:105);... and most surely you guide to the right path (42:52);... a Messenger from among
themselves, who recites to them His communications and purifies them, and teaches them the
Book and the Wisdom.... (62:2);... that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to
them .... (16:44);... obey Allah and obey the Messenger... (4:59); And it is not for a believing
man nor for a believing woman to have any choice in their affairs when Allah and His
Messenger have decided a matter;... (33:36); And that you should judge between them by what
Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires, and be cautious of them, lest they seduce
you from part of what Allah has revealed to you;... (5:49). It has been mentioned that Allah has
not ascribed to the Prophet the wilayah of help for the ummah.

In short, the Prophet (s.a.w.) has the wilayah over the ummah, inasmuch as he leads them to
Allah, rules over them, judges and decides in all their affairs. It is incumbent on them to obey
him unconditionally. In this way, his wilayah springs from Allah's wilayah, in the meaning of the
authority of legislation. In other words, the Prophet (s.a.w.) has precedence over them as they are
bound to obey him, because his obedience is Allah's obedience. Thus, his wil4ah is the wilayah
of Allah, as some previously quoted verses prove, for example: ...obey Allah and obey the
Messenger... (4:59); And it is not for a believing man, nor for a believing woman to have any
choice in their affairs when Alldh and His Messenger have decided a matter;... (33:36), apart
from other such verses.

It is this meaning of wilayah as ascribed to Allah and His Messenger, which is bestowed on the
believers in the verse under discussion, when it says: "Only Allah is your Guardian and His
Messenger and those who believe." You have seen that the context proves that it is only one
wilayah, and it belongs to Allah directly and to the Messenger and to those who believe
indirectly by permission of Allah. Had the wilayah ascribed to Allah in this verse, been different
from that ascribed to those who believe, it was more appropriate, in order to avoid any
confusion, to bring another word of wilayah before mentioning "those who believe", as Allah has
done in similar situations. For example, He says: Say: "A hearer of good for you (who) believes
in Allah and believes the faithful..." (9:6 1). The word: "believes", has been repeated because its
connotations in the two clauses are different. A similar style was used in the verse: ...obey Allah
and obey the Messenger... (4:59), as was explained in volume 8 (Eng.) of this book.

Moreover, the word: "Your Guardian", is singular and is ascribed to, "those who believe", i.e.
plural. According to the exegetes, it is because wilayah here has a single meaning, and it directly
belongs to Allah and as for the Messenger and the believers, it is indirectly, through Allah.

It is clear from above that the restriction in "Only" aims at confining the wilayah to those
mentioned in the verse. It removes the possible misunderstanding that it might cover those who
are mentioned and also the others. There is another possibility that this restriction negates the
wilayah of all persons other than those mentioned therein.

QUR’AN: those who keep up prayers and pay the ZAKAT while they bow: It gives further
particulars of "those who believe"; "while they bow" is the conditional clause attached to the
subject hidden in the verb "pay". ar-ruku is a particular position of body which is found in
human beings only. An old man with bent back is called ar-raki (one who bows down.) In the
language of shar’iah it is the name of a special position in worship. Allah says: ...(those) who
bow down, who prostrate... (9:112). Symbolically it represents humility and submission (to
Allah); but in Islam it is not allowed except in prayer, contrary to prostration.
And because it shows humility and submission, the word is sometimes used to allude to general
humbleness, or to poverty and need, because a man in straitened circumstances usually shows
humility before others.

QUR'AN: And whoever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe for guardian,
then surely the party of Allah are they that shall be triumphant: at-Tawalli (to take as a friend);
"those who believe" points to the preceding: those who believe, together with their attributes:
those who keep up prayers and pay the zakat while they how,? the clause: "then surely the party
of Allah are they that shall be triumphant", is put in the place of the complement for the
preceding conditional clause, although it is not the complement. Rather, the speech has put the
major premise in place of the conclusion, in order to show the reason of the proposition. In effect
it says: Whoever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe for guardian, shall be
triumphant, because he belongs to the party of Allah and the party of Allah are they that are
triumphant. It is an allusion that they are the party of Allah.

al-Hizb according to ar-Raghib, is a group having coarseness, ruthlessness, and harshness. Allah
has described His party in another place in the Qur'an, with a nearly similar theme and has
ascribed success to them. He says: You shall not find a people who believe in Allah and the latter
day befriending those who act in opposition to Allah and His Messenger, even though they were
their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers or their kinsfolk; these are they into whose hearts He
has impressed faith, and whom He has strengthened with a spirit from Him: and He will cause
them to enter gardens beneath which rivers flow, abiding therein; Allah is well pleased with them
and they are well pleased with Him; they are Allah’s party: now surely the party of Allah are the
successful ones (58:22).

al-Faw means victory and acquisition of the object of desire, i.e., triumph. It is this triumph and
success, which Allah has promised to bestow on the believers - this being His best promise to
them. He says: Successful indeed are the believers (23:1). Many verses have this theme; and in
all of them the promise is without any condition; obviously it denotes unrestricted victory and
unconditional success. Gaining felicity, adhering to truth, vanquishing infelicity and refuting
falsity in this world and the hereafter: In this world through good life which is found in virtuous
society made up of the friends of Allah, in an earth cleansed from the friends of Satan based on
piety; and in the hereafter, in neighborhood of the Lord of the worlds.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 57-

66
 
 ‫وا هّللا َ إِن ُكنتُم‬ ْ ُ‫َاب ِمن قَ ْبلِ ُك ْم َو ْال ُكفَّا َر أَوْ لِيَاء َواتَّق‬ َ ‫وا ْال ِكت‬ ْ ُ‫وا ِدينَ ُك ْم هُ ُز ًوا َولَ ِعبًا ِّمنَ الَّ ِذينَ أُوت‬ ْ ‫وا الَّ ِذينَ اتَّ َخ ُذ‬ ْ ‫وا الَ تَتَّ ِخ ُذ‬ ْ ُ‫يَا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬
َّ‫ب هَلْ تَنقِ ُمونَ ِمنَّا إِال‬ ْ َ ُ
ِ ‫} قلْ يَا أ ْه َل ال ِكتَا‬58{ َ‫ك بِأنهُ ْم قَوْ ٌم ال يَ ْعقِلون‬ ُ َّ َّ َ َ َ
َ ِ‫صالَ ِة ات َخذوهَا هُز ًوا َول ِعبًا ذل‬ ُ ُ َّ َّ ‫} َوإِ َذا نَا َد ْيت ْم إِلى ال‬57{ َ‫ُّم ْؤ ِمنِين‬
َ ُ
ُ ‫ك َمثُوبَةً ِعن َد هّللا ِ َمن لَّ َعنَهُ هّللا‬ ُ ِ َ‫نز َل ِمن قَ ْب ُل َوأَ َّن أَ ْكثَ َر ُك ْم ف‬ ُ ُ
َ ِ‫} قُلْ هَلْ أنَبِّئُ ُكم بِ َشرٍّ ِّمن َذل‬59{ َ‫اسقُون‬ ِ ‫نز َل إِلَ ْينَا َو َما أ‬ ِ ‫أَ ْن آ َمنَّا بِاهّلل ِ َو َما أ‬
‫} َوإِ َذا َجآؤُو ُك ْم قَالُ َو ْا‬60{ ‫ضلُّ عَن َس َواء ال َّسبِي ِل‬ َ َ‫ك َش ٌّر َّم َكانا ً َوأ‬ َ ِ‫َازي َر َو َعبَ َد الطَّا ُغوتَ أُوْ لَـئ‬ ِ ‫ب َعلَ ْي ِه َو َج َع َل ِم ْنهُ ُم ْالقِ َر َدةَ َو ْال َخن‬ َ ‫َض‬ ِ ‫َوغ‬
‫ان‬ ِ َ ‫و‬ ْ
‫د‬ ‫ع‬
ُ ْ
‫ال‬ ‫و‬َ ِ ِ ‫م‬ ‫ث‬ْ ‫اإل‬ ‫ي‬ ِ ‫ف‬ َ‫ون‬ ‫ع‬ ُ ‫ار‬
ِ ‫س‬
َ ُ ‫ي‬ ‫م‬
ْ ُ ‫ه‬ ْ
‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ِّ ً ‫ا‬ ‫ير‬ ِ ‫ث‬ ‫ك‬َ ‫ى‬ ‫َر‬ َ ‫ت‬ ‫و‬َ } 61 { َ‫ون‬ ‫م‬ُ ُ ‫ت‬‫ك‬ْ َ ‫ي‬ ْ
‫وا‬ ُ ‫ن‬ ‫ا‬‫ك‬ َ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬ َِ ‫ب‬ ‫م‬
ُ َ ‫ل‬ ْ
‫ع‬ َ ‫أ‬ ُ ‫هّللا‬ ‫و‬َ ِ ‫ه‬
ِ ‫ب‬ ْ
‫ُوا‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ر‬
َ َ
‫خ‬ ‫د‬ ْ َ ‫ق‬ ‫م‬ ْ ُ ‫ه‬ ‫و‬ َ ِ ‫ر‬ ْ
‫ف‬ ُ
‫ك‬ ْ
‫ال‬ ِ ‫ب‬ ْ
‫وا‬ ُ ‫ل‬ ‫خ‬ َ ‫د‬َّ ‫د‬ َ ‫ق‬ ‫و‬ ‫ا‬
َ ََّ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ‫آ‬
‫وا‬ْ ُ‫س َما َكان‬ َ ‫} لَوْ الَ يَ ْنهَاهُ ُم ال َّربَّانِيُّونَ َواألَحْ بَا ُر عَن قَوْ لِ ِه ُم ا ِإل ْث َم َوأَ ْكلِ ِه ُم السُّحْ تَ لَبِ ْئ‬62{ َ‫وا يَ ْع َملُون‬ ْ ُ‫س َما َكان‬ َ ‫َوأَ ْكلِ ِه ُم السُّحْ تَ لَبِ ْئ‬
‫ق َك ْيفَ يَ َشاء َولَيَ ِزيد ََّن َكثِيراً ِّم ْنهُم‬ ُ ِ‫َان يُنف‬ ِ ‫وا بَلْ يَدَاهُ َم ْبسُوطَت‬ ْ ُ‫وا بِ َما قَال‬ ْ ُ‫ت أَ ْي ِدي ِه ْم َولُ ِعن‬ ْ َّ‫ت ْاليَهُو ُد يَ ُد هّللا ِ َم ْغلُولَةٌ ُغل‬ ِ َ‫} َوقَال‬63{ َ‫يَصْ نَعُون‬
‫ع‬ ْ
‫س‬ ‫ي‬ ‫و‬ ‫هّللا‬ ‫َا‬ ‫ه‬َ ‫أ‬ َ ‫ف‬‫ط‬ْ َ ‫أ‬ ‫ب‬ ْ‫ر‬ ‫ح‬ ْ
‫ل‬ ِّ ‫ل‬ ‫ًا‬ ‫ر‬ ‫َا‬ ‫ن‬ ْ
‫ُوا‬ ‫د‬ َ ‫ق‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬ َّ ‫ل‬ ُ
‫ك‬ ‫ة‬ ‫م‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ق‬ ْ
‫ال‬ ‫م‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ى‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫إ‬ ‫اء‬ ‫ض‬ ‫غ‬ ْ ‫ب‬ ْ
‫ال‬ ‫و‬ َ ‫ة‬ ‫َاو‬ ‫د‬ ‫ع‬ ْ
‫ال‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬ َ ‫ن‬‫ي‬ْ ‫ب‬ ‫َا‬ ‫ن‬ ْ
‫ي‬ َ ‫ق‬ ْ
‫ل‬ َ ‫أ‬‫و‬ ‫ًا‬ ‫ر‬ ْ
‫ف‬ ُ
‫ك‬ ‫و‬ َ َ ‫ك‬ ‫ا‬ً ‫ن‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ي‬ ‫غ‬ْ ُ ‫ط‬ َ ِّ‫ك ِمن َّرب‬ َ ‫نز َل إِلَ ْي‬ ُ
َ‫ُ َ َ َ وْ ن‬ ِ َ ْ‫َ ُ َ َ َ َ َ ِ َوْ ِ ِ َ َ ِ َ و‬ ُ َ ِ ‫َّما أ‬
{ ‫ت النَّ ِع ِيم‬ ْ
ِ ‫ب آ َمنُوا َواتَّقَوْ ا لَ َكفرْ نَا َع ْنهُ ْم َسيِّئَاتِ ِه ْم َوأل ْد َخلنَاهُ ْم َجنَّا‬ َّ ْ ْ ْ َ َ
ِ ‫} َولَوْ أ َّن أ ْه َل ال ِكتَا‬64{ َ‫ض فَ َسادًا َو ُ الَ ي ُِحبُّ ال ُمف ِس ِدين‬ ْ ْ ‫هّللا‬ ِ ْ‫فِي األر‬ َ
‫َص َدةٌ َو َكثِي ٌر‬ ‫ت‬‫ق‬ْ ‫م‬
ِ ُّ َّ ْ ِّ ِ ِ ٌ ‫ة‬ ‫م‬ ُ ‫أ‬ ‫م‬ ُ ‫ه‬‫ن‬ْ ‫م‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ج‬ُ ْ‫ر‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫ت‬
ِ ْ‫َح‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ‫و‬
ِ َ ِْ ِ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ق‬ ْ‫و‬ َ ‫ف‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬
ِ ْ
‫وا‬ ُ ‫ل‬ َ
‫ك‬ ‫أل‬ ‫م‬
ِْ ‫ه‬ ِّ ‫ب‬‫ر‬َّ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ي‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫إ‬
ِّ ِ ِ َ ِ َ َ َ ِ ِ َ َ ‫ل‬ ‫نز‬ ُ ‫أ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬ ‫و‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ن‬‫إل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫و‬ َ ‫ة‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ر‬ ْ‫و‬ َّ ‫ت‬‫ال‬ ْ
‫وا‬ ‫م‬
ُ ْ ‫ا‬َ ‫ق‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫م‬ ُ ‫ه‬ َّ ‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬ ْ‫و‬ َ‫} َول‬65
ُ
}66{ َ‫ِّمنهُ ْم َساء َما يَ ْع َملون‬ ْ
{57} O you who believe! Do not take for friends those who take your religion for a mockery and
a joke, from among those who were given the Book before you and the unbelievers; and fear
Allah if you are believers. {58} And when you call to prayer they take it as a mockery and a
joke; this is because they are a people who do not understand. {59} Say: "O People of the Book!
Do you find fault with us (for ought) except that we believe in Allah and in what has been
revealed to us and what was revealed before, and that most of you are transgressors". {60} Say:
"Shall I inform you of (him who is) worse than this in retribution near Allah? (It is he) whom
Allah has cursed and brought His wrath upon, and of whom He made apes and swine, and he
who served the Satan; these are worse in place and more erring from the straight path". {61} And
when they come to you, they say: "We go forth with it; and Allah knows best what they
concealed. {62} And you will see many of them striving with one another to hasten in sin and
exceeding the limits, and their eating of what is unlawfully acquired; certainly evil is that which
they do. {63} Why do not the learned men and the doctors of law prohibit them from their
speaking of what is sinful and their eating of what is unlawfully acquired? Certainly evil is that
which they work. {64} And the Jews say: "The hand of Allah is tied up!" Their hands shall be
shackled and they shall be cursed for what they say. Nay, both His hands are spread out, He
expends as He pleases; and what has been revealed to you from your Lord will certainly make
many of them increase in inordinacy and in unbelief; and We have put enmity and hatred among
them till the Day of Resurrection; whenever they kindle a fire for war Allah puts it out, and they
strive to make mischief in the land; and Allah does not love the mischief-makers. {65} And if
the People of the Book had believed and guarded (against evil) We would certainly have covered
their evil deeds and We would certainly have made them enter gardens of bliss. {66} And if they
had kept up the Tawrat and the Injil and that which was revealed to them from their Lord, they
would certainly have eaten from above them and from beneath their feet; there is a party of them
keeping to the moderate course, and (as for) most of them, evil is that which they do.
 

Commentary
The verses forbid taking those who make mockery of Allah and His communications as friends
from among the People of the Book and unbelievers, and enumerate some of their evil
characteristics including their breaking the covenants of Allah and so on - the matters related to
the theme of this chapter, i.e. exhorting people to keep their promises and covenants and showing
the demerit of going against promises, etc.
All the verses seem to be revealed in one context, although possibly some of them could have
particular reason of revelation.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Do not take for friends... who were given the Book before you
and...: ar-Raghib has said: "al-Huz' = secret jest, sometimes it is used for something like a jest."
Then he says explaining la'ib: "They used the verb, la'ib, when the doer does not have a correct
purpose for his action."

A thing is taken as a mockery and a jest when it is handled in an unserious way to show that it
does not deserve any attention. Similarly, a thing is taken as a plaything and a joke when it is not
intended for a correct reasonable purpose, is rather taken for some unrealistic themes. Thus, they
take the religion for a mockery and a joke in order to show that it only serves some false motives
- incorrect and unserious. Had they taken it to be truly a religion or believed that its Legislator
and the Caller to it as well as the Believers in it were truly serious and paid them the respect due
to them, they would not have placed them in this place. So, they take the religion as a mockery
and a jest to show that the religion does not have any reality or any established position; it is
merely a toy to be played with and jested about.

It appears from the above that:

First: Those, whose friendship is forbidden, are described as "those who take your religion for a
mockery and a joke"; this description points to the reason of this prohibition. As described
earlier, friendship entails spiritual mingling and management of personal and sociological affairs.
Obviously, a waliyy (friend) will not treat as a joke or a mockery those things, which his friend
respects and pays honor to, and considers it more distinguished and honorable than everything,
even his own self. It is therefore necessary not to take such a person as a friend and not to let him
interfere in one's spiritual and physical affairs.

Second: The verse is very appropriately addressed to: "you who believe," as it stands parallel to:
"those who take your religion for .1 mockery and a joke"; also there is the fine point of the
genetic construction: "your religion", (as it emphasizes their strong connection with the religion
of Islam, and puts them on guard against the enemies' manipulation).

Third: The clause: "and fear Allah if you are believers," puts a sort of emphasis to the preceding
wordings: "Do not take for friends those who take your religion for a mockery and a joke," by
repeating it in a more inclusive and comprehensive wording. Obviously, a believer who adheres
to the cord of true faith cannot be pleased if the matters he believes in were to be taken as a
mockery or joke. Therefore, these people, if they are truly associated with belief and are attached
to the religion are bound to fear Allah regarding those inimical persons and not to take them as
friends.

Another possibility; The clause: "and fear Allah if you are believers", may point to the verses
which were revealed a little earlier, e.g. and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then
surely he is one of them. The meaning then will be as follows: Be afraid of Allah in taking them
for a friend if you are not one of them. But the first meaning is more manifest.
QUR'AN: And when you call to prayer they take it as a mockery and a joke;...: It confirms the
preceding statement that the unbelievers take the religion of those who believe for a mockery and
a joke. The call for prayer refers to the adhan, which was laid down in Islam before the
legislation of the daily five prayers. It is said that adhdn has not been mentioned in the noble
Qur'an except in this place.

"they take it": The pronoun "it" refers to the prayer, or to the verbal noun, the call, understood
from the verb: "when you call to prayer". A pronoun referring to a verbal noun may be brought
in either gender.

The end clause: "this is because they are a people who do not understand", puts their misdeed in
its true perspective. It says that they take the prayer or the adhan for a mockery and a joke
because they are a people devoid of understanding. As such, they cannot appreciate the
underlying spiritual realities behind the pillars and acts of religious worship - the reality of
servitude, the benefits of attaining nearness to Allah and convergence of life's happiness in this
world and the hereafter.

QUR'AN: Say: "O People of the Book! Do you find fault with us (for aught) except that we
believe in Allah and...": ar-Raghib has said in his al-Mufradat: "an-Naqam and an-naqim mean
to deny, to vengeance through tongue or punishment; Allah says: and they did not find fault
except because Allah and His Messenger enriched them out of His grace (9:74); and they did not
take vengeance on them for aught except that they believed in Allah ... (85:8); do you find fault
with us. . . (5:59)"

an-Naqimah is punishment, Allah says: Therefore We inflicted retribution on them and drowned
them in the sea (7:136).

Thus the verse under discussion means: Do you deny or dislike from us anything except that we
believe in Allah and in His revelation while you are transgressors. It is as people say: Do you
disavow me for anything except that I am a chaste person and you are profligate'/ Do you find
any fault with me except that I am wealthy and you arc poor? This verse speaks in the same vein.
Do you find any fault with us except that we are believers and most of you are transgressors?

Some people have said that the end clause gives the reason of their hostility; in other words, it
means: You do not deny or dislike anything from us except because you are transgressors.

"that we believe in Allah and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed before": It
means, what has been revealed to us and to you. But the former revelation was not ascribed to
them as an allusion against them - As they did not fulfill the covenant they had made with Allah
and did not follow the commandments given in their books, so it was as though their books were
not sent to them nor were they qualified to receive them.

The meaning: We do not differentiate between one revealed Book and the other; as such we do
not make any difference between the messengers of Allah. It is an adverse allusion to the People
of the Book that they make difference between one messenger and another and say: We believe
in some and disbelieve in others. Also they used to say: "Avow belief in that which has been
revealed to those who believe (in) the first part of the day, and disbelieve (at) the end of it, ...
(3:72). Allah says: Surely those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers and desire to
differentiate between Allah and His messengers, and say: "We believe in some and disbelieve in
others"; and desire to take a way between (this and) that. These it is that are truly unbelievers,
and We have prepared for the unbelievers a disgraceful chastisement (4:150-1).

QUR'AN: Say: "Shall I inform you of (him who is) worse than this in retribution near Allah? (It
is he) whom Allah has cursed and...": The exegetes have said that in this verse Allah tells His-
Messenger (s.a.w.) to address those who indulged in mockery of religion in a just manner
bringing himself down to their level, in order to complete his proof against them. He should tell
them that if they hated the believers because they believed in Allah and in what He has revealed
to His messengers, then they should have their own selves too, because they are worse in place
and more erring from the straight path, because they are afflicted by divine curse and were
changed into apes and swine and indulged in the worship of Satan. If they do not hate their own
selves in spite of all these demerits and evils, which invite hatred, they have no reason to hate
those who are less liable to any evil or demerit. They are the believers keeping firm on their
belief - this is in case we accept that their belief in Allah and His Books is an evil; but we know
that it can never be an evil. Accordingly, al-mathubah (lit. reward) here means recompense;
probably it has been borrowed for end result and inseparable attribute, as may be inferred from
the phrase: "near Allah", which qualifies the clause: "worse than this in retribution"; because
what is near Allah is permanent, enduring and unchangeable; and Allah has adjudged and
ordered it. He says: ...and what is with Allah is enduring;... (16:96); ...there is no repeller of His
decree... (13:41). This recompense or retribution is therefore an enduring one because it is near
Allah or with Allah.

There is a sort of reversal in this speech. Normally, the sentence should have been framed as
follows: Being cursed and transmuted and worshipping the Satan is worse and more erring than
believing in Allah and His Books. But here it says: He whom Allah has cursed and changed into
apes and swine is worse in place and more erring. It puts the described person in place of the
description or attribute; and this style is common in the Qur'an, as Allah says: ...but
righteousness is the one who believes in Allah and ... (2:177)

In short, the verse declares that if our belief in Allah and His revealed Books was an evil in your
opinion, then I inform you of what is more evil than that, and which you should truly hate, and it
is the characteristics, which is found in yourselves.

It has been said by some that the demonstrative pronoun: "this", in the phrase: "worse than this",
points to the entire community of the believers that is mentioned in the clause: "find fault with
us". Accordingly the speech will be straight forward, without any reversal; and the meaning will
be as follows: Shall I inform you of his who is worse than the believers, so that you should find
fault with him? It is you yourselves who were afflicted with divine curse and transmutation and
worshipped the Satan.

Someone else has said that, the pronoun: "this", in the phrase: "worse than this", points to the
verbal noun, to find fault, to hate, which is hidden in the verb: "do you find fault with us". The
meaning: Should I inform you of what is worse than this fault-finding and hate of yours in
retribution? Well, it is what you have been afflicted with, i.e. the divine curse, transmutation, and
so on.

QUR'AN: And when they come to you, they say: "We believe;" and indeed they come in with
disbelief and indeed they go forth with it; and Allah knows best what they concealed: Here Allah
exposes their hidden hypocrisy, and that they keep in their hearts what Allah is not pleased with -
when they meet the believers. So He says: When they come to you they claim that they have
believed while actually they come to you with disbelief and they go forth with the same
disbelief. Their entry and exit both take place in the same one condition i.e. disbelief without any
change; they merely pretend to believe while Allah knows what they concealed of treachery and
perfidy.

Accordingly the clause: and indeed they come in with disbelief and indeed they go forth with it,
means: Their condition in disbelief has not changed at all; the nominative pronoun: hum (they)
has been added for emphasis, to show that disbelief has firmly taken root in their hearts.

It has been said that the said clause indicates that they take turns from one condition of disbelief
to another.

QUR'AN: And you will see many of them striving with one another to hasten in sin and
exceeding the limits... Certainly evil is that which they work: Apparently, the word: "sin",
indicates their rashly plunging into the religious verses revealed to the believers, and speaking
regarding religion's cognition what would cause disbelief and transgression, as is shown by the
clause: "their speaking of what is sinful", in the following verse.

Accordingly, the three items, i.e. sin, transgression, and eating of what is unlawfully acquired,
encompass samples of their transgression in words and deeds. They indulge in verbal misdeeds
(and it is the sin in words) and misdeeds in actions - and it can be either against other believers
(and it is transgression against them) or against their own selves, e.g. their eating what is
unlawfully acquired, like interest, bribe, and things like that. Then Allah has condemned all these
activities and said: "Certainly evil is that which they work," Then He has strongly rebuked their
doctors of law and scholars of religion for their keeping silent and not prohibiting them from
committing these grave sins and misdeeds, although they are aware that these are very grave
sins. So He says: "Why do not the learned men and the doctors of law prohibit them from their
speaking of what is sinful and their eating of what is unlawfully acquired? Certainly evil is that
which they work."

The former verse speaks of "sin and exceeding the limits, and their eating of what is unlawfully
acquired", while the latter speaks only of "speaking of what is sinful and their eating of what is
unlawfully acquired". The omission of exceeding the limits in this verse indicates that sin and
exceeding the limits are one and the same - sin is exceeding the divine limits verbally, which
stands parallel to exceeding those limits in action, an example of which is seen in eating
unlawful things.

Accordingly, the clause: "striving with one another to hasten in sin and exceeding the limits, and
their eating of what is unlawfully acquired", aims at exposing their one fault of words (and it is
sin and exceeding the limits) and another one of deeds, and it is their eating of what is unlawfully
acquired. al-Musara'ah puts emphasis on as-sur'ah (hastening); it is opposite of al-but'
(tardiness). The difference between as-sur'ah and al-'ajalah (hurrying), as inferred from usage of
these words is this: as-sur'ah is more relevant to the actions of body, while al-'ajalah is more
concerned with activities of heart. It is not unlike the difference between al-khudu' (to bow, to
defer) and al-khushu' (to submit, to be humble); and between al-khawf (fear) and al-khashyah
(dread, apprehension). ar-Raghib has said in his al-Mufradat: "as-Sur'ah is opposite of al-but'; it
is used in description of bodies and actions; it is said: saru'a (he hastened); its nomen agentis is
sari' (hastener); and (they say): asra'a and musri' in the same meanings."

It has been said that al-musara'ah and al-'ajalah are synonymous; but al-musara'ah is mostly
used for good works; the use of this word here - although the context is of bad deeds, and
al-'ajalah would have been more appropriate - is aimed at showing that they indulge in it as if
they were doing a good work. But this seems far-fetched.

QUR'AN: And the Jews say: "The hand of Allah is tied up!" Their hands shall be shackled and
they shall be cursed for what they say. Nay, both His hands are spread out, He expands as He
pleases: The Jews did not agree that the laws of religion could be abrogated, and, for this reason,
they did not accept that Tawrat could be abrogated; rather they rebuked the Muslims for
abrogation of some of their laws. Similarly, they did not accept the doctrine of al-bada' in
matters of creation, as is seen from various Qur'anic verses. We have elaborated this topic in the
first volume of this book, under the verse: Whatever signs We abrogate or cause to be forgotten,
We bring one better than it or like it,... (2:106). Some light has been thrown on it in other places
too.

The verse: "And the Jews say: The hand of Allah is tied up!'" might be referring to their above-
mentioned views; however, the following clause in their rebuttal: "Nay both His hands are spread
out, He expends as He pleases", does not leave room for such interpretation. It rather shows that
they had uttered these sinful words particularly with reference to sustenance:

Either they had said it especially about the believers, because generally they were afflicted with
poverty and their condition was straitened. So, they talked in this way as a mockery against
Allah, alluding that He does not have power to give riches to His believing servants nor can He
rescue them from need and humiliation. But this opinion is not worthy of consideration, because
the verse is in the chapter of "The Table", which was revealed (in the last years of the Prophet's
life) when the Muslims enjoyed abundance of livelihood and lived a pleasant and luxurious life.

Or, they said it because of the famine and draught, which had made their lives miserable,
disturbed their economic system, and lowered their standard of living, as appears from some of
the traditions that explain the reason of revelation. But this explanation too does not agree with
the context of the verses, because evidently the verses expose their various characteristics like
their enmity and treachery against the Muslims whom they hated to the extreme. These verses do
not allude to the sinful talks they had uttered regarding their own selves.

Or, they said it when they heard the Qur'anic verses, e.g.: Who is it that will lend to Allah a
goodly loan (73:20). So they said: "The hand of Allah is tied up! He is not able to obtain the
necessary funds to spend in His requirements for propagating His religion and reviving His
mission." They had said it as a mockery and a jest against Allah, as appears from some other
traditions relating to the cause of revelation.

This explanation appears nearer to reality.

In any case, this ascription - that the hand of Allah was tied up and He was over-powered in His
plans, when some adverse situation had developed - does not go against their religious teachings
nor is it alien to the descriptions and comments found in the present Tawrat. According to
Tawrat, there were many things which Allah was unable to do and which prevented Him from
enforcing His will time and again, as strong persons hinder weaker ones in their activities. You
may look at the stories of the prophets, like Adam and others as they appear in Tawrat.

So, many aspects of their belief allow them to ascribe to Allah what is totally against the sanctity
of His status, although in the present context they had uttered these words as a jest and mockery -
we know that every action of a man emanates from some aspects of belief which he holds and
which encourages him to do it.

"Their hands shall be shackled and they shall be cursed for what they say": It is an invocation of
evil against them, of the same type which they had ascribed to Allah, and which went so clearly
against His sanctity and sacredness - their declaration that Allah's hand was tied up and He has
no power to do what he pleases. Accordingly, the clause: "and they shall be cursed for what they
say", is in explanatory conjunction with the clause: "Their hands shall be shackled", inasmuch as
their hands being shackled displays the divine curse on them, because Allah's speech is His
action, and He curses someone only through penalizing him with punishment either in this world
or the next. Thus, this curse means a punishment equal to shackling of their hands or more total
and comprehensive.

Someone has opined that: "Their hands shall be shackled", is (not a curse, but) a statement
showing that they have already been inflicted with chastisement because of their arrogance
against Allah in saying: "The hand of Allah is tied up!" But the former interpretation is more
understandable.

"Nay, both His hands are spread out, He expends as He pleases": It is the rebuttal of their claim:
"The hand of Allah is tied up!"

The sentence: "both His hands are spread out", is an allusion to His all-encompassing firmly
rooted power; and such usage is very common.

Allah has said: "both His hands" (although the Jews had used singular in their talk, "The hand of
Allah is tied up!") in order to show His complete and perfect power; as is the case in the verse:
He said: "O Iblis! What prevented thee that thou shouldst do obeisance to him whom I created
with My two hands? Art thou proud or art thou of the exalted ones?" (38:75), as it indicates or
rather clearly shows the use of perfect power in Adam's creation; or as they say: 'You do not
have two hands on her, to emphasize absence of every power and every favor.'
The dictionaries often give various meanings for 'hand' other than the body organ, like power,
strength, favor, ownership and so on. However, the fact remains that word was originally coined
for the said organ, and it is used in other meanings as allusion, because all other meanings have
some affinity with various aspects of the hand, e.g. magnanimity and spending is related to it in
its management and raising up or putting down.

Therefore, when the Book or Sunnah ascribes hand to Allah, its connotation changes with the
context. For example, in the clauses: "both His hands are spread out (5:64)"; and: whom I
created with My two hands (38:75), "hands" means power and its perfection; and in the
clauses:... in Thine hand is the good... (3:26); Therefore glory be to Him in Whose hand is the
Kingdom of everything... (36:83); Blessed is He in Whose hand is the Kingdom... (67:1) and other
such verses, "hand" means kingdom and authority; likewise, in the verse: ...Be not forward in the
presence of Allah and His Messenger... (49:1) the phrase means 'in the presence of as translated
above.

"He expends as He pleases": It elaborates the clause: "both His hands are spread out".

QUR'AN: and what has been revealed to you from your Lord will certainly make many of them
increase in inordinacy and in unbelief: The context shows that this and the sentences coming
after it aim at elaborating the foregoing clauses, "And the Jews say: The hand of Allah is tied up!'
Their hands shall be shackled and they shall be cursed for what they say."

The sentence under discussion indicates that their arrogance against Allah and their utterances
like: "The hand of Allah is tied up!" are not something unexpected from them, because they have
been steeped in transgression and disbelief from their earliest days; and it has emanated from
their oppression and envy. When a man with such characteristics sees that Allah has given
someone else excellence over him and bestows on that person inesteemable favors, his
inordinacy and disbelief is bound to increase.

The Jews believed that they were lords, and the most developed nation of the world; they called
themselves People of the Book, were proud of their doctors of law and scholars, and of their
knowledge and wisdom; they called all other nations gentiles. Now, they saw that a Divine Book
was revealed to a people who until then submitted to the Jewish knowledge and Book - as was
the case between them and the Arabs in the Days of Ignorance. Then they looked in that Book
and found it truly a Book revealed by Allah as a Guardian over all Divine Books of yore. They
realized that it contained clear truth, sublime teaching, and complete guidance. They felt that this
Book would subdue them and put them to shame in the very field that was the source of their
pride, that is, the knowledge, and the Book. Naturally, they became alarmed and outraged, and
their transgression and disbelief increased.

Their increase in transgression and disbelief has been ascribed to the Qur'an inasmuch as no
sooner had their unjust and envious souls seen the revelation of the Qur'an and realized the true
knowledge and manifest Call contained in it, than they rose up in transgression and disbelief.

Moreover, Allah has often attributed in His Book guiding and causing to go astray to Himself.
For example: All do We aid- these as well as those - out of the bounty of your Lord, and the
bounty of your Lord is not confined (17:20); And We reveal of the Qur’an that which is a healing
and a mercy to the believers, and it adds only to the perdition of the unjust (17:82). Causing
someone to go astray - or something similar to it - is considered blameworthy, if it is done
initially, without any cause. But if it done as a retribution of moral depravity or sins committed
by the one gone astray, then there is nothing wrong in such causing to go astray; because the
man's depravity has brought down the divine wrath on him as a recompense of his wrong-doings.
As Allah says: ...but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors (2:26); ...but
when they turned aside, Allah made their hearts turn aside... (61:5).

Ultimately, the statement that the Qur'an increases in their inordinacy and disbelief, means that
they are deprived of divine help, and Allah does not bring them out of their inordinacy and
disbelief to submission to His will and acceptance of the true Call. This topic was explained in
the first volume of this book under the verse: but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the
transgressors (2:26).

Let us return to our original discussion. The verse: "and what has been revealed to you from your
Lord will certainly make many of them increase in ordinacy and in unbelief;" aims at removing
any astonishment as to how could those people who called themselves the People of the Book
and claimed to be the sons and beloveds of Allah, could dare to utter this contemptuous and
insulting sentence that the hand of Allah was tied up.

They are most certainly steeped in inordinacy and disbelief, a trace of which is seen in this
statement; and it is bound to be followed by signs after hideous signs; and this is what is inferred
from the verb having the prefix of the la of oath and suffix of the nun of emphasis.

The verse mentions inordinacy before disbelief, keeping in view the natural sequence, because
disbelief is among the vestiges and results of inordinacy.

QUR'AN: and We have put enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection: The
pronoun "them" refers to the Jews, as is evident from the position of the sentence within the talk
relating particularly to the Jews, although it had initially covered the People of the Book in
general. Accordingly, the enmity and hatred points to the discord and difference that is found in
their various sects and schools of thought. Allah has pointed to it in various places in His Book;
for example: And certainly We gave the Book and the Wisdom and the Prophecy to the Children
of Israel, and We gave them of the goodly things, and We made them excel the nations. And We
gave them clear arguments in the affair, but they did not differ until after knowledge had come to
them, revolting among themselves; surely your Lord will judge between them on the Day of
Resurrection concerning that wherein they differed (45:16-17), apart from other similar verses.

It seems that enmity points to the hate that is accompanied by transgression in action, and hatred
indicates aversion of the heart, even if it does not show in action. The combination of the two in
the verse indicates a hate that causes injustice against another party and the one, which does not
reach that stage.
The clause: "till the Day of Resurrection", obviously shows that their ummah will continue up to
the end of the world.
QUR'AN: whenever they kindle a fire for war Allah puts it out: To kindle a fire is to inflame it,
and to put it out is to extinguish it. The meaning is clear. There is another possibility that the
clause: "whenever they kindle a fire", explains the preceding clause: "and We put enmity and
hatred ..." Thus the meaning will be as follows: Whenever they kindled a fire of war against the
Prophet (s.a.w.) and the believers, Allah puts it out by reviving their internal discords and
differences.

The context points to the divine decree that their endeavors in kindling the fire of war against the
divine religion and against the Muslims (because of their belief in Allah and His signs) are bound
to fail. However, it does not cover those wars, which the Jews might wage against the Muslims,
not for religious motive, but because of politics, or because of ideas of racial or national
superiority.

QUR'AN: and they strive to make mischief in the land; and Allah does not love the mischief-
makers: as-Sa'y (translated here as strive) literally means moving quickly, running; fasaadan
shows the motive of action, i.e., to make mischief. However, Allah does not love the mischief-
makers; and He will not leave them free to achieve what they want, so their endeavors to make
mischief in the land are bound to fail. And Allah knows better.

All of this explains how their hands are tied up and how they are cursed because of their
demeaning utterances; they shall never succeed in achieving what they aimed at by waging war
after war against the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the Muslims, and for which they were continuously
trying to make mischief in the land.

QUR'AN: And if the People of the Book had believed and guarded (against evil) We would
certainly have covered their evil deeds and We would certainly have made them enter gardens of
bliss: The talk again returns to the condition of People of the Book in general as was the case in
beginning; and it ends on description of the favors they have missed in this world and the next -
the gardens of bliss there and the happy life here.

The taqwa mentioned after belief means abstaining from the forbidden things and guarding
against the sins which bring down divine wrath and chastisement of fire in their wake. Such sins
are ascribing a partner to Allah and all those major sins, which Allah has threatened with fire.
Accordingly, the evil deeds mentioned here which Allah has promised to cover would mean
minor misdeeds; and it fits the theme of the verse: If you avoid great sins which you are
forbidden, We will expiate from you your (small) sins and cause you to enter an honorable place
of entering (4:31).

QUR'AN: And if they had kept up the Tawrat and the Injil and that which was revealed to them
from their Lord, they would certainly have eaten from above them and from beneath their feet:
The Tawrat and the Injil mentioned here refer to the two Divine Books which the Qur'an says
were revealed to Musa and 'Isa (peace be on them), rather than the Old and the New Testaments
which these people have got in their hands and which have reportedly been extensively
manipulated and altered by succeeding generations.

Apparently, the clause: "that which was revealed to them from their Lord", refers to all scriptures
attributed to various prophets, which these people have got, like the Psalms of David which the
Qur'an calls Zabur, and other such Books.

The opinion that this clause refers to the Qur'an is not sustainable, because the Qur'an with its
shari'ah has abrogated the laws of the Tawrat and the Injil, and therefore there is no reason to
count it with them and to express the desire that they should have kept those Books up together
with the Qur'an which had abrogated them. May be someone would say that to follow the Qur'an
is to follow also the Tawrat and the Injil; for when one acts on the abrogating rules in Islam, one
acts on the shari'ah of Islam in its totality - which includes the abrogating and the abrogated
rules together, because the divine religion is one, and its parts are not in conflict with one
another; utmost that can be said is that some laws are temporary, are valid up to a fixed time
without any contradiction. But this view is not correct, because Allah describes this act as
"keeping up" that is firmly preserving something on its roots. Such expression is not suitable for
abrogated laws per se\ so the Tawrat and the Injil could correctly be kept up at the time when
they were not abrogated by any other shari'ah; and the Injil did not abrogate the shari'ah of the
Tawrat except in some minor aspects.

Moreover, the clause: "that which was revealed to them from their Lord", refers to the Books,
which were revealed to the Jews and the Christians, and we have never seen the Qur'an to be
described as being revealed to them.

Obviously, this clause refers to the scriptures, which were revealed after the Tawrat and the Injil,
including various kinds of revelations sent to the prophets of the Israelites, like the Psalms of
David, etc. To keep those Books up means diligently obeying the divine laws contained in those
Books, and believing the gnosis of genesis and return which Allah had described therein. It is a
far cry from manipulating those truths through alteration, concealment, and abandonment. If they
had properly kept up the Books they would certainly have eaten from above them and from
beneath their feet.

The eating mentioned in this clause alludes to a life of ease and comfort, whether it is through
eating or using some other luxuries. The use of "eating" for general management and unrestricted
enjoyment is common in the language.

"from above them" indicates from the heaven, and "from beneath their feet" means from the
earth. The sentence alludes that they would enjoy the blessings of the heaven and the earth, and
would be encompassed by those blessings. It is the same theme which is given in the verse: And
if the people of the towns had believed and guarded (against evil), We would certainly have
opened up for them blessings from the heaven and the earth; but they rejected, so We overtook
them for what they had earned (7:96).

The verse proves that the belief and good deeds of the human species have an effect on the good
of the creative system inasmuch as it has a connection with this species. So if this species
behaved properly the whole system of the world would remain good, because it would fulfill
what is necessary for a happy life of man - by repelling the misfortune and abundance of
blessings.
Many other Qur'anic verses prove it in clear words: Corruption has appeared in the land and the
sea on account of what the hands of men have wrought, that He may make them taste a part of
that which they have done, so that they may return. Say: "Travel in the land, then see how was
the end of those before; most of them were polytheists (30:41-42); And whatever affliction befalls
you, it is on account of what your hands have wrought... (42:30), apart from other such verses.
We have mentioned in the second volume (English volume 3) of our book some matters relevant
to the effects of human deeds.

QUR'AN: there is a party of them keeping to the moderate course, and (as for) most of them,
evil is that which they do: al-Iqtisad is to adhere to al-qasd (the middle course); thus the
moderate group is the one which keeps to the middle course in religious affairs and submits to
the commandments of Allah.

The talk is a fresh start to describe that all that has been attributed to them - their exceeding the
limits imposed by Allah, their disbelief in divine signs, their affliction by divine wrath and the
curse on their bands - portrays the condition of their majority; and that is why all these evils have
been ascribed to them; however, there is among them a moderate group which is above these
demerits. This is an example of the justice the divine speech contains, as it does not ignore
anyone's right, and shows appreciation of reviving the affairs of truth however little it may be.

This reality has been alluded to in many preceding verses, but not so clearly; for example, the
divine words: ...and that most of you are transgressors (5:59); And you will see many of them
striving -with one another to hasten in sin and exceeding the limit... (5:62); ...and what has been
revealed to you from your Lord will certainly make many of them increase in inordinacy and in
unbelief (5:64).

Traditions
al-Qummi writes under the verse: And when they come to you they say: "We believe;"... "It was
revealed about 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy, when he pretended to accept Islam, while they had come in
with disbelief. (at-Tafsir)

The author says: The context clearly shows that these verses were revealed about the People of
the Book, not about the hypocrites, except if this verse is claimed to be revealed alone.

The same book says about the words: and indeed they go forth with it, i.e. they went forth with
disbelief, without faith, (ibid.)

al-Kulayni narrates through his chain from Abu Basir, from 'Umar ibn Riyah, from Abu Ja'far
(a.s.) that he said, "I told him, 'I have been informed that you say that whoever divorced in
contravention to sunnah you do not consider his divorce (to be) anything.' Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said,
'It is not I that say so; but Allah, the Mighty, the Great, says it. Why by Allah! Were we to give
you legal opinion with injustice, we would have been worse than you. Verily, Allah says: Why
do not the learned men and the doctors of law prohibit them from their speaking of what is sinful
and their eating of what is unlawfully acquired? (al-Kafi)

al-'Ayyashi narrates from Abu Basir that he said, "I said to Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), 'Verily, 'Umar
ibn Riyah thinks that you have said, "There is no divorce except with proof (i.e. with two just
witnesses)."'" Abu Basir said that (the Imam, a.s.) said, "It is not I that have said so, but Allah,
the Blessed, the Sublime, says it. Why, by Allah! Were we to give you legal opinion with
injustice, we would have been worse than you. Verily, Allah says: Why do not the learned men
and the doctors of law... (at-Tafsir)

ash-Shaykh narrates through his chain from Ibn Abi 'Umayr, from Hisham ibn Salim, from Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.) regarding the words of Allah, the High: And the Jews say: "The hand of Allah is
tied up." "He said that they used to say, 'He has concluded all affairs.'" (al-Majalis)

The author says: al-'Ayyashi has narrated this connotation in his at-Tafsir from Ya'qub ibn
Shu'ayb and Hammad from the same Imam (a.s.).

al-Qummi narrates (from the same Imam, a.s.) that he said, "They used to say, 'Allah has
concluded all affairs; He does not bring forth other than that which He had ordained in the first
ordination.' Therefore, Allah rebutted them and said: Nay, both His hands are spread out, He
expends as He pleases, i.e. He brings (something) forward and puts (another) back, and He
increases and decreases; to Him belong al-bada' and volition." (at-Tafsir)

The author says: as-Saduq has narrated this theme in his Ma'ani 'l-akhbar, through his chain,
from Ishaq ibn 'Ammar, from the one who heard it, from as-Sadiq (a.s.).

al-'Ayyashi narrates from Hisham al-Mashriqi from Abu'l-Hasan al-Khurasani (a.s.), (i.e. ar-
Rida, a.s.), that he said, "Indeed Allah is as He has described Himself, the One, on Whom all
depend, the Light." Then he said, "Rather, both His hands are spread out." (Hisham says,) "I said
to him, 'Well, does He have two hands like this?' - and I pointed with my hand to his hand. He
said, 'If He were like this, He would have been a created thing.'" (at-Tafsir)

The author says: as-Saduq has narrated it in al- 'Uyuun, through his chain from al-Mashriqi
from the Imam (a.s.).

as-Saduq narrates through his chain from Muhammad ibn Muslim that he said, "I asked Ja'far
(a.s.), and said, '(What is the explanation of) His word, the Mighty, the Great: O Iblis! What
prevented thee that thou shouldst do obeisance to him whom I created with My two hands!
(38:75).' (The Imam, a.s.), said, 'Hand in the language of Arabs is (used) for power and favor; He
has said: And remember Our servant Dawud, the powerful (38:17), (lit: owner of hands); and the
heaven, We created it by hands, (i.e. by power) and verily We are expanding (51:47); and He has
said: and He strengthened them with a spirit from Himself (58:22);' (the Imam said) 'i.e. He gave
them strength; and it is said, "I owe that man a bright hand," i.e. a boon and grace.'" (Ma'ani 'l-
akhbar)

al-Qummi writes in his at-Tafsir about the word of Allah: And if they had kept up the Tawrat
and the Injil - i.e. the Jews and the Christians — they would certainly have eaten from above
them and from beneath their feet - from above them (alludes to) rain, and from beneath their feet,
vegetation.

al-'Ayyashi narrates under the divine word: there is a party of them keeping to the moderate
course, from Abu 's-Sahba' al-Kubra that he said, "I heard 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (who) invited
Ra'su'l-Jalut and the Bishop of the Christians and said, 'I am going to ask you of a matter - and I
know it better than you do - so do not conceal (it).' Then he called the Bishop of the Christians
and said, 'I adjure you by Allah, Who sent down Injil to 'Isa, and put blessings on his foot, and
(because of which, 'Isa) healed the blind and the lepers, and removed the pain of the eye, and
made for you birds out of clay and he informed you of what you ate and what you stored.' (The
bishop) said, 'I would tell truth (even) for less than that.'

"So 'Ali (a.s.), said, 'Into how many (sects) were the Israelites divided after 'Isa?' He said, ‘No,
by Allah! Not even a single sect.' Then 'Ali (a.s.) said, 'You have told untruth. By Allah, that
there is no god except Him! Indeed they had divided into seventy-two sects; all of them are in the
Fire except one sect. Verily, Allah says: there is a part of them keeping to the moderate course,
and (as for) most of them, evil is that which they do; it is that which shall be saved.'" (at-Tafsir)

The same book narrates from Zayd ibn Aslam, from Anas ibn Malik, that he said, "The
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), used to say, 'The ummah of Musa divided into seventy-one sects,
seventy of them were in the Fire and one in the Garden; and the ummah of 'Isa into seventy-two
sects, seventy-one of them is in the Fire and one is in the Garden; and my ummah will rise over
the two sects together with one group in the Garden, and seventy-two (of their sects) (will go) to
the Fire.' They (the companions) said, 'Who are they? O Messenger of Allah!' He said, The
groups, the gro.ups.'" (ibid.)

Ya'qub ibn Yazid said, "Whenever 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.), narrated this hadith from the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), he used to recite the (verse of the) Qur'an: And if the People of the
Book had believed and guarded (against evil) We would certainly have covered their evil deeds...
evil is that which they do; and he also recited, and from among those We created, there is a
group who guide with truth and they do justice with it - i.e. the ummah of Muhammad (s.a.w.)."

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verse 67

 
{ َ‫اس ِإ َّن هّللا َ الَ يَ ْه ِدي ْالقَوْ َم ْال َكافِ ِرين‬ ِ ‫ك َوإِن لَّ ْم تَ ْف َعلْ فَ َما بَلَّ ْغتَ ِر َسالَتَهُ َوهّللا ُ يَع‬ ُ
ِ َّ‫ك ِمنَ الن‬
َ ‫ْص ُم‬ ِ ‫يَا أَيُّهَا ال َّرسُو ُل بَلِّ ْغ َما أ‬
َ ‫نز َل إِلَ ْي‬
َ ِّ‫ك ِمن َّرب‬
}67
{67} O Messenger! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not,
then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people; surely
Allah will not guide the unbelieving people.
 

General Comment
The meaning of the verse itself is clear. It contains an order in the form of threat to the
Messenger (s.a.w.) to convey the message, and promises to protect him from the people. If we
ponder on the verse looking at the position it has been placed in, and look at the verses preceding
and following it, you will see them exposing the condition of the People of the Book and
admonishing and condemning them for their various transgressions, their crossing the limit and
indulging in things prohibited by Allah and their rejection of divine communications. For
example, the preceding verse says: And if they had kept up the Tawrat and the Injil and that
which was revealed to them from their Lord, they would certainly have eaten from above them
and from beneath their feet;... ; and the following one says: Say: "0 People of the Book! You
have no ground to stand upon until you keep up the Tawrat and the Injil and that which is
revealed to you from your Lord; "...

Then ponder on the verse itself and see how its clauses are inter linked together. Now, you will
be astonished, (and realize that this verse is not connected with the preceding or following
verses).

Had this verse been connected to the preceding and following verses which deal with the People
of the Book, it would have meant that the Prophet (s.a.w.) was ordered in extremely harsh words
to deliver what Allah had revealed regarding the People of the Book; and the context would
show that: what has been revealed to you from your Lord refers to what he was told to convey in
the immediately following verse: Say: "0 People of the Book! You have no ground to stand upon
until you keep up the Tawrat and the Injil and that which is revealed to you from your Lord; "...

But the context of the verse itself rejects this interpretation. The clause: and Allah will protect
you from the people, shows that the revealed order which the Prophet (s.a.w.) is urged to convey
is a very important one; the delivery of which would put the life of the Prophet (s.a.w.) in peril or
would cause the divine religion to fail in its aim. But the Jews or the Christians did not have such
a power during the days of the Prophet (s.a.w.) as to put his life in danger to such an extent as to
justify holding back or delaying its conveyance, until Allah gives him a promise to protect him
from the people if he conveys the revealed order. Even in the early days of the Prophet's hijrah to
Medina the People of the Book were not in a position to put his life in danger, although the Jews
were fiercely opposed to him and their active opposition ultimately led to the battle of Khaybar,
etc.

Moreover, this verse does not contain any tough order or any vehement word. The Prophet had
delivered before that the verses, which were harder, sharper and much bitter than it for the Jews.
Also, before that he was told to convey to the unbelievers of the Quraysh and the polytheists of
Arabia what was more distasteful than it, e.g. the message of Tawhid (Oneness of God) and the
rebuttal of idol worship. Besides, those people were more ruthless, more violent and more given
to bloodshed than the Jews and other People of the Book. Hence, Allah did not use any
threatening word when ordering him to convey His message, nor did He find it necessary to give
him assurance of His protection.

Apart from that, the verses describing the condition of the People of the Book constitute the
major part of the chapter, "The Table". Therefore, this verse was certainly revealed in it; and at
the time this chapter was revealed, the Jews' power was already broken, their fire had died down,
and they were engulfed by the divine curse and wrath. Whenever they kindled a fire for war,
Allah put it out. In this background, there was no reason for the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) to
fear them regarding the divine religion. They had already entered through peace treaties in the
domain of Islam and they, as well as the Christians, had agreed to pay jizyah. How could Allah
talk, in this environment, about the Messenger's fear and worry in delivering the divine message
to them; while he had conveyed to them messages which were much harder, and stood before
them in surroundings which were more frightful and more weird.

Thus, there is no room for any doubt that this verse is totally separate in its context from that of
the preceding and following verses; and has no connection with them. In short, it is a single
verse, which was revealed alone.

The verse speaks about an order which was sent to the Prophet (s.a.w.) the entire religion or
some parts of it and the Prophet (s.a.w.) was afraid of the people in delivering that message and
kept postponing it waiting for a suitable time. If there were no fear and no delaying there was no
reason why he should be addressed in such a threatening way: and if you do it not, then you have
not delivered His message. Compare it with the verses revealed in early period of the Call none
of which has any shade of threat. For example: Read in the name of thy Lord Who created... (to
the end of ch.96); 0 you who are enwrapped, arise and warn (74:1 2);... therefore, follow the
right way to Him and ask His forgiveness; and woe to the polytheists (41:6), apart from other
such verses.

No doubt, the Prophet (s.a.w.) was afraid of the people, but he was not afraid of sacrificing his
life in the cause of Allah, because his whole life and character is a rebuttal of such thinking.
Moreover, Allah Himself testifies about His Messengers that they did not fear the adversaries.
For example: There is no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has ordained for him; such
has been the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before; and the command of
Allah is a decree that is made absolute. Those who deliver the message of Allah and fear Him,
and do not fear any one hut Allah; and Allah is sufficient to take account (33:38 39). Also, Allah
has said concerning such situations: ...so do not fear them, and fear Me if you are believers
(3:175). And He has praised a group of believers that they were not afraid of the people although
the people had tried to frighten them: Those to whom the people said "Surely men have gathered
against you, therefore fear them "; but this (only) increased their faith, and they said "Allah is
sufficient for us and most excellent Protector is (He). " So they returned with favor from Allah
and (His) grace; no evil touched them and they followed the pleasure of Allah; and Allah is the
Lord of mighty grace (3:173 4).
Also, it is not possible to say that the Prophet (s.a.w.) was afraid for his life because if he were
killed the divine mission was bound to perish, and for this reason he was delaying its conveyance
waiting for a suitable time. But this hypothesis is patently false, because Allah says: You have no
concern in the affair... (3:128); and if they had killed the Prophet (s.a.w.) Allah had power to
revive His mission through any means He pleased and any cause He wished.

Of course, it is possible to infer from the clause: and Allah will protect you from the people, that
the Prophet (s.a.w.) was afraid of the people concerning the delivery that they would accuse him
(of having selfish motive), which would irreparably damage the whole fabric of conveyance. He
had permission from Allah to use his discretion in such matters, and it had no connection with
any fear regarding his own self.

The above description makes it clear that the verse was not revealed in the early days of
prophethood, as some exegetes have thought; as in that case there would be no sense in the
clause: and Allah will protect you from the people; because such an interpretation would imply
that Prophet (s.a.w.) was delaying the delivery of the divine message because he was afraid that
they would kill him and it would cost him his life, or would nullify the effects of tabligh. But
such a hypothesis is not tenable.

Again, let us see what is the connotation of the phrase: what has been revealed to you from your
Lord. Does it mean the whole religion? If so, then the clauses: and if you do it not, then you have
not delivered His message, would mean: 0 Messenger! Deliver the religion, and if you do not
deliver the religion, then you did not deliver the religion!

Someone has said: The verse means: If you do not deliver the message, then you will be liable to
blame for dereliction of duty and negligence of what Allah had most emphatically commanded
you to do and it is in the same vein as the well known Arab poet, Abu 'n-Najm, has said: I'm Abu
'n Najm, and my poem is my poem.

But this explanation is wrong; such rhetorical expressions are used regarding the general and the
particular, or the unrestricted and the restricted, and such expressions allude that the both are one
and the same; as Abu 'n Najm says that my poem is my poem, i.e., no one should think that my
talent has now dulled, or vicissitudes of time have adversely affected my genius and robbed me
of the gift of poetry; because the poem which I compose today has the same brilliance which my
poems had in the past.

However, this explanation cannot be applied to the divine speech: and if you do it not, then you
have not delivered His message. Because if it is believed that the verse was revealed in early
days of prophethood, then the message the religion in its totality or the basic religion was a
single unit, not changeable or alterable. Then how can it be said that if you did not deliver this
message then you did not deliver that message of the basic messages; admittedly in the
beginning it was the basic message that was a collection of religious cognition.

It is now clear that the verse could not have been revealed in the early period of prophethood, nor
can the phrase: what has been revealed to you from your Lord, point to the basic religion or
totality of religion either in the early days or at any later period; because all such interpretations
would render the clause: and if you do it not then you have not delivered His message, devoid of
meaning and irrelevant.

We should reiterate here that: If message were to refer to the basic or total religion, then the
words: 0 Messenger! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord, could not have been
revealed except in the early days of prophethood, as is clear; And the problem would remain as
before, that the Prophet (s.a.w.) was afraid of the people in delivering the divine message.

Apparently, the matter which was revealed to the Prophet (s.a.w.) and this verse put emphasis on
its delivery was not the religion in its totality, or basic religion whatever meaning is understood
from it. Therefore, we have to admit that it was a part of religion. The meaning in this case will
be as follows: 0 Messenger! Deliver the particular command revealed to you from your Lord,
and if you do it not, then you have not delivered Allah's message at all. According to this
interpretation, "His message" means all the things that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had
brought as part of religion. Otherwise, the previous trouble that the speech would be devoid of
meaning - would continue. Let us put it in this way: If "His message" means this particular order,
it would means: 'Deliver this order, and if you did it not, you did not deliver this message!' It is
clearly absurd.

The verse therefore means: '0 Messenger! Deliver this particular command, and if you do it not,
then you have not delivered the basic message or the message in its totality.' This meaning is
correct and understandable and then the speech will be in the style of the poem of Abu'n Najm:
I'm Abu 'n Najm, and my poem is poem.

Why was this order so important that if it was not conveyed then the message was not conveyed
at all? It was because religion's knowledge and commands are inter linked, inter twined with one
another on all sides; if one coil is unraveled, the whole material is destructed especially in the
sphere of delivery because each item is connected with all others. This supposition has no defect
in itself, yet the clauses coming after it: and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah
will not guide the unbelieving people, do not fit on it. These clauses clearly show that some
unbelieving people had decided to oppose this revealed command, or, seeing their tendency, they
were expected to oppose it to the extreme. They would use every strategy to nullify this divine
mission and neutralize it, so that it could not bring about any effect or benefit. Therefore, Allah
promised His Messenger that He would protect him from them, nullify their artifice and leave
them wandering in their own viles.

This meaning does not fit on any revealed order whatsoever; because the religious cognition and
orders in Islam are not all of them of the same importance, some are the pillars of religion, others
are like the invocation on sighting the crescent, there is prohibition of adultery and that of
looking at a stranger woman. The fear that the Prophet (s.a.w.) had and for which Allah promised
him His protection, cannot be related to every such order; obviously it had emanated from some
especial commandment.

The fact, that if this commandment was not conveyed, then no other order was conveyed, shows
its utmost importance, and makes it crystal clear that this particular order occupies such a central
position in the whole structure that if it was left unannounced, it would amount to leaving all
other orders unannounced, because its relation to other items is like that of soul with body; if it is
disconnected, there would remain only a dead body, devoid of feeling, movement (and
perception, etc.). The verse thus proves that Allah had sent to his Messenger (s.a.w.) an order
which was to complete the religion, and by which the religion would firmly settle in its proper
pedestal. As such there was a danger that the people would oppose it and strive hard to overturn
it against the Prophet (s.a.w.) aiming at demolishing the structure of religion he had built and
disintegrating all its parts. The Prophet (s.a. w.a.), having intuitive knowledge of the people's
nature, understood their tendency and was afraid that they would contrive to neutralize all his
endeavors. Accordingly, he kept postponing its delivery from time to time, waiting for a suitable
circumstances and peaceful atmosphere, in order that his mission might be successful and his
endeavors fruitful. But Allah ordered him to make haste in conveying that message, showing to
him its importance, and promising to protect him from the people. In this way, He assured him
that He would not let their plans succeed, nor would they be able to overturn his Mission's
affairs.

Overturning the Prophetic Mission and negating his efforts after the spread of Islam was not
possible for the polytheists and idol worshippers of Arabia or outside. In other words, it is not
possible to suppose that the verse was revealed in Mecca before hijrah, and the Prophet (s.a.w.)
was afraid that the people would slander and accuse him of lying in his affairs, as Allah quotes
their calumnies in the Qur'an: "One taught (by others), a madman" (44:14); "A poet, we wait for
him the evil accidents of time" (52:30); "A magician or a mad man " (51:52); "You follow only a
man deprived of reason " (17:47); "This is not but enchantment, narrated" (74:24); "The stories
of the ancients he has got them written so these are read out to him morning and evening" (25:5);
"Only a mortal teaches him. . ", (16: 103); "Go and steadily adhere to your gods, this is most
surely a thing sought after" (38:6); and other such things which they used to say about him
(s.a.w.). However, such talks could not shake the foundation of religion. They only show if they
show anything the confusion and perturbation in their ideas and their crookedness. Moreover,
such slanders were not reserved for the Prophet (s.a.w.), so that he would be disturbed because of
them or afraid of their appearance; in fact all the messengers and prophets were equally made
targets of such afflictions and misfortunes; they all had to face such unpalatable situations from
their people, as Allah has described in the stories of Nuh and the succeeding prophets who are
mentioned in the Qur'an.

If there was something like that and there must have been it could be imagined after the hijrah
when the religion was firmly established in the Islamic society. The Muslims were then a mixed
lot: There were good believers, and there were the hypocrites who were powerful and could not
be under rated. Lastly there were those whose hearts were diseased whom the Mighty Book calls
"the listeners". These people dealt with the Prophet (s.a.w.) although they believed in him really
or apparently like the kings are dealt with; and the divine religion in their eyes was not different
from man made national laws. All this may be seen in various sets of Qur'anic verses; and some
of them have already been explained in previous volumes of this book.

In this background, it could possibly happen that delivery of some orders which could apparently
give some advantage to the Prophet (s.a.w.), could generate a misconception in those people's
minds that he is a king in the guise of prophethood, and his shariah is the worldly law disguised
as religion; as we find its evidence in some people's talk on various occasions.
If this or similar doubt had entered into their hearts, it would have generated such corruption and
perversion in religion which no power on earth could rectify or anyone could remove. Obviously,
this revealed order which the Prophet had to deliver was of such a nature that people could think
of it to be especially benefiting the Prophet (s.a.w.), and that it was particularly reserved to him
without any Muslim having any part in it, like the story of Zayd, and plurality of marriages and
the one fifth of the war booty, etc.

However, the especial rules, if not affecting general Muslims, were not expected to create doubts
in minds. For examples, permission of marriage with a woman divorced by an adopted son was
not particularly reserved to him. Likewise, if marrying more than four wives were based on his
own desire without permission of Allah, there was nothing to prevent him from allowing it to all
Muslims. His life long conduct of giving preference to Muslims over his own self in division of
wealth, etc. which came into his hands leaves no room for any doubt in such affairs.

All the above elaboration makes it clear that the verse speaks about a revealed order that could
create a misunderstanding that it contains a sort of personal benefit and interest for the Prophet
(s.a.w.), and gives him a privilege, which the others too would have desired; and its delivery and
enforcement would deprive them of its enjoyment. That is why the Prophet (s.a.w.) was afraid of
its delivery. But Allah ordered him to convey it and put utmost emphasis on this delivery, and
promised to protect him from the people, telling him that his adversaries will not succeed in their
machination, even if they tried.

This supports the traditions, narrated by both sects, that the verse was revealed about the
guardianship of 'Ali (a.s.); that Allah had sent direction to convey this commandment, but the
Prophet (s.a.w.) was afraid that the people would accuse him regarding his cousin; that was why
he kept postponing its delivery until this verse was sent down; and he delivered it at Ghadir
Khumm, and announced: "He whose mawla (Guardian) am I, this 'Ali is his mawla."

The essentiality of the Guardianship of the affairs of the ummah for religion is clear without any
doubt. Islam is a religion so comprehensive and all encompassing that it has laid down for the
whole the people in all regions and for all times all fundamental gnosis, ethical principles and
practical rules which cover all human movement and stillness, separately and collectively,
contrary to other general legal systems. How can it be imagined that such a comprehensive
system does not need a guardian who should protect and preserve it properly. Or, can it be said
that of all the human societies, only the Muslim ummah and Islamic society is so self sufficient
that it does not need any ruler to manage its affairs and look after its interests. What excuse can
be offered to a research scholar who looks at the social system established by the Prophet (s.a.w.)
and finds that whenever he went out of Medina, he invariably always put a man in his place to
manage the society. He had appointed 'Ali in his place in Medina at the time of going forth to
Tabuk; 'Ali said: "0 Messenger of Allah! Are you leaving me among the women and children?"
The Prophet (s.a.w.) said: "Well, are you not pleased that you should be to me as Harun was to
Musa, except that there is no prophet after me?"

And the Prophet (s.a.w.) used to appoint governors in all towns, which were in the hands of the
Muslims, e.g., Mecca, Taif and Yemen, etc. Likewise, he appointed people at the head of
expeditions and battalions, which he used to send around. And what difference is there between
his lifetime and after his death? Rather the essentiality of such appointment is more emphatic for
the time after his departure from this world; and the need of such a ruler at that time is more and
more pressing.

Commentary
Qur'an: 0 Messenger! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord: The order is
addressed to the Messenger, as it is the most appropriate attribute to the conveying the divine
order, which was revealed. It is a sort of proof that the delivery mentioned in the verse is
obligatory and compulsory; because the only function of a messenger is to convey the message
he is entrusted with. In other words, the office of Messengership obligates him to deliver the
message.

The verse does not elaborate what was revealed to him from his Lord. It alludes to it just as a
thing revealed to him. This vagueness points to the greatness of that message, and shows that the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had no hand in it, nor did he have any authority in his own affairs. It
would be another proof that he (s.a.w.) had no power or discretion to keep the order secret and
postpone its conveyance from this time to that. It also provided him with an excuse that he had
been obligated to deliver this order; and showed that he was perfectly justified in fearing the
people in this respect; but at the same time indicated that this important order had to be
announced by him, in his own words, through his own tongue.

Qur'an: and if you do it not, then you have not delivered his message: Some reciters have read,
"his messages" in plural. In any case, it means the totality of the messages that was sent by Allah
to His Messenger (s.a.w.). We have explained above that this clause shows the utmost
importance of the order alluded to; and that it enjoyed such a dignity and position that if it was
not conveyed then it would be as if no message was ever delivered by him.

The speech is constructed as a threat; and in reality it connotes the importance of the order if this
one order was not conveyed to the people and its implications were not preserved, it would be as
though no other part of religion was ever conveyed.

It is a conditional sentence, to show the importance of the conditional clause; that its subordinate
clause depends totally on the principle one for its existence.

This conditional sentence is not like such sentences found in our speech. We use conditional
sentences because we do not know whether the principle clause would lake place, bringing about
with it the subordinate clause. But far be it from the position of the Prophet (s.a.w.) that the
Qur'an should imply that it was not sure whether the Prophet would convey or not the revealed
message. And Allah says: Allah best knows where He places His message (6:124).
In short, this sentence apparently contains a threat, but in fact it makes it known to the Prophet
(s.a.w.) and other people the utmost importance of the order and that the Messenger had no
power to delay its delivery.

Qur'an: and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving
people: ar Raghib has said: "al 'Asm means to take hold; and al i'tisam is to adhere. al-'Isam is
strap, that which is used for binding; the prophets enjoy 'ismah i.e. Allah protects them, first
through the pure nature which is reserved for them; then through the physical and psychological
virtues which He has bestowed upon them. Then through helping them and keeping their feet
firm (on righteousness); then by sending tranquility upon them and protecting their hearts, and
finally through tawfiq (divine help); Allah says: "and Allah will protect you from the people".
And al 'ismah is like bracelet, and al-mi'sam is wrist, the part of hand where it is worn; the wrist's
whiteness is called 'ismah, likening it to bracelet, as the whiteness of foot is called tahjil (wearing
anklet); in the same vein they say, a'sam (white footed) crow (i.e. rare)."

Allamah Tabataba'I says: The explanation given above of the prophets' 'ismah is good, there is
no objection to it; but those meanings cannot be applied to the verse under discussion: and Allah
will protect you from the people; if we were to apply it, it may be applied to the verse: ...and they
shall not harm you in any way, and Allah has revealed to you the Book and the Wisdom, and He
has taught you what you did not know, and Allah's grace on you is very great (4:113). As for the
clause: and Allah will protect you from the people, the verb, ya'sim, in it apparently denotes
protection and safety from the people's evil which they aimed at the noble person of the Prophet,
or his religious objectives or at the success of his Call and the triumph of his endeavors in short,
any connotation appropriate to his sacred office.

However, looking at the usage of this word, we find that it actually means holding fast and
clutching. Therefore, its use in the meaning of protection is based on allusion, because protection
necessitates holding it fast.

Protection from the people is unrestricted and general. It does not say from which type of
machination of the people the Prophet shall be protected. Does it point to their transgression and
endeavors to harm him in body, like murder, poisoning, or assassination? Or through speech, like
abusing and slandering? Or through some other devices, like disrupting his affairs one way or
another through treachery, deception and double dealing? In short this non identification of
things protected against, implies a sort of generalization; yet the context confines it to their evil
that could have disrupted and destroyed what he had built and raised of the structure of religion.

"The people" refers to all human beings, without looking at any specialty, be it natural and in
field of creation, like masculinity and femininity, or otherwise, like knowledge, virtues, and
richness, etc. That is why it is seldom used for other than a group; and for this very reason, it
often points to virtuous human beings if the virtue spoken of has some relation with humanity, as
Allah says: And when it is said to them: "Believe as the people have believed" (2:13) i.e. those in
whom meaning of humanity is found, and it is by which truth is perceived and distinguished
from falsity.

Also, sometimes it denotes a sort of vileness and downfall in circumstances. This happens when
the subject of talk is a thing in which some such human virtues are contemplated which are
extraneous to the basic theme of the species, as Allah says: ...but most people do not know
(30:30). Or, as you may say: Don't put trust in the people's promises; or, don't seek help from
their masses. In the above clauses, you want to express the idea that trust or appeal to help should
be placed in virtuous people who have natural disposition to fulfill their undertakings and to
remain firm on their stand; that you should not trust such people who are merely called humans,
without any praise or blame being attached to them; (especially) when the main theme does not
indicate any merit or demerit other than the basic meaning of humanity, as Allah says: 0 you
people! Surely We have created you of a male and a female and made you nations and tribes that
you may recognize each other; surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one who is
most pious;… (49:13).

Probably, the word: "the people", in the clause: "and Allah will protect you from the people",
points to the multitude of people which encompasses believers and hypocrites and those whose
hearts are diseased; all of them are mixed together without any distinction. Therefore, if there is a
cause to fear them, all of them combined will be feared. Probably the clause: "surely Allah will
not guide the unbelieving people," points to it. This clause explains the reason of the preceding
one: "and Allah will protect you from the people"; it has been described earlier that the verse was
revealed after hijrah when the Islam had gained upper hand in Arabia, and most of the people
had apparently entered into the fold of Islam, although there were among them the hypocrites
and those whose hearts were diseased. Therefore, the phrase: "unbelieving people" denotes those
who were mingled with the general public, who were not called "unbelievers" yet the
characteristics of disbelief had taken root in their hearts. And through this clause, Allah has
given assurance that He will nullify their machinations and protect His Messenger from their
evil.

Also, it seems clear that in this clause, disbelief, means disbelieving in one of the
commandments of Allah, i.e. the order to which the phrase: what has been revealed to you from
your Lord, points; it is the same style that has been used in the verse of Hajj: ...and whoever
disbelieves, then surely Allah is Self sufficient (independent) of the worlds (3:97).

In any case, the context of the verse does not allow taking "disbelief" in the meaning of rejection
of the two testimonies. Such views can only be considered if we take: what has been revealed to
you from your Lord, as referring to the sum total of all the revealed messages, but you have seen
that this interpretation has no leg to stand upon.
The statement that Allah will not guide the disbelievers, means that He will not guide them in
their treachery and machinations, and will prevent usual causes to submit to them when they
proceed to their objectives of evil and mischief. It is like the verses: ...surely Allah does not
guide the transgressing people (63:6);... and Allah does not guide aright the unjust people
(2:258). Detailed discussion on this subject may be seen in volume two of this book.

It is certainly not correct to say that the non guidance here means not guiding them to correct
faith, because it goes against the basic concept of Divine Call. How can Allah tell His
Messenger: You call them to Allah, or, invite them to obey the divine command, but I will not
guide them to it, except for the purpose of completing the proof against them!

Moreover, we see with our own eyes that Allah guides a lot of unbelievers to faith, and continues
to do so every day; and He Himself has said: ...and Allah guides whom He pleases to the straight
path (2:213).

Now, it is crystal clear that not guiding the unbelievers means that Allah does not let them
achieve their goal of negating the word of truth and extinguishing the light of the revealed
commandments. The unbelievers as well as the unjust people and the transgressors, under the
influence of their sinister minds and erroneous views, want to change the custom of Allah, which
encompasses the whole creation. They intend to divert the proceedings of true causes (which are
free from stigma of disobeying the Lord of the universe) towards their own false goals and
wicked destinations. But their formal powers can never debilitate Almighty Lord. Let them
ponder on this question. Who has put these powers in their body? The only answer is: Allah.
(How can these powers overpower their Creator?)

They might occasionally succeed in their endeavors and obtain for a short time what they want,
but soon all this is turned upside down and their trickery turns against themselves: ...and the evil
plan does not beset any save the authors of it... (35:43);... thus does Allah compare truth and
falsehood; then as for the scum, it passes away as a worthless thing; and as for that which profits
the people, it remains in the earth; thus does Allah set forth parables (13:17)

Accordingly, the clause: "surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people", elaborates the
preceding one: "and Allah will protect you from the people", putting some limitation on its
generality. The protection then means that Allah will protect him (s.a.w.) so that the people do
not inflict any harm on him before he achieves his objectives of delivering this order and
announcing it to the ummah. For example, He will not let them kill him before he conveys the
message; they would not be able to rise against him or overturn his affairs, or accuse him of such
matters which would make the believers go out of his religion, or affect such devices which
would destroy and annihilate this shari'ah. Nay, Allah will certainly make the word of truth
victorious, and establish the religion as He pleases, wherever He pleases and whenever He
‫‪pleases. Allah says: If He pleases, He can make you pass away, 0 people! And bring others; and‬‬
‫‪Allah has the power to do this (4:133).‬‬

‫‪However, the verse: "and Allah will protect you from the people", cannot be taken to imply a‬‬
‫‪general and all encompassing protection from all and every trouble and harm; because such a‬‬
‫‪view is rebutted by the Qur'an, the hadith and accepted history. The Prophet (s.a.w.) had to suffer‬‬
‫‪from his people be they believers, unbelievers or hypocrites such misfortunes, tribulations and‬‬
‫‪multifarious afflictions and grievances which nobody could ever bear except the noble Prophet‬‬
‫"‪(s.a.w.); and he has said in a famous hadith: "No prophet was ever harmed like I have been.‬‬

‫‪Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 68-‬‬

‫‪86‬‬
‫‪ ‬‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ب لَ ْستُ ْم َعلَى َش ْي ٍء َحتَّ َى تُقِي ُم ْ‬ ‫قُلْ يَا أَ ْه َل ْال ِكتَا ِ‬
‫ك ِمن‬ ‫نز َل ِإلَ ْي َ‬ ‫نز َل إِلَ ْي ُكم ِّمن َّربِّ ُك ْم َولَيَ ِزيد ََّن َكثِيراً ِّم ْنهُم َّما أ ِ‬ ‫وا التَّوْ َراةَ َوا ِإلن ِجي َل َو َما أ ِ‬
‫ْ‬
‫صا َرى َمن آ َمنَ بِا ِ َواليَوْ ِم‬‫هّلل‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫س َعلى القوْ ِم ال َكافِ ِرينَ {‪ }68‬إِ َّن ال ِذينَ آ َمنوا َوال ِذينَ هَادُوا َوالصَّابِ ُؤونَ َوالن َ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ك طُ ْغيَانًا َو ُك ْفرًا فال تَأ َ‬
‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َّربِّ َ‬
‫يل َوأَرْ َس ْلنَا إِلَ ْي ِه ْم ُر ُسالً ُكلَّ َما َجاءهُ ْم‬ ‫ق بَنِي إِ ْس َرائِ َ‬ ‫ف َعلَ ْي ِه ْم َوالَ هُ ْم يَحْ َزنُونَ {‪ }69‬لَقَ ْد أَخ َْذنَا ِميثَا َ‬ ‫صالِحًا فَالَ َخوْ ٌ‬ ‫اآل ِخ ِر و َع ِم َل َ‬
‫َاب هّللا ُ َعلَ ْي ِه ْم ثُ َّم َع ُم ْ‬
‫وا‬ ‫وا ثُ َّم ت َ‬ ‫ص ُّم ْ‬ ‫وا َو َ‬ ‫ُوا أَالَّ تَ ُكونَ فِ ْتنَةٌ فَ َع ُم ْ‬ ‫ُوا َوفَ ِريقًا يَ ْقتُلُونَ {‪َ }70‬و َح ِسب ْ‬ ‫َرسُو ٌل بِ َما الَ تَ ْه َوى أَ ْنفُ ُسهُ ْم فَ ِريقًا َك َّذب ْ‬
‫يل‬ ‫ال ال َم ِسي ُح يَا بَنِي إِس َْرائِ َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫هّللا‬ ‫ْ‬
‫صي ٌر بِ َما يَ ْع َملُونَ {‪ }71‬لَقَ ْد َكفَ َر ال ِذينَ قَالوا إِ َّن َ هُ َو ال َم ِسي ُح ابْنُ َمرْ يَ َم َوقَ َ‬
‫ُ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫وا َكثِي ٌر ِّم ْنهُ ْم َوهّللا ُ بَ ِ‬ ‫ص ُّم ْ‬ ‫َو َ‬
‫ذ‬
‫َ ِ ينَ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ر‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ك‬‫َ‬ ‫د‬‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫}‬ ‫‪72‬‬ ‫{‬ ‫ار‬ ‫نص‬ ‫َ‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫م‬ ‫م‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ا‬‫َّ‬
‫ُ َ َ ِ ِ ِ ينَ ِ‬ ‫لظ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ا‬‫م‬ ‫و‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ا‬‫َّ‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫أ‬
‫َ َ ُ َ ِ َ َ َ َ ُ‬‫م‬ ‫و‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ال‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ي‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ع‬ ‫هّللا‬ ‫م‬ ‫ر‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ح‬ ‫ْ‬
‫د‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ق‬‫َ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫هّلل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ك‬ ‫ر‬
‫َ َ ْ ِ ُ َ ُ ِ ِ ِ‬‫ْ‬
‫ش‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬‫َّ‬ ‫ن‬‫إ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ك‬‫ُ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ب‬‫ر‬ ‫و‬ ‫ِّي‬ ‫ب‬‫ر‬ ‫هّللا‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ُوا‬ ‫د‬ ‫ا ُْ‬
‫ب‬‫ع‬
‫َ ٍ‬ ‫َ َ‬
‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫قَالوا إِ َّن َ ثَالِث ثَالَثَ ٍة َو َما ِم ْن إِلَـ ٍه إِال إِلَـهٌ َوا ِح ٌد َوإِن ل ْم يَنتَهُوا َع َّما يَقولونَ لَيَ َمس ََّّن ال ِذينَ َكفَرُوا ِم ْنهُ ْم َع َذابٌ ألِي ٌم {‪ }73‬أفَالَ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫هّللا‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫صدِّيقَةٌ َكانَا‬ ‫ت ِمن قَ ْبلِ ِه الرُّ ُس ُل َوأُ ُّمهُ ِ‬ ‫يَتُوبُونَ إِلَى هّللا ِ َويَ ْستَ ْغفِرُونَهُ َوهّللا ُ َغفُو ٌر َّر ِحي ٌم {‪َّ }74‬ما ْال َم ِسي ُح ابْنُ َمرْ يَ َم إِالَّ َرسُو ٌل قَ ْد َخلَ ْ‬
‫ْ‬
‫ض ّرا َوالَ نَفعًا‬ ‫ً‬ ‫ك لَك ْم َ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ُون ِ َما الَ يَ ْملِ ُ‬ ‫هّللا‬ ‫ت ثُ َّم انظُرْ أَنَّى ي ُْؤفَ ُكونَ {‪ }75‬قُلْ أَتَ ْعبُ ُدونَ ِمن د ِ‬ ‫يَأْ ُكالَ ِن الطَّ َعا َم انظُرْ َك ْيفَ نُبَيِّنُ لَهُ ُم اآليَا ِ‬
‫وا َكثِيراً‬ ‫ضلُّ ْ‬ ‫وا ِمن قَ ْب ُل َوأَ َ‬ ‫ضلُّ ْ‬‫ُوا أَ ْه َواء قَوْ ٍم قَ ْد َ‬ ‫ق َوالَ تَتَّبِع ْ‬ ‫وا فِي ِدينِ ُك ْم َغ ْي َر ْال َح ِّ‬ ‫ب الَ تَ ْغلُ ْ‬ ‫َوهّللا ُ هُ َو ال َّس ِمي ُع ْال َعلِي ُم {‪ }76‬قُلْ يَا أَ ْه َل ْال ِكتَا ِ‬
‫َصوا َّو َكانُواْ‬ ‫يل {‪ }77‬لُ ِعنَ الَّ ِذينَ َكفرُوا ِمن بَنِي إِ ْس َرائِي َل َعلى لِ َسا ِن دَا ُوو َد َو ِعي َسى ا ْب ِن َمرْ يَ َم ذلِكَ بِ َما ع َ‬
‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫وا عَن َس َواء ال َّسبِ ِ‬ ‫ضلُّ ْ‬ ‫َو َ‬
‫س َما‬ ‫ُوا لَبِ ْئ َ‬ ‫وا يَ ْف َعلُونَ {‪ }79‬ت ََرى َكثِيراً ِّم ْنهُ ْم يَت ََولَّوْ نَ الَّ ِذينَ َكفَر ْ‬ ‫س َما َكانُ ْ‬ ‫وا الَ يَتَنَاهَوْ نَ عَن ُّمن َك ٍر فَ َعلُوهُ لَبِ ْئ َ‬ ‫يَ ْعتَ ُدونَ {‪َ }78‬كانُ ْ‬
‫نز َل إِلَ ْي ِه َما اتَّخَ ُذوهُ ْم‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ت لَهُ ْم أَنفُ ُسهُ ْم أَن َس ِخطَ هّللا ُ َعلَ ْي ِه ْم َوفِي ْال َع َذا ِ‬ ‫قَ َّد َم ْ‬
‫ب هُ ْم خَ الِ ُدونَ {‪َ }80‬ولَوْ َكانُوا ي ُْؤ ِمنُونَ بِاهلل والنَّبِ ِّي َو َما أ ِ‬
‫َّ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬
‫اس َعدَا َوةً لِّل ِذينَ آ َمنُوا اليَهُو َد َوال ِذينَ أ ْش َر ُكوا َولَتَ ِجد ََّن أ ْق َربَهُ ْم َّم َو َّدةً لِّل ِذينَ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫أَوْ لِيَاء َولَـ ِك َّن َكثِيراً ِّم ْنهُ ْم فَا ِسقُونَ {‪ }81‬لَتَ ِجد ََّن أ َش َّد النَّ ِ‬
‫َ‬
‫ُول ت ََرى‬ ‫نز َل إِلَى ال َّرس ِ‬ ‫ك بِأ َ َّن ِم ْنهُ ْم قِسِّي ِسينَ َو ُر ْهبَانًا َوأَنَّهُ ْم الَ يَ ْستَ ْكبِرُونَ {‪َ }82‬وإِ َذا َس ِمع ْ ُ‬ ‫صا َرى َذلِ َ‬ ‫وا الَّ ِذينَ قَالُ َو ْا إِنَّا نَ َ‬ ‫آ َمنُ ْ‬
‫ُوا َما أ ِ‬
‫هّلل‬
‫ق يَقُولونَ َربَّنَا آ َمنَّا فَا ْكتُ ْبنَا َم َع ال َّشا ِه ِدينَ {‪َ }83‬و َما لَنَا الَ نُ ْؤ ِمنُ بِا ِ َو َما َجاءنَا ِمنَ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫أَ ْعيُنَهُ ْم تَفِيضُ ِمنَ ال َّد ْم ِع ِم َّما َع َرفُوا ِمنَ ال َح ِّ‬
‫ْ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ت تَجْ ِري ِمن تَحْ تِهَا األَ ْنهَا ُر خَالِ ِدينَ فِيهَا َو َذلِكَ‬ ‫وا َجنَّا ٍ‬ ‫َط َم ُع أَن يُ ْد ِخلَنَا َربَّنَا َم َع ْالقَوْ ِم الصَّالِ ِحينَ {‪ }84‬فَأَثَابَهُ ُم هّللا ُ بِ َما قَالُ ْ‬ ‫ق َون ْ‬ ‫ْال َح ِّ‬
‫ك أصْ َحابُ ال َج ِح ِيم {‪}86‬‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫َج َزاء ال ُمحْ ِسنِينَ {‪َ }85‬وال ِذينَ َكفَرُوا َو َكذبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا أوْ لَـئِ َ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫‪{68} Say: "O People of the Book! You have no ground to stand upon until you keep the Tawrat‬‬
‫‪and the Injil and that which is revealed to you from your Lord"; and surely that which has been‬‬
‫;‪revealed to you from your Lord shall make many of them increase in inordinacy and unbelief‬‬
‫‪grieve not therefore for the unbelieving people. {69} Surely those who believe and those who are‬‬
‫‪Jews and the Sabaeans and the Christians whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does‬‬
‫‪good - they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve. {70} Certainly We made a covenant with the‬‬
‫‪Children of Israel and We sent to them messengers; whenever there came to them a messenger‬‬
‫‪with what their souls did not desire, some (of them) did they call liars and some they used to‬‬
‫;‪slay. {71} And they thought that there would be no affliction, so they became blind and deaf‬‬
‫‪then Allah turned to them mercifully, but (again) many of them became blind and deaf; and‬‬
‫‪Allah is well seeing what they do. {72} Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah, He is‬‬
the Messiah, son of Mary"; and the Messiah said: "O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord
and your Lord. Surely whoever associates (others) with Allah, then Allah has forbidden to him
the garden, and his abode is the Fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust". {73} Certainly
they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah is the third of the three"; and there is no god but the one
God, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among
them who disbelieve. {74} Will they not then turn to Allah and ask His forgiveness? And Allah
is Forgiving, Merciful. {75} The Messiah, son of Mary is but a messenger; messengers before
him have indeed passed away; and his mother was a truthful woman; they both used to eat food.
See how We make the signs clear to them, then behold, how they are turned away. {76} Say:
"Do you worship besides Allah that which does not control for you any harm or any profit? And
Allah - He is the Hearing, the knowing.". {77} Say: "O People of the Book! Be not unduly
immoderate in your religion, and do not follow the low desires of people who went astray before
and led many astray and went astray from the right path". {78} Those who disbelieved from
among the Children of Israel were cursed by the tongue of Dawud and 'Isa, son of Maryam; this
was because they disobeyed and used to exceed the limit. {79} They used not to forbid each
other the hateful things (which) they did; certainly evil was that which they did. {80} You will
see many of them befriending those who disbelieve; certainly evil is that which their souls have
sent before for them, that Allah became displeased with them and in chastisement shall they
abide. {81} And had they believed in Allah and the Prophet and what was revealed to him, they
would not have taken them for friends, but most of them are transgressors. {82} Certainly you
will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe (to be) the Jews and those
who are poly theists, and you will certainly find the nearest in friendship to those who believe (to
be) those who say: "We are Christians"; this is because there are priests and monks among them
and because they do not behave proudly. {83} And when they hear what has been revealed to the
Messenger, you will see their eyes over-flowing with tears on account of the truth that they
recognize; they say: "Our Lord! We believe, so write us down with the witnesses (of truth). {84}
And what (reason) have we that we should not believe in Allah and in the truth that has come to
us, while we earnestly desire that our Lord should cause us to enter with the good people!". {85}
Therefore Allah rewarded them on account of what they said, with gardens in which rivers flow
to abide in them; and this is the reward of those who do good. {86} And (as for) those who
disbelieve and reject Our signs, these are the companions of the flame.
 

Commentary
The verses in themselves are interlinked and appear to be in the same context. But they are not
connected with the verse: And if they had kept up the Tawrat and the Injil... (5:66) even if we do
not look at the verse: O Messenger! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord;
(5:67). As for the connection of the verse 5:67, you have known its details.

It is more likely that these verses run on the same track which is used by the preceding verses
from the beginning of the chapter up to this point. Look at the theme of the verse 5:12 (And
certainly Allah made a covenant with the Children of Israel...) up to the end of the verses under
discussion, and you will see that, except for a few intervening verses like those of wilayah and
tabligh, etc.; all deal with the affairs of the People of the Book; and the same is the topic of the
following verses up to the end of the chapter.
QUR'AN: Say: O People of the Book! You have no ground to stand upon until you keep up the
Tawrat and the Injil...: It is a common experience of human beings that when they want to
perform a laborious and hard work that requires the use of utmost strength, they let their bodies
or organs rely on some firmly fixed things. For example, if a man wants to pull a heavy thing, or
to push, or remove it, or to carry it or make it stand, he firmly puts his feet on earth and then
begins the work he has to do. He knows that if his feet are not firmly held by some strong
surface, he will not be able to do his work.

If we apply the same principle in immaterial affairs, e.g., man's spiritual activities, or
psychological affairs, it would indicate that performance of great activities and prodigious deeds-
depends on a spiritual base, strong psychological foundation; i.e. such actions depend on
patience, firmness, high ambition and strong will-power. Likewise, man can succeed in his
dealings with Allah only through true piety and desistence from forbidden things.

All this shows that the clause: "you have no ground to stand upon" (lit. you are not on anything),
alludes to the fact that they do not rely on a thing which would keep their feet firmly in place, in
order that they could keep up the Tawrat and the Injil and what has been revealed to them from
their Lord. It signals that Allah's religion and His commands are a heavy burden which man
cannot easily pick up or bear on his shoulders without depending on a firm foundation and
surface; he cannot keep the religion up merely by his desire. Allah has pointed to this heavy
burden in relation to the noble Qur'an: Surely We will send down to you a weighty word. (73:5);
Had We sent down this Qur'an on a mountain, you would certainly have seen it falling down,
splitting asunder because of the fear of Allah, and We set forth these parables to men that they
may reflect. (59:21); Surely We offered the trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains,
but they refused to bear it, and were afraid thereof; and man undertook it, verily he was unjust
ignorant (33:72).

And He says in relation to the Tawrat, addressing Musa: ...so take hold of it with firmness and
enjoin your people to take hold of what is best thereof;... (7:145).

And He says addressing the Children of Israel: ...Take hold of what We have given you with
firmness... (2:63).

And He says addressing Yahya: O Yahya! Take hold of the Book with strength. (19:12)

The verse in short says that you do not have anything to rely upon in your desire to keep up the
religion of Allah, which He has revealed to you in His Books. You could get that support if you
practice piety, return to Him repeatedly through repentance time and again, hold fast to His cord,
and rely on His pillar. But your attitude is contrary to it; you haughtily turn away from His
worship and transgress His limits.

The same meaning appears from the verse: He has prescribed for you of the religion what He
enjoined upon Nuh, and that which We have revealed to you, and that which We enjoined upon
Ibrahim and Musa and 'Isa, (42:13). It makes it clear that the sum total of religion is what is
mentioned in these words. Then it is followed by the admonition: that keep up the religion and
be not divided therein. It puts emphasis on unity and warns them of division and disunity. Then
the verse says: hard to the polytheists is that which you call them to. It is because they do not like
to see you united; it is hard for them to see you firm in obedience to religious commands. Then
Allah further says: Allah chooses for Himself whom He pleases, and guides to Himself him who
turns (to Him) frequently. It declares that keeping up the religion is not feasible without guidance
from Allah. Only such a person is capable of doing it who repents to Allah, holds to His cord fast
without breaking it, and returns to Him again and again. Then Allah says: And they did not
become divided until after the knowledge had come to them, out of rivalry among themselves
(42:14). It shows that the only reason of their division and disunity and of their not keeping up to
religion is their rivalry and envy and their transgressing the via media laid down for them.

Allah likewise mentions this factor in similar verses: Then set your face upright for religion in
natural devotion (to truth), the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no
altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion, but most people do not know - turning to
Him, and be careful of (your duty to) Him, and keep up prayer and be not of the polytheists, of
those who divided their religion and became sects; every party rejoicing in what they had with
them (30:30-32). This too clearly says that the means of keeping up the natural religion is to
return to Allah and keeping the cord intact which attaches him to the divine presence, and not
letting that cord be cut or severed at all.

He had pointed to this reality in the verses preceding these verses under discussion, where He
had mentioned that Allah had cursed the Jews and was displeased with them because of their
transgressing His limits; consequently He put enmity and hatred among them. Also, He has
mentioned this theme particularly about the Christians in another context as He said in this
verse:... therefore We excited among them enmity and hatred to the Day of Resurrection;...
(5:14).

Allah had warned the Muslims of similar painful affliction that was to fall down on the People of
the Book - the Jews and the Christians. He informed them that they shall never be able to keep
up the Tawrat and the Injil and what was revealed to them from their Lord. History testifies that
what the Qur'an had foretold, has actually taken place. They are divided into untold
denominations and their mutual enmity and hatred goes on unabated. So, Allah warned the
Muslim ummah lest they follow in their track and their relation with Allah be severed and they
do not return to Allah, as He said in the verse: Then set your face upright for religion in natural
devotion... (30:30), among many other verses in the same chapter 30.

We have elaborated on various verses of this theme in previous volumes of this book, and, God
willing, some other verses will be explained in coming volumes.

As for the divine word: "and surely that which has been revealed to you from your Lord shall
make many of them increase in inordinacy and disbelief;" its explanation has already been given
before. The clause: "grieve not therefore for the unbelieving people", aims at giving consolation
to the Prophet (s.a.w.) in the form of prohibition.

QUR'AN: Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabaeans and the
Christians...: Apparently, the word as-sabiun in nominative case, is in conjunction with "those
who believe". A group of grammarians says that the subject of inna (Surely)(in this instance:
those who believe)cannot be placed in conjunction with another word of nominative case before
its predicate is mentioned. But this verse disproves their view.

The verse aims at explaining that so far as the ultimate happiness is concerned, nomenclatures
and titles have no effect on it. A group is called believers, another is named Jews, a third is
labeled Sabaeans, and a fourth is branded Christians. But none of the titles will be of any benefit
before Allah; the only quality needed is the belief in Allah, the Last Day and good deeds.

In the first volume of this book, detailed discussion of this topic has been given under the verse
62 of chapter 2.

QUR'AN: Certainly We made a covenant with the Children of Israel and We sent to them
messengers; whenever there came to them a messenger with what their souls did not desire,
some (of them) did they call liars and some they used to slay; This and the following verses
describe the condition of the People of the Book, as a proof of what has been said in the
preceding verse: O People of the Book! You have no ground to stand upon until you keep up the
Tawrat... It is because the crimes and sins committed by them (as mentioned in the verse under
discussion) have cut asunder any connection that they might have had with their Lord;
consequently they are not in a position to keep up the Books of Allah or to rely on them.

Another possibility: The verses may be connected with the preceding one (Surely those who
believe and those who are Jews and the Sabaeans and the Christians...). Accordingly, it would
confirm that the names and titles would not avail anyone at all in the matter of actual bliss and
happiness; had it been of any benefit it would have prevented them from slaying the prophets and
calling them liars, and would have protected them from perils of mischief and hazards of sins.

Also, possibly these verses may be taken as an elaboration of the verse: Surely those who believe
and those who are Jews and the Sabaeans and the Christians ..., which in its turn could be an
elaboration of the verse: O People of the Book! You have no ground to stand upon ... The
meaning is clear.

The clauses: "some (of them) did they call liars and some they used to slay." Obviously, the
words "some" in both clauses are the objects of the verbs coming after them. These objects have
been put before their verbs to show their importance. The sentences in normal sequence will be
as follows: they did call some of them liars and used to slay some others. The whole phrase
completes the preceding clause: "whenever there came to them a messenger..." The meaning is as
follows: Whenever there came to them a messenger with what their hearts did not like or desire,
they stood against him haughtily and rejected his call; they dealt with the messengers, sent to
them, in two ways: some of them they called liars and some others they used to kill.

(at-Tabrisi) writes in Majma'u'l-bayan: "If it is asked: 'Why did Allah put a future tense in
conjunction with a past tense, (as the clauses should literally be translated as follows), some of
them did they call liars and some they will slay?' Then the reply is as follows: This style was
used to show that it is their confirmed habit; it actually means: They called them liars and killed
them and will call others liars and kill them. Apart from that, yaqtulun (they will slay) comes at
the end of the verse and therefore it was necessary to make it rhyme to other such endings.'"

QUR'AN: And they thought that there would be no affliction, so they became blind and deaf: It
completes the topic of the preceding verse. al-Husban (reckoning, thinking); al-fitnah (an ordeal
that beguiles a man, or evil and tribulation in general); al-'ama (blindness; here it indicates not
seeing the truth, not differentiating between good and evil). as-Samam (deafness; here it means
not listening to admonition, indifference to good advice). This blindness and deafness have been
caused by their delusion that there would be no affliction; and apparently that delusion had
emanated from their vanity and conceit that they had a special status before Allah because they
were from the seed of Israel, and they were sons and beloveds of Allah. Therefore, no evil would
fall to them no matter what they did and what they indulged in.

The meaning of the verse then is as follows - and Allah knows better: They, because of their
vanity that they enjoyed the prestige of being Jewish, thought that they would not be afflicted by
any evil, and would not be put on trial no matter what they did; this thought and delusion blinded
their eyes - so they cannot see the truth - and deafened their ears - so they cannot listen to their
Prophets' call which would have benefited them.

This interpretation favors what we have said earlier that these verses are a sort of proof of the
verse: Surely those who believe and those who are Jews... It shows in short that names and titles
are not to avail anyone anything. Look at these Jews who thought that they had a special prestige
because they were Jews; yet this delusion did not do them any good, rather it made them blind
and deaf and led them to perils of destruction and tribulation when they called the Prophets of
Allah liars and murdered them.

QUR'AN: then Allah turned to them mercifully, but (again) many of them became blind and
deaf; and Allah is well seeing what they do:
(As explained in Eng. vol.8, at-tawbah means to return. When a servant of Allah repents from
his sin, he returns to Allah seeking forgiveness, and) when Allah accepts that repentance, He
returns to the servant with mercy. It shows that Allah had removed them away from His mercy
and care, and therefore they got involved in that delusion which resulted in their blindness and
deafness. But Allah turned to them second time accepting their repentance, and they were freed
from that delusion and their eyes and ears were cured of that blindness and deafness respectively.
Then they recognized themselves, knew that they were servants of Allah and they had no
prestige or status except through piety. So they saw the truth, and listened to divine admonition
delivered by the tongues of the Prophets. Thus, they realized that mere names and titles would
never bring any benefit to anyone.

Again many of them became blind and deaf.

Allah has ascribed blindness and deafness first to the whole group and then to many of them. It is
based on justice in speech.

First: It shows that the ascription of blindness and deafness to the whole group uses the style of
attaching the majority's attribute to the whole, because in reality only majority, and not the whole
group, has this attribute.
Second: It however indicates that the said blindness and deafness had covered the whole group
in the beginning.

Third: It shows that Allah's turning to them with mercy was not in vein, and had not passed
away without benefit, without any effect. Rather some of them were saved through repentance,
and that is why that minority had remained immune from the blindness and deafness that had
affected the majority second time.

Allah ends the verse on the clause: "and Allah is well seeing what they do"; it proves that
nothing can make Allah oblivious of realities. When persons, other than Allah, bestow an honor
to a group, it puts a veil on their eyes, which prevents them from seeing any defect or drawback
in that group. But Allah is not like that; He is the All-Seeing; He sees all aspects and facets; an
outward appearance does not hide other inner layers from Him.

QUR'AN: Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah, He is the Messiah, son of Mary": It
further explains that the Christians did not get any benefit from calling themselves Christians and
tracing their origin to the Christ; as in spite of these factors, they were counted as disbelievers,
because they ascribed partners to Allah and did not believe in Him in true sense, when they said:
Surely Allah is the Christ, son of Mary.

The Christians have differed among themselves in explaining as to how the Christ comprises the
essence of divinity. Some say that the Person of the Christ (i.e. the knowledge) had branched out
from the Person of the Lord (i.e. the life); and this is the meaning of one of them being the
Father, and the other being the Son. Some others say that the Lord was transformed and changed
into the Christ. A third group says that the Lord became incarnate in the Christ. We have
described this topic in detail while writing about 'Isa, son of Maryam, in the chapter of "The
House of 'Imran", in the third volume of our book. (English volume 6)

However, each of the three views fits this clause: "Certainly they disbelieve who say: 'Surely
Allah, He is the Messiah, son of Mary."' Obviously therefore, all the Christians are included in
this verdict of disbelief, because all believe in his divinity and have exceeded the limits. In short,
this verse does not speak about those only who believe in incarnation.

The description of the Messiah as the son of Mary proves - or at least indicates - how and why
they became disbelievers; it was because they believed in divinity of a man, son of a woman,
both of whom were created from dust. How can dust become the Lord of Lords?

QUR'AN: and the Messiah said: "O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord, and your
Lord. Surely whoever associates (others) with Allah, then Allah has forbidden to him the garden,
and his abode is the Fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust": This argument proves
their disbelief and rebuts their view through the Messiah's own words. When he said: "Worship
Allah, my Lord and your Lord," he clearly showed that he himself is a created servant like them
and in the same way he needs a Lord Who would look after all his affairs and manage them.
Then he said: "Surely whoever associates (others) with Allah, then Allah has forbidden to him
the garden"; thus he declared that whoever ascribes a partner to Allah, he becomes a polytheist
and the garden is forbidden to him.

Allah quotes the Christ as saying: "then Allah has forbidden to him the garden, and his abode is
the Fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust." This quotation refutes what they say about
atonement. They believe that the Christ atoned the Christians' sins by offering his own self as
redemption and that is why he was crucified. The beliefs of atonement and crucifixion have
assured them that all their sins are forgiven in advance. They are not obliged to follow the divine
law, since they would go directly to the garden, and the fire will not touch them at all. (We have
described all these things under the chapter of "The House of 'Imran", in the above mentioned
volume of our book.)

What the verse quotes 'Isa (a.s.) as saying may be seen in different chapters of the Gospels, e.g.
the order to believe in One God, refutation of polytheistic worship, and the declaration that the
unjust people would abide in the Fire.

QUR'AN: Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah is the third of the three": That is, He
is one of the three Persons: the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost; and He corresponds with
each of the three. It intrinsically results from their saying that the Father is god, the Son is god
and the Holy Ghost is god; and He is three and He is one. They try to give the example of the
sentence: Verily Zayd son of 'Amr is man. Now, there are three things in this statement: Zayd,
son of 'Amr and man, and at the same time there is only one person to whom all three attributes
are applied. But they are oblivious of the fact that if this plurality were real (not based on a
subjective approach), then the persons too should have been plural; and when the said person is
in reality one, then the plurality would be based on the subjective approach, and would never be
real. It is beyond human understanding to imagine that Zayd combines in himself the real
singularity and the real plurality at the same time.

And probably that is the reason why some Christian missionaries say that the trinity in which
they believe, is an idea, which has come to them from the early fathers of the Church, and that it
is a claim that cannot be proved through rational arguments or logic. They do not realize that it is
incumbent on men to demand proof for any claim they hear, no matter whether it has reached
them from their elders or from the coming generations.

QUR'AN: and there is no god but one God: It is a rebuttal of their saying that Allah is the third
of the three. It portrays that the Sublime Person of Allah cannot accept or admit any plurality by
any means. He is One in His Person; even when His noble adjectives are attributed to Him, or
His good names are ascribed to Him; it does not add anything to His One Person. Also when an
adjective is added to another adjective, it does not create any numerousness or plurality in His
Person. He is One Person and is not divisible at all - neither in reality nor in imagination or in
reason. Allah is not such as may be divided into such and such parts or ingredients; nor anything
can be ascribed to Him that He could become two or more. How can it be? Because it is Allah
Who has made that thing which one wants to attach to Him in reality, imagination, or
supposition.

Allah, the High, is One in His Person. But it is not the numerical oneness that the created things
have and which gives rise to plurality and multitude. Nor is He subject to numerousness in His
Person or name or adjective. How can it be? Because this numerical oneness, and the plurality
which results from this unity, both are the effects of His making and His innovation. How then
can He accept the attributes, which He Himself has created?

The sentence: "and there is no god but one God", affirms the oneness of God with an emphasis
and intensity not possible in other expressions: The sentence begins with negation followed by
exception, which in itself is sufficient for emphasis; then the preposition min (from) is added to
the particle of negation which further emphasizes all-inclusiveness of the statement. And lastly
the clause: "one God", is used as common noun which denotes species of oneness; if it were used
as proper noun, i.e. except the one God, it would not have expressed the intended essence of
unity.

The meaning then is as follows: There does not exist in the genes of god any species except one
God Whose Oneness does not accept any plurality at all - neither in person nor in attributes,
neither in reality nor in supposition. If Allah had said: There is no god but the One God, it would
not have refuted the Christians' claim that "Allah is the third of the three", because they do not
deny His Unity; yet they say that He is one being which has three Persons, He is One although
He is three in reality.

The Christians' supposition can be rebutted only when we prove the unity from which no
plurality can be formed; and it is this unity which the Qur'an asserts in the sentence: "and there is
no god but One God".

It is a very fine theme to which the divine Book eludes concerning the reality of unity; and we
shall further discuss it thoroughly in a special Qur'anic Discussion, then in a Rational one
followed by a Traditional one.

QUR'AN: and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those
among them who disbelieve: Apparently, the verse threatens them with a painful chastisement of
the hereafter.

It is a fact that the theory of Trinity (as contained in the sentence, Allah is the third of the three)
is beyond the understanding of general public. Most of the Christians receive it as a religious
creed accepting its verbal formula without understanding, or hoping ever to understand, its
meaning; and it is beyond the capacity of unimpaired reason to comprehend it properly. The
mind places it side by side with other impossible suppositions, like a man who is no-man, a
number that is neither one nor more, neither odd nor even. That is why the general Christian
public accepts it without looking at its meaning. As for their expressions - God the Father, God
the son - they take it as a matter of protocol. Such people, in fact, are not Trinitarians; they
merely utter the words and cling to it without thinking. But the position of their elite class is
quite different. It is they whom Allah says are responsible for creating discord in religion
because of their internal rivalry. He says: ...that keep up the religion and be not divided
therein;... And they did not become divided until after the knowledge had come to them out of
rivalry among themselves;... (42:13-14)

Accordingly, the real disbelief (which does not emanate from being deemed weak), which entails
rejection of the belief in Unity of God and denial of divine communications, applies to some -
not all - of them. And Allah has addressed the threat of ever-lasting fire to only those who
disbelieve and deny the divine communications, as He says: And (as to) those who disbelieve in,
and deny Our signs, they are the inmates of the Fire, in it they shall abide (2:39). There are many
such verses, and we have explained this topic fully under the verse 98 of the chapter 4.

Probably, that is why the verse under discussion threatens only a particular group, and not all, of
the disbelievers.

Or it may be an indication that there were some Christians who did not believe in Trinity, and
accepted Jesus Christ only as a servant of Allah and His Messenger, as the history records about
the Ethiopian Christians, for example.

The meaning: If the Christians do not desist from what they say (it ascribes the belief of some
people to the whole community), then those among them who disbelieve (i.e., believe in Trinity)
shall be afflicted with a painful chastisement.

Some exegetes have opined: The clause: "a painful chastisement shall befall those among them
who disbelieve", uses the noun in place of pronoun; it wants to say "shall befall them", but has
used "shall befall those among them", in order to show that such thought is disbelief, and that
this disbelief has invited the threatened punishment.

COMMENT: There would have been no difficulty in agreeing with this opinion if the verse
itself had not begun with the words: Certainly they disbelieve who say...

No less far-fetched is another opinion that the phrase: "those among them who disbelieve",
actually means, those who disbelieve and they are these; it is a claim without proof.

QUR'AN: Will they not then turn to Allah and ask His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving,
Merciful: It exhorts them to repent and seek Allah's forgiveness and reminds them of His pardon
and mercy. Alternatively, the question may stand for admonition, or for denial, i.e. they do not
turn to Allah nor do they seek His forgiveness.

QUR'AN: The Messiah, son of Mary is but a messenger; messengers before him have indeed
passed away; and his mother was a truthful woman; they both used to eat food: It is a rebuttal of
their claim that "Surely Allah is the third of the three", or of this together with earlier mentioned
claim that: " Surely Allah, He is the Messiah, son of Mary". These claims are based on the belief
that Messiah has got in him the essence of divinity. The verse under discussion proves that
Messiah is not different from other messengers of Allah, who had appeared before him and
whom Allah had given death. All of them, including Messiah, were human beings, mortals, who
were sent by Allah for guidance of mankind, and none of them was a Lord apart from Allah.
Likewise his mother, Maryam, was a truthful woman who attested to the truth of the divine signs
- and she too was a mortal human being. Both Messiah and his mother used to eat food; and
eating food with all that it entails, is words, based on the foundation of 'need.' "Need" is the first
sign of transience, and the 'needy' is something made and transient. In other Messiah was a
transient, born of a transient; he was a servant and messenger of Allah, born from his mother;
both mother and son worshipped Allah, and proceeded in their lives on the path of need and
dependence - in short they were not Lords.

The Gospels accept the above reports. They clearly say that Maryam was a young lady who
believed in, and worshipped, Allah. They declare that Jesus was born of her, as a human from
another human. They further assert that Allah sent Jesus to the mankind not unlike all other
messengers. Also, they make it clear that Jesus and his mother used to eat food. These are the
phenomena, which the Gospels explicitly declare, and they prove that he was a servant and a
messenger of Allah.

Possibly the verse may be aiming at refuting the idea of divinity of Jesus and his mother both;
because the verse: And when Allah will say: "O 'Isa son of Maryam! Did you say to men, 'Take
me and my mother for two gods besides Allah? '"(5:116), clearly shows that there were some
people at that time who believed in the divinity of Maryam too side by side with that of Jesus.

Or, the expression, taking Maryam for god, may have been used in the same meaning as in the
verse (9:31), which says: They have taken their doctors of law and their monks for lords besides
Allah. It actually points to their total submission to their scholars in a manner, which reason and
shari'ah do not approve.

Be it as it may. The verse accordingly altogether refutes their belief that Jesus and his mother
were lords, declaring that Jesus was only a messenger like other messengers, his mother was a
truthful woman, both used to consume food; and all these facts speak against their divinity.

The clause: "the messengers before him have indeed passed away", reinforces the proof of his
humanity, by pointing out that he is subject to life and death like other preceding messengers.

QUR'AN: See how We make the signs clear to them, then behold, how they are turned away:
The verse is addressed to the Prophet (s.a. w.a.), and draws his attention to a strange
phenomenon. See how Allah offers the clearest explanation of the clearest proof that negates the
Christians' claim of the Christ's divinity, and then see how they refuse to understand these proofs.
How long will they turn a blind eye to this reality? How long will their intellect remain oblivious
to the falsity of their claim?

QUR'AN: Say: "Do you worship besides Allah that which does not control for you any harm, or
any profit? And Allah, He is the Hearing, the Knowing.": Submission to the idea of Lordship was
wide-spread among the mankind since the earliest days, and especially among the general public
- that public worshipped idols, hoping that through that worship, the Lord would ward off evil
from them and bring them benefits, as the historical researches of ancient eras have shown. So
far as the worship of Allah - because He is Allah - was concerned, it was not found beyond a
small circle of some chosen servants like the prophets and the divine scholars among their
nations.

It is in this background that Allah orders His Messenger (s.a.w.) to talk to them exactly as a
simple man is talked to, who follows the dictates of his simple primitive nature regarding the
divine worship. It is the same manner in which He had addressed the idol-worshippers. He
reminds them that what had led the man to the divine worship was his awareness that Allah holds
the reins of good and evil, profit and harm in His hand; and man hopes to avoid harms and obtain
benefits through the worship of Allah.

And clearly nothing besides Allah owns or controls any benefit or harm, because everything is
owned by Allah and has no power whatsoever of its own. Therefore, how can any such thing be
selected for worship and joined with Allah, the Lord, for submission? Allah is the Owner of him
and the others, and it was necessary that He (Allah) should be worshipped exclusively, without
extending this homage to others. It is only Allah who hears and answers; He hears the call of the
servant and answers it; it is He who is fully aware of the needs of His servants, and neither
ignores it nor is confused in it contrary to what others do - because others own only that which
Allah gives into their possession, and can do only that which Allah empowers them to do.

The above discourse has made it clear that:

First: The proof contained in this verse is quite separate from the one contained in the preceding
verse (The Messiah, ...is but a messenger, ...and his mother was a truthful women; they both
used to eat food), although both depend on a common premise, i.e. the Messiah and his mother
both were transients and needy. The preceding verse, quoted in square brackets above, argues
that they both were mortals, needy and obedient servants of Allah, and anyone with such
attributes cannot be a Lord or worthy of being worshipped. And the verse under discussion
argues that the Messiah is a transient and needy person who himself is owned by Allah, and has
no control on any benefit or harm. And a person in this situation cannot be accepted as a Lord or
worthy of worship.

Second: The argument is based on what a simple man expects from his acts of worship, because
his only aim in accepting someone as his Lord, and in worshipping Him is to ward off possible
harms and acquire possible gains. But the power to control harm and benefit belongs exclusively
to Allah. So why should anyone worship other than Allah? It is essential that such submission
and worship (i.e. to other than Allah) be totally rejected.

Third: In the clause: "that which does not control for you any harm or any profit", the relative
pronoun ma (that which) has been used, which is reserved for other than rational beings, even
though the Messiah was a rational person. It is because the same proof is used against those who
worship insensate things, like idol-worshippers; and the Messiah's rationality has no effect on the
perfection of this proof - it is applicable against all "worshipped" things other than Allah.

Moreover, the creatures (all things besides Allah) even if they do have perception and
understanding, do not possess that perception and understanding by their own power, nor do they
own other aspects of their 'being'. Allah says: Surely those whom you call on besides Allah are in
a state of subjugation, like yourselves; therefore call on them, then let them answer you if you
are truthful. Have they feet with which they walk, or have they hands with which they strike, or
have they eyes with which they see, or have they ears with which they hear? Say: "Call your
associates, then make a struggle (to prevail) against me and give me no respite." (7:194-5)

In the clause: "any harm or any profit", harm precedes profit; this too follows the same pattern to
which the simple primitive nature invites, as described above. Man by nature thinks that
whatever blessings and benefits he has got are owned by him, are his to remain; he does not
imagine that these benefits might be lost, and does not anticipate the sorrow or pain that would
follow that loss. But as for the harm which he presently experiences, and the benefits and
blessings which are lost and he presently feels the pain of that loss, the nature alerts him to take
refuge in a Lord Who would ward off that loss and harm, and would restore the lost blessings; as
Allah says: And when affliction touches a man, he calls on Us, whether lying on his side or
sitting or standing; but when We remove his affliction from him, he passes on as though he had
never called on Us on account of an affliction that touched him;... (10:12). And if We make him
taste mercy from Us after distress that has touched him, he would most certainly say: "This is of
me..." (41:50). And when We show favor to man, he turns aside and withdraws himself; and
when evil touches him, he makes lengthy supplications (41:51).

It all proves that a touch of affliction induces a man to submit to the Lord and worship him,
rather more than gaining a profit does. That is why in the clause: "that which does not control for
you any harm or any profit", 'harm' precedes 'profit'. The same reason applies to other similar
expressions, like: And they have taken besides Him gods, who do not create anything while they
are themselves created, and they control not for themselves any harm or profit, and they control
not death, nor life, nor raising (the dead) to life (25:3).

Fourth: The complete verse: "Say: 'Do you worship besides Allah ...the Knowing'", proves that
worship is exclusively reserved for Allah, and none else should be joined with Him in it. This
short verse actually contains two proofs: One, Submission to a God and worshipping Him is
resorted to for averting harm and acquiring benefit; as such, it is necessary that the worshipped
God should control the harm and benefit. Therefore, it is not correct to worship one who has no
control on anything. Two, only Allah is the Hearing, Who answers the call of the distressed, and
knows the true nature of his need; none other than Allah has this attribute. Therefore, it is
necessary to worship Him exclusively, without joining others to Him.

QUR'AN: Say: "O People of the Book! Be not unduly immoderate in your religion: Another call
to the Prophet (s.a.w.), ordering him to invite the People of the Book to abandon immoderation
in their religion. The People of the Book, and especially the Christians, are entangled in it. al-
Ghaali  (one who transgresses the limit, on the side of excess); its opposite is al-qaali (one who
does not reach the required goal). The divine religion, as explained by His revealed Books,
orders the people to believe in one God Who has no partner, and forbids believing in any partner
to Him. The People of the Book, the Jews, and the Christians in general, were afflicted with this
disease, although the condition of the Christians was more ignominious and abominable. Allah
says: And the Jews say: "Ezra is the son of Allah"; and the Christians say: "The Messiah is the
son of Allah"; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the sayings of those who
disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away! They have taken their
doctors of law and their monks for lords besides Allah, and (also) the Messiah son of Mary; and
they were not enjoined but that they should worship one God only, there is no god but He; far
from His glory be what they set up (with Him), (9:30-31).

Although the belief, that Ezra is the son of God, is apparently not found today in the Jewish
community, but the verse testifies that such as belief was prevalent at the time of the Qur'anic
revelation.

Apparently, son of God was an honorific title which they used for Ezra, in view of the valuable
services he rendered and the good he did to them: He brought them back to Jerusalem after the
Babylonian captivity; and rewrote the Torah after it was lost in the devastative attack of
Nebuchadnezzar. The Jews treated the sonship of God as an honorific title, in the same way as
the Christians nowadays treat "fatherhood", as they call the Popes, bishops and priest Fathers -
the word Pope itself means father. Allah says: And the Jews and the Christians say: "We are the
sons of Allah and his beloved ones" (5:18). Further, the verse 9:31 quoted earlier (They have
taken their doctors of law and their monks for lords besides Allah, and (also) the Messiah son of
Mary) indicates it, as it mentions only the Messiah, but not Ezra. It means that Ezra is included
in the expression: their doctors of law and their monks. In other words they called Ezra the son
of God in the same sense as they name their scholars and monks as sons of God. However, they
chose to mention his name in particular because he had done much good to them, as described
above. In short, they had placed some of their prophets, scholars and monks on the throne of
lordship, and submitted to them in a manner that is reserved exclusively for Allah. It was their
inordinacy in religion that Allah forbids them here through his Prophet (s.a.w.).

The phrase: "unduly immoderate in your religion", if literally translated would be written as,
immoderate without truth in your religion. In fact, immoderation is always without truth, it can
never be with truth. Yet, here the Qur'an qualifies it with the word, unduly or without truth, in
order to put emphasis on the prohibition of immoderation; and also to remind the hearer of a
concomitant item with its principal - after all, he had forgotten or nearly forgotten this
indispensability when he indulged in inordinacy.

The reason does not reject the idea of using the word, father, for God, provided its meaning is
purified of all material and physical defects and stigmas - if it is taken in the meaning of "One
who has control on creation and upbringing." The same applies to the word, son, when used for
God in its non-physical sense. But the shari'ah strictly forbids use of these words for Allah,
because we are obliged to use only those names for Him, which He has approved. We cannot use
self-invented names or titles for Him, because it would lead to corruption and scandals. We have
only to look at the Jews and the Christians - and especially the latter - to realize how much
depravity they were afflicted with through the Church 'fathers' in all those long centuries. The
things are not much better even today!

QUR'AN: and do not follow the low desires of people who went astray before and led many
astray and went astray from the right path ": Apparently the context shows that the people who
went astray before and whose low desires were not to be followed, were the leaders whose
opinions and orders were obeyed. They themselves went astray by holding fast to their views and
opinions, and led many astray as others followed them. Thus, their going astray from the right
path was the sum total of their going astray and leading astray - it was a compound error.

Also, the context shows that the people whose low desires were not to be followed were the idol-
worshippers."The verse is addressed to the whole community of the People of the Book and not
only to those who were contemporaries of the Prophet (s.a.w.). So, it cannot be said that their
later generations are here admonished not to follow their forefathers.
This interpretation is supported, rather it is proved, by the words of Allah: And the Jews say:
"Ezra is the son of Allah"; and the Christians say: "The Messiah is the son of Allah"; these are
the words of their months; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before (9:30).

This is then the historical fact as analyzed by the Qur'an. It indicates that the belief in divine
fatherhood and sonship has infiltrated into People of the Book from the idol-worshippers who
had passed before them. We have described in the third volume of this book (in chapter 3, story
of Jesus, a.s.14) that this belief was prevalent among the Hindus and the Buddhists of India and
China, as well as in ancient Egypt and other places. Then, gradually, it was brought into
Christian community, clothed in religious dress by its religious leaders. The name remained
monotheistic and the meaning became idolatrous.

QUR'AN: Those who disbelieved from among the Children of Israel were cursed by the tongue
of Dawud and 'Isa son of Maryam; this was because they disobeyed and used to exceed the limit.
They used not to forbid each other the hateful things (which) they did; certainly evil was that
which they did: It reveals that their prophets cursed the disbelievers from among them. It
adversely alludes to the Jews who were cursed by their own prophets, and it was because they
exceeded the limit, and continued in this transgression generation after generation. The words:
"They used not to forbid... evil was that which they did", explain that transgression.

QUR'AN: You will see many of them befriending those who disbelieve; certainly evil is that
which their souls have sent before for them, that Allah became displeased with them and in
chastisement shall they abide: It is a perceivable proof that they had exceeded the limit. If they
had any respect for their religion, they would have adhered to it and not exceeded its limit. As a
concomitant of that, it was necessary for them to befriend those who believe in one God, and
avoid those who disbelieve. If a nation respects some things and considers them sacred, and
another group has animosity towards those things, this group would be an enemy of the nation.
Now, if that nation befriends this group, it would mean that that nation had abandoned that thing
which it hitherto considered sacred. And a friend of enemy is enemy. Then Allah condemns them
in these words: "certainly evil is that which their souls have sent before for them." It points to
their befriending the disbelievers as because of their low desires. Consequently, its recompense
was, "that Allah became displeased with them and in chastisement shall they abide." The verse
has put the recompense in place of action. It is as though their souls had sent for them the
recompense by sending ahead the action.

QUR'AN: And had they believed in Allah and the Prophet and what was revealed to him, they
would not have taken them for friends, but most of them are transgressors: If these People of the
Book had believed in Allah and the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) and what was revealed to him;
or if they had believed in their own prophet, e.g. Musa and what was revealed to him, i.e., the
Torah, they would not have taken those disbelievers for friends, because Islam cuts asunder all
worldly ties; but most of them are transgressors, recalcitrants from belief.

Some people have suggested another explanation: They have taken the pronouns in "they
believed" and "them (for friends)", as referring to "those who disbelieve" (in the preceding
verse). Accordingly, the meaning will be as follows: If those disbelievers, whom the People of
the Book have taken for friends, had believed in Allah, the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) and the
Qur'an, these People of the Book would not have taken them for friends. They have only
befriended them because they disbelieve in the Prophet and the Qur'an.

COMMENT: There is no difficulty in accepting this interpretation, but the end phrase: "but
most of them are transgressors", does not agree with it.

QUR'AN: Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe (to
be) the Jews and those who are polytheists, and you will certainly find the nearest in friendship
to those who believe (to be) those who say: "We are Christians": Allah has described in the
preceding verses the depravities found in the People of the Book in general, and some which
apply to only a particular group among them, e.g., the saying of the Jews that the hand of Allah
is tied up; and the saying of the Christians that surely Allah, He is the Messiah son of Mary.
Now, He describes their attitude vis-a-vis the believers and Islam; and adds to it the attitude of
the polytheists, in order to present a complete picture of the non-Muslim communities' mental
disposition towards Islam, and how near or far they are from accepting it. Its sum-total is that the
Christians are the nearest of all those groups in friendship to the Muslims and readier to listen to
the call of the truth.

They have been counted as the nearest in friendship to the believers, because a group of them did
believe in the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) as the next verse shows: And when they hear what has been
revealed to the Messenger you will see their eyes overflowing with tears on account of the truth
that they recognize; they say: "Our Lord! We believe, so write us down with the witnesses (of
truth)." (5:83).

However, if acceptance of faith by a group can justify its ascription to the whole community,
then the Jews and the polytheists too must be joined with the Christians in this matter, because a
Jewish group led by 'Abdullah ibn Salam had entered into Islam, and so had a lot of the
polytheists of Arabia - in fact, the latter formed the majority of the Muslims at that time. In this
background, singling the Christians out for the praise contained in the above verse - to the
exclusion of the Jews and polytheists - points to their sincere acceptance of the call of Islam,
even when they had other options than entering into Islam: they could have opted to continue on
their religion and pay jizyah, or to fight against Islam.

The case of the polytheists was totally different, because they had no alternative to acceptance of
Islam (or to fight). In this situation, the fact that the majority of Muslims had come from that
group does not prove that they had entered into Islam sincerely. This is quite apart from the
sufferings they inflicted upon the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the tortures they wreaked on Muslims.

Coming to the Jews, although they had the same alternatives as the Christians, and they could
remain on their religion with payment of jizyah, yet they continued in their haughtiness, became
harder in their bigotry, and turned to double dealing and deception. They broke their covenants,
eagerly waited calamities to befall the Muslims and dealt to them bitterest deal.

The attitude the Christians had towards the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the Muslims, and their attraction
to Islam; and also the enmity of the Jews and polytheists toward the divine religion and their
sustained arrogance and bigotry, have continued exactly in the same manner even after the
Prophet (s.a.w.). Innumerable were the Christians who answered the call to Islam during the past
centuries, while the number of the Jews and the polytheists was so insignificant. These
unchanged characteristics in both groups confirm what the Mighty Book had indicated.

The verse: "Certainly you will find the most violent...", lays down a general all-inclusive
principle, although it is addressed to the Prophet (s.a.w.) alone. It is the style used in many
preceding verses: You will see many of them befriending those who disbelieve... (5:80); And you
will see many of them striving with one another... (5:62). All these verses use the second person
singular pronoun; but their connotation is general.

QUR'AN: this is because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not
behave proudly: al-Qissis (priest, clergyman); ar-ruhban is plural of ar-rahib (monk),
sometimes it is used as singular. ar-Raghib has said: "ar-rahbah and ar-ruhb mean to fear with
cautiousness... at-tarahhub (devoutness); ar-ruhbaniyyah (excessive devotion based on extreme
fear (of God); monasticism). Allah says: and (asfor) monasticism, they innovated it (57:27). ar-
Ruhban is used both as a singular and a plural; those who take it as singular, make its plural
ruhaabin”

Allah has given three reasons for the Christians being the nearest in friendship to the believers,
and of their geniality and cordiality towards the Muslims; these reasons are their exclusive
attributes, which are not found in the Jews and the polytheists: (1) There are priests among them,
(2) and monks and ascetics, and (3) they are not proud. These three are the keys to prepare them
for felicity.

The felicity of religious life depends on good deeds, which emanate from knowledge. You may
say that that felicity is achieved when one believes in the Truth and acts accordingly. He, first of
all, needs knowledge in order to perceive the right of religion and it is the religion of truth.
However, mere perception of truth is not enough to prepare him to act according to its dictates
unless and until man removes from his soul the opposite factors, i.e. the arrogance which
prevents him from submitting to truth, the bigotry, prejudice, and other such things. When man is
armed with beneficial knowledge, and becomes ready to deal justly vis-a-vis the truth by
discarding haughtiness and arrogance, then he is ready to submit to the truth by acting according
to its demands - provided the environment is not incompatible to it, because compatibility of
environment with action has great effect on that action. The activities, which are performed, by
the society, where children grow up in that atmosphere; their sub-conscience forms a habit to go
on doing it and it continues generation after generation. The conscious mind is not given a
chance to think over it, to ponder or meditate as to how to get rid of that habit - even if he
understands that the habit is harmful and against his felicity. The same is the case of good deeds
and activities if they become deep-rooted in the society - it is extremely difficult to neglect them.
That is why it is said that habit is second nature. Also it is because of this factor that when one
intends to do something, which one does not like, it seems very difficult to accomplish, but with
each repetition its difficulty is decreased.

When a man, therefore, makes sure that a certain deed is correct and good, and removes from his
soul the tendency of obstinacy and stubbornness by negating haughtiness, then it will be fully
helpful to him if he sees another person doing that deed, as it would prove to him that the said
deed is not beyond his own power.

This shows that the society will be ready to accept a truth if there are in it knowledgeable persons
who know it and teach it, and there are people who act upon that truth, so that general public
ascertains that the deed is not impossible and is really good, and finally the general public is
accustomed to submit to the truth and not to be too proud to accept it when it appears before their
eyes.

It is because of these factors that Allah has said about Christians that they are nearer to accept the
call of the true religion because they have their religious scholars and monks who do not behave
proudly. Their scholars continue to teach them cognizance of truth and realities of religion -
verbally. Their ascetics remind them the greatness of their Lord and the importance of their
felicity in this world and the next - practically. And they do not have pride and haughtiness,
which would prevent them from accepting the truth.

As for the Jews, they had their own scholars, no doubt; but they behaved proudly, and their
arrogance and stubbornness did not let them be prepared for accepting the truth.

And as for the polytheists, they did not have any religious scholar or ascetics, and on top of that,
they did behave arrogantly.

QUR'AN: And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you will see their eyes
overflowing with tears on account of the truth that they recognize; they say: "Our Lord! We
believe, so write us down with the witnesses (of truth): Eyes overflowing with tears i.e. shedding
plentiful tears; min in mina 'd-dam' (with tears) denotes beginning; and in mimma 'arafu (that
they recognize) shows emergence; and in mina 'l-haqq (of the truth) gives explanation.

QUR'AN: "And what (reason) have we that we should not believe in Allah and in the truth that
has come to us, while we earnestly desire that our Lord should cause us to enter with the good
people? ": The
word, "cause us to enter", implies the meaning, put us/place us; that is why it is followed by the
preposition ma' (with).

The meaning: that our Lord should place us with the good people and include us among them.

The words and the deeds which Allah has attributed to them prove what He has said about them
that they are nearest in friendship to the believers, and ascertain that they possess beneficial
knowledge and good deed and they surrender to the truth because there are among them priests
and monks and they do not behave proudly.

QUR'AN: Therefore Allah rewarded them on account of what they said, with gardens in which
rivers flow to abide in them; and this is the reward of those who do good. And (as for) those who
disbelieve and reject Our signs, these are the companions of the flame: al-Ithabah (to reward).
The first verse here describes, their reward, and the second one recompense of those who oppose
them. Thus, all groups are dealt with.
Traditions
(as-Saduq) narrates through his chain from ar-Rida (a.s.) from his forefathers from 'Ali (a.s.) that
the clause: they both used to eat food, means: "They both evacuated the bowels." (Ma'ani 'l-
akhbar)

The author says: al-'Ayyashi has narrated it in his at-Tafsir.

(al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Abu 'Ubaydah al-Hadhdha' from Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.) that he said about the word of Allah: Those who disbelieved from among the Children of
Israel -were cursed by the tongue of Dawud and 'Isa, "Swines are (those who were cursed) by
the tongue of Dawud, and monkeys by the tongue of 'Isa son of Maryam." (al-Kafi)

The author says: Also, al-Qummi and al-'Ayyashi have narrated it from the same Imam (a.s.).
The Sunni traditions from Mujahid and Qatadah, etc. narrate that monkeys were cursed by the
tongue of Dawud and swines by the tongue of 'Isa son of Maryam; and some Shi'ah traditions
agree with it, as will be seen later.

Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said: "As for Dawud, he cursed the people of Eilat, when they transgressed on
their Sabbath day, and their transgression had occurred in his days. So he said, 'O Allah! Dress
them with curse like robe and like belt on waist.' So Allah transformed them into monkeys. And
as for 'Isa, he cursed those to whom the food was sent down and then they disbelieved." Then
Abu Ja'far (a.s.), said, "They befriended tyrant kings and made their (i.e. kings') desires fair
seeming to them in order to get (a share) from their world." (Majma'u'l-bayan)

The author says: The Qur'an supports this report that the people of the Sabbath were
transformed into monkeys. Allah says: And certainly you have known those among you who
exceeded the limits of the Sabbath, so We said to them: "Be apes, despised and hated" (2:65).
And ask them about the town which stood by the sea; when they exceeded the limits of the
Sabbath, when their fish came to them on the day of their Sabbath, appearing on the surface of
the water, and on the day on which they did not keep the Sabbath they did not come to them;...
And when a party of them said: "Why do you admonish a people whom Allah would destroy or
whom He would chastise with a severe chastisement? " They said: "To be free from blame before
your Lord, and that haply they may guard (against evil)"... Therefore when they revoltingly
persisted in what they had been forbidden, We said to them: "Be apes, despised and hated"
(7:163-6).

'Abd ibn Hamid, Abu 'sh-Shaykh, at-Tabaram, and Ibn Mardu-wayh have narrated from Ibn
Mas'ud that he said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said, 'Verily whenever the Children of
Israel committed a sin, their scholars forbade them (to do it) in rebuke, and then they sat with
them and ate and drank with them as if they had not committed any sin yesterday. So when Allah
saw this conduct of theirs, He let discord to appear among them, and cursed them by the tongue
of a prophet.' Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said, 'By Allah! You will most certainly
enjoin the right and forbid the wrong; and you most certainly bend them to turn to truth;
otherwise, Allah will most certainly let discord appear among you, and will most certainly curse
you as He had cursed them.'" (ad-Durru'l-manthur)
'Abd ibn Hamid has narrated from Ma'adh ibn Jabal that he said, "The Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.), said, 'Accept gift as long as it is gift; and if it is a bribe to divert you from your religion,
then do not take it. But you shall never leave it - need and fear shall not let you avoid it. Surely
the children of Gog have arrived. And certainly the hand mill of Islam will soon start going
round, so wherever the Qur'an revolves, you should revolve with it. It is about to happen that the
worldly power and the Qur'an shall fight each other and separate. Surely soon you will get kings
who will judge you according to one standard and judge themselves with another standard; if you
would obey them they would lead you astray, and if you would disobey them they would kill
you.'

"They (companions) said, 'How should we (behave) if we found that (era)?' He said, 'You should
be like the companions of 'Isa. They were sawed with handsaws and hoisted on wood (i.e.
crucified). Death in obedience (of Allah) is better than life in disobedience. Surely the first defect
that appeared in the Children of Israel was that they used to enjoin the good and forbid the evil,
rebuking (the evil-doer), and then when one of them met the fellow whom he used to rebuke, he
ate and drank with him as though he had not rebuked him for anything. So Allah cursed them by
the tongue of Dawud, and it was because they disobeyed and used to exceed the limit. (I swear)
by Him in Whose hand my soul is! You should certainly enjoin what is good and forbid what is
evil; otherwise Allah will most certainly impose your evil ones as rulers over you, then your
good ones will call (on Allah) and their call will not be answered. (I swear) by Him in Whose
hand my soul is! You should most certainly enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil, and you
will most certainly take the hand of the unjust and twist it over him; otherwise Allah will cause
discord to appear among you.'" (ibid.)

Ibn Rahwayh, al-Bukhan (in al-Wahdaniyyat), Ibnu 's-Sakan, Ibn Mandah, al-Bawardi (in
Ma'rifatu 's-sahabah), at-Tabarani, Abu Nu'aym, and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated from Ibn
Abzi, from his father that he said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), delivered a sermon; he
offered thanks to Allah and praised Him; then he mentioned some groups of the Muslims and
lauded them in good terms; thereafter he said, 'What has happened to some people that they do
not teach their neighbors and do not impart to them the knowledge of religion? Why they do not
enjoin them (to do good) and do not forbid them (the evil)? And why is it that some people do
not learn from their neighbors, and do not acquire religious knowledge and do not become
knowledgeable? (I swear) by Him in Whose hand my soul is! They should most certainly teach
their neighbors, or they should most certainly acquire religious knowledge, or they should most
certainly become knowledgeable; otherwise I shall most certainly hasten to their chastisement in
this world.'

"Thereafter he came down and entered his house. The companions of the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) said, 'Whom does he mean by this talk?' They said, 'We do not know whom does he
mean by this talk except the tribe of Ash'arites. (They are) religious scholars, knowledgeable and
they have neighbors, uncouth, ignorant.'

"Then a group of Ash'arites came together and visited the Prophet (s.a.w.). They said, 'You
mentioned some groups of Muslims in good (terms) and mentioned us in bad (terms); so what
should we do?' The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said, 'You should most certainly teach your
neighbors, and most certainly give them religious knowledge, and most certainly enjoin them
and forbid them; otherwise I shall most certainly hasten to your chastisement in this world.' They
said, 'O Messenger of Allah! Give us one year's time; as in that one year we shall teach them and
they shall learn.' So he gave them time of one year. Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) recited:
Those who disbelieved from among the Children of Israel were cursed by the tongue of Dawud
and 'Isa son of Maryam; this was because they disobeyed and used to exceed the limit. They used
not to forbid each other the hateful things (which) they did; certainly evil was that which they
did. {ibid.}

Muhammad ibn al-Haytham at-Tamimi narrates from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said about the
word of Allah, They used not to forbid each other the hateful things (which) they did; certainly
evil was that which they did: "Well, they did not enter their places nor did they sit in their
sessions; but when they met them, they showed gladness on seeing them and showed friendliness
towards them." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

Marwan narrates through some of his companions, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he described
the Christians and their enmity (towards Muslims); then he mentioned the word of Allah: that is
because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave proudly, (and)
said, "Those were the people who were between 'Isa and Muhammad, (who) were awaiting
coming of Muhammad (s.a. w.a.)." (ibid.)

The author says: Apparently the verse is general and not restricted to a certain period. Probably,
the tradition means that the praise is applied to them only as long as they did not change, exactly
as the praise of the Muslims too is conditional to their not changing.

'Abd ibn Hamid, Ibnu'l-Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Abu 'sh-Shaykh and Ibn Marduwayh have
narrated from Sa'id ibn Jubayr that he said explaining the word of Allah: that is because there
are priests and monks among them... "It refers to the messengers of Negus whom he sent with
(news of) his Islam and that of his people; they were seventy persons whom he selected from
among his nation, good ones. So good is in religious knowledge and age." (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

Another version says: He sent to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) thirty men from among his
good companions. They came to him, and he recited before them the chapter of Ya-Sin; so they
wept when they heard the Qur'an and recognized that it was truth. Therefore, Allah revealed
about them: that is because there are priests and monks among them... Also it was revealed
about them: (As to) those whom We gave the Book before it, they are believers in it. And when it
is recited to them they say: "We believe in it; surely it is the truth from our Lord; surely we were
submitters before it." These shall be granted their reward twice ... (28:52-54), (ibid.)

Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said, "The
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), while in Mecca, was afraid of polytheists regarding his companions.
So he sent Ja'far ibn Abi Talib, Ibn Mas'ud and 'Uthman ibn Maz'un with a party of his
companions to Negus, the king of Ethiopia. When the news reached the polytheists, they sent
'Amr ibn al-'As with a group of theirs. It is said that they arrived at Negus' (court) before the
companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.), and said, 'Indeed, has appeared among us a man who has
declared as foolish the wisdom and aspirations of Quraysh; he thinks he is a prophet. He has sent
a party to you in order to sabotage your nation against you; therefore, we liked to come to you
and give you his report.'

"(Negus) said, 'If they came to me, I'll look into what they say.' When the companions of the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) arrived (there), they came to the gate of Negus and said (to the door-
keeper), Take permission for the friends of Allah.' (Negus) said, 'Give permission to them;
welcome to the friends of Allah.' When they came to him, they greeted him with salam. The
group of the polytheists said, 'Do you not see, O King! That we have told you the truth, and they
have not greeted you with the formula you are (usually) addressed with.' (The King) said to them
(the Muslims): 'What has prevented you from greeting me with my (usual) greeting?' They said,
'We have greeted you with the greeting of the people of Garden, and the greeting of the angels.'

"Then he said to them, 'What does your companion say about 'Isa and his mother?' They said, 'He
says, "A servant of Allah and His Messenger; a word from Allah and a spirit from Him which He
sent to Maryam"; and he says about Maryam that she was a virgin, pure and untouched.' The
King took up a (small) piece of wood from the earth and said, "Isa and his mother were not more
than what your companion says even to the extent of this wood.' The polytheist did not like his
words and their faces underwent a change.

"Then (Negus) said, 'Would you recite something from what has been revealed to you?' They
said, 'Yes.' He said, Then recite (it).' They began to recite. And there were around the King,
priests, monks, and all other Christians. A group of the priests and monks (was so overwhelmed
that) whenever they recited a verse, their (the Christians') eyes overflowed with tears because of
what they recognized of the truth. Allah says: this is because there are priests and monks among
them and because they do not behave proudly. And when they hear what has been revealed to
the Messenger, you will see their eyes overflowing with tears on account of the truth that they
recognize, (ibid.)

The author says: al-Qummi has narrated in his at-Tafsir this event in a lengthy tradition, and it
says at the end: (The envoys sent by Negus) returned to him and gave him the information about
the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and recited to him what the Prophet had recited to them. So,
Negus wept and the priests wept, then he became Muslim but did not disclose his Islam to the
Ethiopians, because he was afraid of them regarding his life. So he came out of Ethiopia
proceeding to the Prophet (s.a.w.); when he crossed the sea, he expired...

Meaning of Tawheed in the Qur'an

A deep thinker on matters of general cognizance certainly recognizes that the subject of tawhid
(monotheism, oneness of God) is the deepest of all problems. It is the most difficult to imagine
and conceive, and most entangled to unravel, because it is highly above the general topics which
human understanding grasps, and much beyond the common propositions which minds are
familiar with.

Such a complicated subject is bound to be perceived in diverse ways by different minds, because
of multiplicity of thinking which mankind is created with, as every individual has a separate
body-construction, and this leads to diversity of the senses in their actions. This in its turn affects
thought and understanding ranging from sharp intelligence to idiocy, from steadfastness to
deviation. All this is generally accepted and no one has any doubt about it. The Qur'an has
affirmed this difference and diversity in various places. Allah says: Say: "Are those who know
and those who do not know alike? Only those possessed of understanding shall bear in mind
(39:9). Therefore turn aside from him who turns his back upon Our reminder and does not
desire anything but this world's life. That is the (last) reach of their knowledge; (53:29-30).... but
what is the matter with these people that well-nigh they do not understand what is told (them)?
(4:78).... See how we make the signs clear to them, then behold, how they are turned away
(5:75).

A clear example of this difference in understanding is their difference in cognizance of the

meaning of oneness of God. Although the human nature through its secret inspiration has united
all men together in believing that there is a Creator, yet there is a great difference and vast chasm
between one mind and the other in grasping its meaning.

Some people's intellect led them to idol-worship. He carves idols and statues from wood and
stone, even from (flour,) cheese and clay made with urine of goats and sheep. Then he declares
these to be partners and colleagues of God. He worships God exactly as he worships these idols,
and asks God for his needs as he asks them, and shows devotion to Him as he does to them. It
did not take him long to give precedence to those idols over God; he came closer to them and left
Him; put all his needs in their hands and discarded Him.

Utmost that such a man can understand about the existence of God is what he does about his
idols, which were made by himself or by another man like himself. That is why they ascribed to
God the attribute of oneness in the same way as they did to each of their idols, and it was the
oneness in number; one is a number from which other numbers are made. Allah says: And they
wonder that there has come to them a Warner from among themselves, and the disbelievers say:
"This is an enchanter, a Her." What! Makes he the gods a single God? A strange thing is this, to
be sure! (38:4-5)

These people looked at the Qur'anic call to monotheism as a call to numerical oneness, as
opposed to numerical multitude. Allah says: And your God is one God! There is no god but
He;... (2:163); He is the Living, there is no god but He, therefore call on Him, being sincere to
Him in obedience (40:65); apart from many verses which call man to discard numerous gods and
turn his face exclusively to the One God. Also, He says: ...and our God and your God is One...
(29:46); in addition to other verses which call men not to be divided by worshipping different
gods, as every nation, group and tribe used to worship a god which exclusively belonged to it,
and discarded others' gods.

Qur'an's sublime teachings negate numerical unity concerning God; a thing, which is numerically
one, must inevitably be distinguished from another similar one through confinement of limit and
dimension. For example, there is water in a reservoir; if we put it in various pots, then the water
in each pot would be a unit, separate from other units found in other pots. Likewise, Zayd is one
man because he does not have the particulars found in other men. If there were no such
distinction, their humanity would not be called one or more numerically.
Limitedness of existence compels the numerical one to be one. When this unity is curtailed in
some aspects, the numerical multitude is formed; for example, when some units gather together
to form a group.

Allah is the Subduer, not subdued; the Victor whom nothing can subjugate, as the Qur'anic
teachings make clear. As such, numerical unity or numerousness vis-a-vis God is unimaginable.
Allah says: ...and He is the One, the Subduer (13:16).... are sundry lords better or Allah the One
the Subduer? You do not worship besides Him but names, which you have named, you and your
fathers;... (12: 39-40). ...and there is no god but Allah, the One, the Subduer (38:65); If Allah
had intended to take a son to Himself, He would surely choose those He pleases from what He
has created. Glory be to Him! He is Allah, the One, the Subduer. (39:4)

These verses, in their contexts, negate every unity which stands face to face with opposite
numerousness: No matter whether it is numerical unity, like a single member of a species, which
if joined with another member would become two. (This individual member is subdued by the
limit imposed on it by the second member, who is distinguished from it.) Or, if it is unity in
species genes or any other general conception, parallel to numerousness of the same type. For
example, when man as a species, is looked at side by side with other species, e.g. horse, cow,
sheep, etc., is subdued by the limit imposed on it by the other species.

However, we know that nothing can subdue Allah in any aspect, be it His person, His attributes,
or His actions. He is the Subduer, above all things; nothing can impose any limit on Him. He is
Existent without any taint of non-existence; He is the Truth that no nullity can touch Him; the
Living that death cannot come near Him; the Knowing that ignorance cannot creep to Him; the
Powerful that weakness cannot overcome Him; the Owner and the King that nothing can possess
Him, and the Mighty Who is far above meekness - and so on. He has the essence of perfection. If
you want to understand more this Qur'anic reality, then imagine one thing finite, and another
infinite. You will find that the infinite encompasses the finite in a way that the finite does not
push the infinite away from its perfection; rather, the infinite dominates the finite and is present
in every aspect of the finite's perfection; the infinite stands independently, and is the witness over
the finite and encompasses it. Keeping this scenario in view, look at the connotation of these
verses: Is it not sufficient as regards your Lord that He is a witness over all things? Now surely
they are in doubt as to the meeting of their Lord; now surely He encompasses all things (41:53-
54).

This is what is proved by all those verses that describe divine attributes and which clearly or
apparently shows all-inclusiveness. For examples: Allah - there is no god but He (20:8); ...and
they shall know that Allah is the evident Truth (24:25); He is the Living, there is no god but He...
(40:65); ...and He is the Knowing, the Powerful (30:54); ...that the power is wholly Allah's...
(2:165); ...to Him belongs the kingdom, and to Him is due (all) praise... (64:1); ...surety might is
wholly Allah's... (10:65); The truth is from your Lord,... (2:147); ...you are the ones who stand in
need of Allah, and Allah is He Who is the Self-sufficient, the Praised one (35:15), in addition to
other many similar verses.

As you see, these verses loudly declare that every imaginable perfection originally belongs to
Allah; others do not have any perfection unless and until He gives it to them; even then He does
not lose any perfection by giving it to the others, contrary to what happens to us when we give
something into others' possession - that we lose our hold on it and our possession of it is negated.

In this backdrop, when we imagine a perfect thing vis-a-vis Allah, with a view to make it His
second and His partner, we will find that all its perfection actually belongs to Allah and comes
from Him; He is the Truth, Who owns everything; and whatever is besides Him is worthless and
owns nothing for itself. Allah says: ...and they control not for themselves any harm or benefit,
and they control not death, nor life, nor raising (the dead) to life. (25:3)

It is this connotation that negates numerical unity in respect of Allah. Had He been numerically
one, He would have been confined to His own person and unable to encompass other beings; and
then it would have been possible in reason to suppose His second like Him  - no matter whether
that second could exist in reality or was impossible to exist. Then the reason could attribute
numerousness to Him looking at His person, even if such multitude was impossible in actuality.
But it is not so.

He is One, i.e. His existence cannot be limited with any limit; otherwise it would have been
possible to imagine His second beyond that limit. This is the connotation of the chapter of "The
Unity": Say: "He, Allah, is Unique. Allah is He on Whom all depend. He begets not, nor is He
begotten. And none is like unto Him. " The word ahad denotes uniqueness. It does not mean one,
so that we may start counting, two, three, and so on. This attribute removes the possibility of
numbering. In a negative sentence it is translated as "no one" or "nobody". They say: "No one
came to me.' It negates coming of one, two or more. Allah says: And if one of the idolaters seek
protection from you, grant him protection... (9:6). The 'one' here encompasses one, two and
group; no number is out of its circle. Also He says: ...or one of you come from the privy... (5:6).
Here too 'one' covers all numbers endlessly.

The word One or Unique in the first verse (of the chapter of "The Unity") is used in a positive
sentence. There is no negation, nor is it qualified with any adjective or genitive construction; and
it connotes that in His essence Allah is such as no like unto Him can even be imagined - be it one
or more. Therefore, regardless of its condition in actuality, it is impossible even to imagine it
properly.

Allah has gone ahead, mentioning the attribute of as-samad: It means something solid, not
hollow. (That is why it is translated as the One on Whom all depend and Who does not depend
on anything.)

Then it says: "He begets not", followed by, "nor is He begotten", and finally comes: And none is
like unto Him.

The last three attributes negate such factors that impose some limits and isolation.

This is the reason why the attributes imagined or invented by the creatures in respect of Allah
cannot be applied to Him properly. Allah says: Glory be to Allah (for freedom) from what they
describe; except the servants of Allah, freed (from sins) (37:159-60); ...they do not comprehend
Him in knowledge (20:110). The fact is that the attributes of perfection that we use for Allah are
limited attributes, and far be it from His glory to be subject to limitation and restriction. This was
the idea which the Prophet (s.a.w.) expressed in his famous words: "I do not count Your praise,
You are as You have praised Yourself."

This meaning of unity removes the idea of the Christian trinity. They are Unitarians and at the
same time are Trinitarians. But the unity they believe in is the numerical unity, which does not
negate numerousness from other sides. They say: There are three persons (the Father, the Son,
the Holy Ghost) (or say: the self, the knowledge, the life), yet they are one, like: A living learned
man; he is one, yet he is three because there is man, life, and knowledge.

But the Qur'anic teaching rebuts this idea, because it affirms such a unity, which leaves no room
for a supposition of any type of multitude, numerousness, or distinction either in His person or
His attributes. Whatever attribute is supposed for Him is exactly the other attribute, because there
is no limit or boundary here. Allah's person is exactly His attribute; and each attribute supposed
for Him is His other attribute. May He be exalted above what they associate with Him and Glory
be to Him from what they ascribe to Him.

This is the reason that the verses that describe Him as the Subduer first ascribe to Him the
attribute of Oneness and then mentions His subduing. It shows that His unity does not leave any
room to anyone even to imagine His second who could be similar to Him in any way, not to
speak of that second's actual existence. Allah says:... are sundry lords better or Allah the One,
the Subduer? You do not worship besides Him but names which you have named, you and your
fathers;... (12:39-40). In this speech, Yusuf (a.s.) ascribes to Allah the unity, which has subdued
every imaginary partner, and this subduing does leave nothing to any other supposed god except
name. Also He says:... Or have they set up with Allah associates who have created creation like
His, so that what is created became confused to them? Say: "Allah is the Creator of all things,
and He is the One, the Subduer" (13:16); ...To whom belongs the Kingdom this day? To Allah,
the One, the Subduer (40:16). It is because His unrestricted kingdom does not leave any other
supposed owner without turning him and his possession into His hand as His possession. Also
He says: ...and there is no god but Allah, the One, the Subduer (38:65); If Allah had intended to
take a son to Himself, He would surely have chosen those He pleases from what He has created.
Glory be to Him: He is Allah, the One, the Subduer (39:4). Thus, you see that in all these verses,
His Oneness precedes His attribute of subduing.

Traditions on Tawheed
(as-Saduq) narrates through his chain of narrators, from al-Miqdam ibn Shurayh ibn Hani, from
his father that he said, "Verily a Bedouin stood up on the day of the Camel to the Leader of the
Faithful (a.s.) and said, 'O Leader of the Faithful! Do you say that Allah is one?'" (The narrator)
said that the people bore down on him and said, "O Bedouin! Do you not see how disturbed the
Leader of the Faithful is at present?" The Leader of the Faithful (a.s.) said, "Leave him, because
what this Bedouin wants is exactly what we want from these people (our adversaries)."

Then he said, "O Bedouin! The statement that, Allah is One is of four kinds (i.e., it can be
interpreted in four ways): Two sides (meanings) of them are not applicable to Allah, the Mighty,
the Great, and two sides are affirmed about Him. As for the two meaning which are not allowed
to attach to Him: (One:) It is the word of a speaker, 'one', when he intends it as a number; so this
is not allowed (in respect of Allah), because that which has no 'second' does not enter into the
fold of numbers (i.e. cannot be counted). Don't you see that He has declared them disbelievers
who said that He was the third of the three? (Two:) It is the word of a speaker (for someone) that
he is one of the people; he means a species from genes; so it is not allowed because it likens Him
(to others), and our Lord is far greater and more sublime than it.

"And as for the two meanings which are affirmed about Him: (One:) It is the word of a speaker:
He is One, there is nothing like unto Him; such is our Lord. (Two:) It is the word of a speaker:
He is of one meaning, i.e. He cannot be divided in existence, or in reason, or in imagination.
Such is our Lord, the Mighty, the Great." (at-Tawhid; al-Khisal)

The author says: He has also narrated it in Ma'ani 'l-akhbar, through another chain, from Abu'l-
Miqdam ibn Shurayh ibn Hani, from his father from the Imam (a.s.).

('Ali, a.s. said:) "The foremost in religion is the knowledge of Him, the perfection of knowing
Him is to testify Him, the perfection of testifying Him is to believe in His Oneness, the
perfection of believing in His Oneness is to adhere to Him purely, and the perfection of adhering
to Him purely is to deny Him attributes, because every attribute testifies that it is different from
that to which it is attributed and everything to which something is attributed testifies that it is
different from the attribute.

"Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah joins Him (to another thing) and who joins Him (to
another thing) regards Him two; and who regards Him two recognizes parts for Him; and who
recognizes parts for Him is ignorant of Him; and who is ignorant of Him pointed at Him; and
who pointed at Him admitted limitations for Him; and who admitted limitations for Him
numbered Him ..."

The author says: It is a most amazing expression. The gist of the first paragraph is that
cognition of Allah in its perfection ultimately leads to denying Him attributes. And the gist of the
second paragraph (beginning with, "Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah ...") is that
affirmation of attributes entails affirmation of numerical unity that in its turn depends on putting
limitations on Him, which is not allowed for Allah. The two premises lead to the conclusion that
perfection of Allah's cognition entails denying numerical unity/oneness for Him, and seeking
some other meaning for divine unity. And that is the theme of the Imam (a.s.) in this sermon.

As for the question of denying Him attributes, the Imam (a.s.) has explained it in his word: The
foremost in religion is the knowledge of Him. Apparently, one, who does not know Allah in any
way, is yet to enter into the fold of religion. That knowledge is sometimes accompanied by deeds
and at other times is devoid of deeds. Obviously, if one had a knowledge, which was somewhat,
related to deed and action that knowledge would settle in the psyche only when it was acted
upon. Otherwise, the knowledge would go on losing its power if contrary actions were
performed, until it would become futile, null and void. The Imam (a.s.) has explained the same
principle somewhere else in the same book: Knowledge is joined with action, he who knows
acts; knowledge calls action loudly, if it answers the call, (well and good); otherwise knowledge
too departs.
The knowledge and cognition becomes complete when the knower holds truly to "the known",
and manifests it in his interior and exterior, in his heart and limbs, by submitting to it in spirit
and flesh. And it is the faith, which spreads to his inner and outer self. This reality is expressed in
a nutshell in the sentence: the perfection of knowing Him is to testify Him.

Although this submission, which is called testifying Him, may take place with ascribing a partner
to the Lord, as we see idol-worshippers submitting to Allah together with their other gods, yet
obviously submission to a thing cannot be complete without turning away from other things.
Thus submission to one of the gods means to turn away from other gods and in a way behaving
arrogantly towards them. By the same standard, testifying to Allah and submission to Him
cannot be complete without turning away from submission to the partners ascribed to Him and
from the call to multitude of gods. This takes us to the sentence: the perfection of testifying Him
is to believe in His Oneness.

Now, the belief in unity of God has different grades one over another; and it is not perfected until
the One God is given His due right of exclusive divinity. It is not enough just to call Him One
God, but every factor having any part in existence and perfection must be attributed to Him, e.g.,
creation, giving sustenance, raising to life, causing to die, and bestowal and withholding.
Submission and worship must be reserved to Him, without showing humility to other than Him
in any way; one should not hope except for His mercy, should not fear except His wrath, should
not covet except what is with Him, and should not adhere except to His door. In other words, one
must devote oneself solely to Him in knowledge and practice. This factor is described by ‘Ali
(a.s.) in these words: the perfection of believing in His Oneness is to adhere to Him purely.

When man settles on throne of sincerity, and divine solicitude attaches him to the near friends of
Allah, then appear before his insight the signs manifesting his inability to properly acquire His
cognition or to ascribe to Him the attributes worthy of His Greatness and Majesty. He sees that
whatever attributes he uses for Allah are merely the ideas, which he has perceived by looking at,
created things and the happening that he has observed in transient creatures. These are limited
and restricted forms, each repelling the others; they cannot be mixed and mingled. Look for
example at the meanings of existence, knowledge, power, life, sustenance, might, and affluence.

The limited meanings repel each other because clearly each meaning is devoid of the other
meaning; for example, meaning of knowledge is devoid of that of power. When we imagine
knowledge our attention is diverted from power, and we do not see the meaning of power in that
of knowledge; and when we imagine the meaning of knowledge (which is one of the attributes)
we are diverted from the meaning of His person, to Whom these attributes are attached.

Thus, these meanings, perceptions, and knowledge fall short of the ability to be applied properly
to Allah, or to express exactly His splendor. A sincere servant, who intends to describe his Lord,
inevitably feels the need to confess his shortcomings, which are not redeemable, his weakness
that cannot be restored. Then he looks again to himself and negates what he had affirmed; and
wanders in bewilderment from which he can't come out. This is the connotation of the words of
‘Ali (a.s.): "and the perfection of His purity is to deny Him attributes, because every attribute
testifies that it is different from that to which it is attributed, and everything to which it is"
attributed testifies that it is different from the attribute."

This explanation given by us of the first paragraph is supported by the beginning of the sermon
where the Imam (a.s.) says: "... Whom the height of intellect cannot appreciate, and the diving of
understanding cannot reach; He for Whose description no limit is laid down, no eulogy exists, no
time is ordained and no duration is fixed", as is clear to an intelligent contemplator.

The next paragraph: "Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah joins Him (to another thing)..."
This section analyses the implication of attaching attributes to Allah and in this way arrives at the
aim that Allah is not subject to limitation or counting; while the first paragraph had reached
through analysis of cognition to the denial of attributes.

"Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah joins Him (to another thing)" because attribute and
that to which it is attributed are two separate things; and whoever attaches them together, joins
them; and whoever joins them recognizes them as two; and whoever recognizes Allah and His
attributes as two, recognizes parts for Him, and whoever recognizes parts for Him is ignorant of
Him, because in his imagination he points to Him; and whoever points to Him admits limitations
for Him - because pointing shows that the one who is pointed at is separate from the one who
points; and it creates a distance between the two, as the pointing begins from one and ends at the
other; and whoever puts limitation on Him, numbers Him. In other words, he believes in Him as
a numerical one, because counting is concomitant with division and isolation: Far be it from His
glory.

'Ali (a.s.) says in another sermon:

"Praise be to Allah for whom one condition does not precede another so that He may be the First
before being the Last or He may be Manifest before being the Hidden. Everyone called one
(alone) except Him is by virtue of being small (in number); and everyone enjoying honor other
than Him is humble. Every powerful person other than Him is weak. Every master (owner) other
than Him is slave (owned). Every knower other than Him is seeker of knowledge. Every
powerful other than Him is sometimes imbued with power and sometimes with disability. Every
listener other than Him is deaf to faint voices while loud voices make him deaf and distant voices
also get away from him. Every onlooker other than Him is blind to hidden colors and delicate
bodies. Every manifest thing other than Him is hidden, but every hidden thing other than Him is
incapable of becoming manifest."

The author says: It is based on the principle that Allah is not limited and all other things are
limited. When these and similar attributes and ideas are subjected to limitation, they have some
relationship with other things; and limitation causes them to be isolated from those other things,
and be turned into opposite meaning.

Manifestation, when it is taken as limited, will be limited to a certain thing or a certain direction,
and not to another thing or direction. Rather this manifest thing will turn into a hidden one when
looked at in relation to that another thing or direction. When honor is subjected to limitation, will
become null and void beyond that limit - will become humility. Power, when confined to a limit,
will turn into disability beyond that limit. Manifestation is concealment beyond its location, and
concealment is manifestation outside its context.

When ownership is restricted then the one who restricts shall be guardian and supervisor over
this owner - in this way, both the owner and the thing he owns will be under ownership of
someone else. Knowledge, when it is limited, does not belong to the knower, because a thing
does not restrict itself - it has come to him by bestowal of someone else and his teaching. And so
on.

The proof that the Imam (a.s.) has based his talk on the meaning of limit, may be seen in the
sentences: "Every listener other than Him is deaf to faint voices" (to the end of the paragraph,) as
all of it shows that all the created things are subject to limitation; and all is in the same context.

The sentence: "Everyone called one (alone) except Him is by virtue of being small (in number),"
is the reason why we have quoted the whole paragraph. Manifestly it is based on the meaning of
limit. The numerical oneness branches out from the limitedness of what is called one; and it
entails division and multiplication. The more this division increases, the smaller and weaker that
'one' becomes - in comparison to the resulting multitude. Obviously, every numerical 'one' is
small in comparison to the resulting multitude - even if in imagination only.

As for the 'one' which has no limit nor end, we cannot imagine any numerousness in it, because it
does not accept any limit or distinction, and its being encompasses all its essence. As nothing of
its essence is left out, there is nothing to add to it or to subtract from it - so it cannot increase nor
decrease; what we imagine as that one's second, is exactly the same 'one'.

'Ali (a.s.) has also said:

"All praise be to Allah Who gives proof of His existence through His creation, of His being
eternal through the newness of His creation, and through their mutual similarities proves that
nothing is similar to Him. Senses cannot touch Him, because of the difference between the
Maker and the made, the Limiter, the limited, the Sustainer, and the sustained.

"He is One but not by being the first in counting; is Creator but not through movement or labor;
is Hearer but not by means of any physical organ; is Looker but not by a stretching of eyelids; is
Witness but not by nearness; is Distant but not by measurement of distance; is Manifest but not
by seeing and is Hidden but not through a rarefied (body).

"He is Distinct from things because of their subjugation to Him and their turning to Him.

"He who describes Him puts limits on Him, he who puts limits on Him counts Him, and he who
counts Him rejects His eternity."

The author says: The beginning of this sermon indicates that all attributes and ideas found in
transient creation, are limited affairs; they cannot take place until and unless there is a Limiter to
fix their limits, a Maker to make them and a Sustainer to sustain them, and that Limiter, Maker
and Sustainer is Allah. Obviously, limit is of His making, and as such it has come into being
when He has made it; so it cannot cover its Maker. Far sublime is His Glory from these limits.
As such, whatever attributes are ascribed to Him are not subject to any limit - although our words
are incapable of describing this idea properly. Allah, therefore, is One but not in the sense of
number, because number and count leads to limitation. In the same way should be interpreted the
further descriptions of His creation, His hearing, His seeing, His presence and so on.

It sprouts from it that His being distant from His creation does not mean separation and isolation.
Far High is He from attachment and separation, incarnation and isolation. Rather it means that
He subdues the creation and controls it, while the creatures are subjugated to Him and return to
Him.

The clauses: "He who describes Him puts limits on Him, and he who puts limits on Him counts
Him, and he who counts Him rejects His eternity", prove that affirmation of numerical unity
entails rejection of His eternity. Eternity in its essence means that Allah is not finite in His
person and attributes, nor is He limited in any way. When we think of Him with regard to His
being unprecedented by any former thing, it is His eternity without beginning; and when we
regard Him as being not followed by any later thing, it is His eternity without end; and when one
is regarded eternal on both sides, it is perpetuity.

Some scholars think that Allah's eternity without beginning means that He precedes the created
things, which He has created, and there had passed untold time before it when there was no news
of any creation or its trace. (In other words, His precedence is seen within the framework of
time.) But it is a most repulsive mistake. What is time? It is but the amount of the movement of
moving things. How can such a thing join Allah in His eternity?

'Ali (a.s.) again says:

"All praise be to Allah, Creator of the people, Who has spread the earth, has made streams to
flow and vegetation to grow on high lands. His primality has no beginning, nor has His eternity
any end. He is the First and from ever, and the everlasting without limit. Foreheads bow before
Him and lips declare His Oneness. He determined the limits of things at the time of His creating
them, keeping Himself away from any likeness.

"Imagination cannot surmise Him with limits and movements, limbs or senses. It cannot be said
about Him: When? and no time duration can be attributed to Him by saying: till. He is Manifest,
but it cannot be said: from what. He is Hidden but it cannot be said: in what. He is not a body
that can die, nor is He veiled so as to be enclosed within. He is not near to things by way of
touch, nor is He remote from them by way of separation.

"The gazing of people's eyes is not hidden from Him, nor the repetition of words, nor the glimpse
of hillocks, nor the tread of a footstep in the dark night or in the deep gloom, where the shining
moon casts its light and the effulgent sun comes in its wake, through its setting and appearing
again and again with the rotation of time and periods, by the approach of the advancing night or
the passing away of the running day.

"He precedes every extremity and limit, and every counting and number. He is far above what
those whose regard is limited attribute to Him, such as the qualities of measure, having
extremities, living in houses, and dwelling in abodes, because limits are meant for creation and
are attributable only to other than Allah.

"He did not create things from eternal matter, nor after ever-existing examples. But He created
whatever He created and then He fixed limits thereto, and He shaped whatever He shaped and
gave the best shape thereto."19

Again he (a.s.) says:

"He who assigns to Him (different) conditions does not believe in His oneness, nor does he who
likens Him (to something) grasp His reality, He who illustrates Him does not signify Him. He
who points at Him and imagines Him does not mean Him. Everything that is known through
itself has been created, and everything that exists by virtue of other tings is the effect (of a
cause). He works, but not with the help of instruments. He fixes measures, but not with the
activity of thinking. He is rich, but not by acquisition.

"Times do not keep company with Him, and implements do not help Him. His being precedes
times. His existence precedes non-existence, and His eternity precedes beginning. By His
creating the sense it is known that He has no senses. By His creating contrariness in various
matters it is known that He has no contrary; and by His creating similarity between things it is
known that there is nothing similar to Him. He has made light the contrary of darkness,
brightness that of gloom, dryness that of moisture, and heat that of cold. He produces affection
among inimical things, fuses together diverse things, brings near remote things, and separates
things, which are joined together.

"He is not confined by limits, nor counted by numbers. Material parts can surround things of
their own kind, and organs can point out things similar to themselves. The word, 'since',
disproves their eternity; the word, qad (that denotes nearness of time of occurrence), disproves
their being from ever; and the word lawla (if it were not) keeps them remote from perfection.

"Through them the Creator manifests Himself to the intelligence; and through them He is
guarded from the sight of the eyes. Stillness and motion do not occur in Him: How can that thing
occur in Him, which He Himself has made to occur? And how can a thing revert to Him, which
He first created? And how can a thing appear in Him, which He first brought to appearance? Had
it not been so, His Self would have become subject to diversity, His Being would have become
divisible (into parts), and His reality would have been prevented from being deemed Eternal. If
there was a front to Him, there would have been a rear also for Him, and He would have needed
completion when shortage befell Him. In that case signs of the created would appear in Him, and
He would become a sign (leading to other objects) instead of signs leading to Him."

The Author says: The first parts aim at showing that Allah cannot admit limitation. We have
briefly explained it earlier.

"He is not confined by limits, nor counted by numbers": It gives the sum total of the preceding
paragraphs.
"Material parts can surround things of their own kind, and organs can point out things similar to
themselves": It further elaborates immediately preceding result. The preceding clauses showed
that the limits encompassing the created things are the handiwork of the Creator, and have
occurred after Him as an action occurs after its doer. Obviously, such a thing cannot encompass
the doer. But these clauses under discussion look at the same aspect from another angle.
Quantification and limitation, which are affected by these organs and material parts, take place
within the framework of the given species. For example, gram is a unit of weight, and it is used
in weighing loads, not colors or sounds; time which is amount of motion is used for gauging
movements; a man's social prestige and weight is measured by comparing him to that of another.
In short, each of these limits gives its object a frame of its own kind. Now, every transient
attribute, whatever it may be, is based on a measure and limit, and adheres to a term and end; this
being the case, how can its limited meaning be applied to Allah Who is eternal, without
beginning and without end, remaining forever?

This is what the Imam (a.s.) means, and that is why it is followed by the clauses: "The word,
'since', disproves their eternity; the word, qad (that denotes nearness of time of occurance),
disproves their being from ever; and the word, lawla (if it were not) keeps them remote from
perfection." The words, since and qad, both indicate new occurrence in time; obviously their
objects cannot be described as being eternal or without beginning. Likewise, the word, lawla,
points to shortcoming and defect, which has kept it far from perfection.

"Through them the Creator manifests Himself to the intelligence; and through them He is
guarded from the sight of the eyes": 'Through them' i.e. through these things. Meaning: The
things are the signs of Allah, the Creator; and signs show only that whose signs they are. They
are like mirrors that show only His power and knowledge; through them He has shown Himself
to intelligence; and also through them He prevents the eyes to see Him. The only way to see Him
is through these signs - and these are limited and can cover only those things, which are limited
like them. How can they encompass the Lord who encompasses everything?

For the same reason, eyes cannot see Him. Eyes are delicately made organs, which have their
own limitations and can comprehend only those things, which are similarly limited. And far be it
from the Glory of the Lord to be subject of limitation!

"Stillness and motion do not occur in Him ...": It reiterates the forgoing theme in a different way.
These actions and occurrences, which are ultimately a combination of stillness and motion, are
not applicable to Him; they do not return to Him, nor do they occur in Him. They are merely the
effects of His influence on a thing. And man cannot influence himself, except through a sort of
analysis that would divide his person somehow, like a man hitting his hand on his head, or a
physician treating himself through his medicine, etc. This looks Ok because of variation of
aspects or imaginary separation of limbs. Otherwise it would have been impossible. For example,
eye does not see itself, and fire does not burn itself; similarly no active agent shows its action
except in other than itself, (save where compounding or analysis is entailed). This is the
connotation of the Imam's words: "Had it not been so, His Self would have become subject to
diversity, His Being would have become divisible (into parts), and His reality would have been
prevented from being deemed Eternal."
"In that case signs of the created would appear in Him, and He would become a sign (leading to
other objects) instead of signs leading to Him": If He were subject to limits and dimension, He
would be afflicted with shortage and defect, in need of something to remove that shortfall. But
defect and shortage are signs of ‘made' objects, and are proofs of transience; and in that case He
would carry in Himself signs of being created; Glorified and High be He from such aspects!
Such an idea would place Him side by side with other made things, which through their defects,
limitations and transience, point to an Eternal Being Who is free from all defects and limitations
- and He is Allah, Whom hands of limitation and dimension cannot reach.

The Imam (a.s.) has shown here that only a transient and made thing leads to its Eternal Maker.
In other contexts, the same Imam as well as all other Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.) have asserted
that Allah is known by Himself while other things are known through Him; that He is the Guide
to His Own Self as well as to His created things. Apparently, these two stands seem contrary to
each other. But it is not so, because this knowledge is different from that, and this guidance is
dissimilar to that. I hope that Allah will help me to explain it fully in a related discourse in some
later study - God Willing!

(as-Saduq) narrates through his chain from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said, "While the Leader
of the Faithful (a.s.) was delivering a sermon on the pulpit of Kufah, a man named Dhi'lib stood
up - and he had a fluent tongue, eloquent speech and a brave heart - and said, 'O Leader of the
Faithful! Have you seen your Lord?' He said, 'Woe unto thee, O Dhi'lib! I am not the one to
worship Whom I have not seen.' (Dhi'lib) said, 'O Leader of the Faithful! How did you see Him?'
He said, 'O Dhi'lib! Eyes have not seen Him through the eye-sight; but hearts perceive Him
through the realities of belief. Woe unto thee, O Dhi'lib! Verily my Lord is the most kind, and He
is not described in terms of kindness; the most exalted, but is not described in terms of
exaltedness; the greatest, but not described in terms of greatness; the most grand, but not
described in terms of thickness. He is before everything, it is not said that anything is before
Him; He is after everything, it is not said that for Him there is an after. He wished (creation of)
thing but not through endeavor; He is successful, not through treachery. He is in the things, but
not intermingled with them, or separate from them. He is Manifest but not in physical sense, is
Evident but not through sighting with eyes. He is separate but not because of distance, is near but
not by proximity. He is delicate, but not through embodiment, existing, not after non-existence.
He is the Doer, but not under compulsion, the Ordainer, but not with movement, the Preceptor,
not with any worry; He is the Hearer, not with an organ, the Seer, not with a body part. Places do
not encompass Him, and times do not accompany Him and attributes do not limit Him. His
Being preceded times, and His existence (preceded) non-existence, and His eternity (preceded)
the beginning. By His creating the senses it was known that He has no senses, and by His making
the substances it was recognized that He has no substance; and by His creating the contraries in
various matters it is known that He has no contrary, and by the similarity between things it is
known that there is nothing similar to Him. He has made light contrary of darkness, dryness that
of moisture, and cold that of heat. He produces affinity between inimical things (and) separates
things, which are joined together. (These things) by their separation lead to their separator and by
their joining point to their joiner; and this is the word of Allah, the Mighty, the Great: And of
everything We have created pairs that you may be mindful (51:49). In this way He separated
them between before and after, in order that it may be known that for Him there is no before or
after; they prove through their natures that their Creator has no nature; their being bound by time
makes it known that He Who thus binds them is not bound by time. He veils some of them from
others, that it may be understood that there is no veil between Him and His creation - except the
creation itself. He was the Sustainer when there was no sustained, the God when there was no
worshipper, the Knower when there was no known, and the Hearer when there was nothing to be
heard. (Then he recited saying:)

" 'And my Master was always well-known by praise,

And my Master was always described for magnanimity; And He was when there was no light to
illuminate,
Nor was darkness keeping to horizons; So our Master is unlike the whole creation,
And unlike all that could be imagined by minds' "

The author says: As you see, the speech of the Imam (a.s.) explains the theme of the uniqueness
of Allah's person in all its manifestations; and that His Person is neither finite nor limited. No
self stands opposite His Self, otherwise it would have threatened Him through limitation and
subdued Him through determination. He encompasses everything, and controls every affair. No
attribute is ascribed to Him, which is separate from His person; otherwise it would negate His
eternity and go against His limitlessness.

His attribute of perfection is not bound with any limit, which would push away other thing or be
pushed away by it. For example, our knowledge is other than our power because both are
separate from each other in meaning as well as in external existence; but so far as Allah's person
is concerned, the two attributes are not separate from one another; this attribute is exactly that,
and is not distinguishable from His many other attributes; His one name denotes all His beautiful
names.

Going one step further, we find another meaning - finer and deeper than above: These meanings
and ideas are like weights and measures for intelligence. The intelligence uses them to weigh and
measure external existence, the actual being. As such these meanings and ideas are subject to
limits, and boundaries. They cannot be devoid of this aspect, even if we join them together and
even if they were to support one another; they cannot weigh or measure except the things, which
are subject to limits and boundaries like them. Now, if we suppose something unlimited, and
then try to gauge it with these limited weights and measures, we cannot get except a limited thing
and it will not be the One Who is above limits and boundaries; and the more we try to get Him in
this way, the higher and remoter He will go.

Let us look at the meaning of knowledge: It is a meaning we have taken from an attribute which
is limited in existence and which we deem as perfection for the knower. This theme is bounded
in such a way that it cannot accommodate power and life, for example. Sometimes we may use
this word for Allah and try to overcome its limitedness by adding to it some phrases, e.g.
"knowledge unlike other knowledge"; now it would release it from some limitations, yet it
cannot go beyond its basic meaning and will not cover other attributes of perfection. (Every
meaning has a limit that it cannot go beyond.) Just adding one theme to another does not lead to
negation of the particular theme, as it is clear.
This leaves man bewildered when he tries to describe Allah according to his own wisdom and
understanding. It is this theme that is inferred from his clause, "and attributes do not limit Him",
and from another clause in the first sermon quoted earlier, "and the perfection of adhering to Him
purely is to deny Him attributes", and again in the same sermon (not quoted here): "He for
Whose description no limit has been laid down, and no eulogy exists". Here you see that he (a.s.)
asserts attribute at the same time when he negates it or negates its limit; and it is understood that
its assertion cannot be free from limit; thus negating its limit is tantamount to rejecting it after
admitting it. It means that asserting for Him an attribute of perfection does not negate other
attributes. In this way His attributes combine with one another and then become one with His
Self and there is no limit; then it does not negate what is beyond these attribute (that which we
do not understand that we may narrate, nor do we perceive that could be attached to Him).
Understand it.

Had it not been that meanings fall down when they reach near His Majesty and Greatness (in the
sense described above), it would have been possible for the reason to encompass Him with all
the general and vague ideas which surround Him, like His description that He is a person not like
persons, He has knowledge unlike knowledge, power not like others' power, and life different
from all types of life. This manner of description does not leave anything without counting and
encompassing it in general. The question is: Is it possible for anything to encompass Him? Or is
it that one cannot comprehend Him in detail, but there is no difficulty in encompassing Him in a
general way? But Allah has said: ...while they do not comprehend Him in knowledge (20:110);
...now surely He encompasses all things, (41:54). So, nothing encompasses Allah from any
direction in any manner of encompassing; and His Glorified Self does not accept any detail or
generality, so that there could be one verdict for His detail and another for His generality.
Understand it.

'Ali (a.s.) says in another sermon:

"His proof is His signs, and His existence is His affirmation; and His cognition is His Oneness,
and His Oneness is to distinguish Him from His creation; and the verdict of distinction is the
separation of attribute, not separation of isolation. Verily He is the Sustainer (and) Creator, not
sustained (or) created; anything imagined, He is opposite to it. (Thereafter he, a.s. said): He is
not a god who is recognized by his self; He guides the proof to lead to Him, and leads the
cognition to Himself."

The author says: Meditation on foregoing statement makes it clear that this sermon aims at
showing that the divine unity is an oneness unrelated to number. See how clearly he (a.s.) says
that His cognition is His oneness; in other words, affirmation of His existence is exactly the
affirmation of His oneness. Had this oneness been of number, it would have been separate from
His Self, and the Self, per se, would not have sufficed for oneness except through an external
factor separate from affirmation of the Self.

It is an amazing logic and a most profound description of the divine unity; if we were to go into
its proper explanation, it would require a deep and extensive discourse beyond the scope of this
book. A finest point included therein is his clause: "His existence is His affirmation"; the Imam
(a.s.) means that His proof is His actual existence, i.e. mind does not grasp Him and reason does
not encompass Him.

"anything imagined, He is opposite to it": The Imam (a.s.) does not mean that He is opposite the
imagined form, because everything found outside imagination shares this quality. The actual
meaning is that Allah is opposite to what the mind imagines about Him, whatever it may be; as
such imagined form cannot encompass Him. However, you should not forget that He is much
beyond even this imagination, i.e. the imagination that He is opposite to every imagination.

"He is not a god who is recognized by his self: Allah's Majesty is so great that cognition cannot
reach Him and He subdues all understanding and perception. Everyone whom we recognize by
his own self, his self is other than ours and his cognition is likewise separate from ours, and that
is how our cognition is attached to him. But Allah encompasses and supervises our cognition and
us. There is no safety-hold to which our cognition or we might cling to avoid His all-
encompassing power and to adhere to it in isolation.

The Imam (a.s.) has explained this stage in his words: "He guides the proof to lead to Him, and
leads the cognition to Himself." It means that Allah is the Guide Who leads the proof to guide to
Him, and leads the cognition to have a sort of relation to Him; it is because He encompasses
everything and has power and authority over everything. That being the case, how can anything
find a way to His Self or encompass Him, while Allah encompasses it and controls its guidance
to Himself?

(as-Saduq) narrates from 'Umar ibn 'Ali from 'Ali (a.s.) that he said, "The Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) has said, The Unity (of God), its exterior is in its interior, and its interior is in its exterior;
its exterior is attributed (which) is not seen and its interior is existent (which) is not hidden. He is
sought in every place while no place is devoid of Him even for one moment; (He is) present,
without any limit, absent (but) not lost.'" (Ma 'ani 'l-akhbar)

The author says: This speech too aims at describing Allah's numberless oneness; it is based on
the fact that Allah is not limited by any limit. This limitlessness shows that His unity's exterior is
not separate from its interior, and vice versa. It is because exterior and interior become separated
and isolated from one another when there is a limit and boundary between them, but when that
boundary is removed, both mingle together and become one.

Likewise, the attributed exterior is encompassed and the extant interior is hidden and veiled
when they are fettered with a limit, and cannot trespass that boundary. Likewise, a thing present
is limited and its presence is perceived by those who are near it, while the absent is unperceived
and lost because of its limitedness. Otherwise, the present with all its being would not have
gathered near those who are in its proximity, and the absent would not have been hidden from
those who are far away. And it is clear.

A Historical Discourse
The belief that there is a Creator for the universe, and that He is One, is among the earliest ideas
prevalent among the thinkers of this species, to which it is guided by its natural instincts. If we
ponder deeply on even the idol worship, which is based on polytheism, we shall find that it is
founded on the Oneness of the Creator, and the idols are taken merely as interceders near Him
(We do not worship them save that they may make us nearer to Allah (39:3)), although with
passage of time it deviated from its original path, and finally they treated those idols as
independent deities besides Allah.

The human nature, which calls to the Unity of God, was inviting human beings to the One God
Who is not bound with any limit in His Greatness and Majesty, neither in Person nor in attribute
(as we have explained earlier with the help of the Mighty-Book); yet man in his life is intimately
familiar with units in numbers; and the people of religion were entangled with idol-worshippers
and dualists, etc. to refute plurality of gods, on the other hand. Both these factors stamped the
idea of oneness of number on the minds, so much so that the above-mentioned natural dictate
was almost forgotten.

That was the reason that the ancient philosophers of Egypt, Greece, Alexandria, as well as those
who came after them, affirm divine unity in terms of oneness in number; even such a genius as
Avicenna has clearly affirmed it in his Kitabu 'sh-Shifa'. And the same path was trodden by later
ones up to about the year 1000 of hijrah,

As for the scholars of scholastic theology, their arguments too for the Unity do not prove other
than the oneness in number, although they have based their talk on the Qur'anic general
declarations. So, this is what is understood from the scholars' writings on this subject.

In fact, what the Qur'an has explained concerning the meaning of the divine unity was the first
and the foremost step for teaching this reality of cognition. Unfortunately, the Companions, their
disciples, and their pupils who dealt with the Qur'anic explanation and who pursued the
knowledge of the Book, left this noble topic in abeyance. Look into the collections of traditions,
and the book of exegesis narrated on their authority; you will not find in that entire multitude any
trace of this reality - neither with an explanatory description nor in a logical manner.

We did not find in all our searching anything which could uncover its veil, except what has come
into the speeches of the Imam 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) exclusively. It is his speech that has
opened its door and raised its curtain, showing the straightest path and the clearest way of proofs.
Thereafter we come straight to the Muslim philosophers who appeared after the year one
thousand of hijrah, and they have clearly said that they have learned it from the Imam (a.s.)'s
speeches.

That is the reason that we had no alternative to quoting only from his pure speeches in the
preceding section of Traditions, because nowhere else can we find description of this topic and
its explanation with logical arguments - May Allah's peace be on him.
Also because of the same reason, we have not included an independent philosophical discussion
of this subject. The fact is that the proofs presented in their books are composed of the same
premises, which have been explained in the Imam's speeches; and all are based on the theme of
the oneness of His Person.*

* If one looks with critical eyes and meditates deeply, one cannot fail to be astonished by the
blunder committed by some scholars who have claimed that these Sermons of 'Ali (a.s.), which
are included in Nahju'l-balaghah, are spurious and not genuine; some have said that they were
forged by ash-Sharif ar-Radi (may Allah have mercy on him!). Comments on some aspects of
this mistake have been given somewhere earlier. Would that I knew, how could forgery and
unauthorized insertion cover such a complicated and fine academic subject which had for long
centuries remained beyond the grasp of scholars even when the Imam (a.s.) had opened its door
and raised its curtain - until the developing intellect had trodden on this path for one thousand
years; and which had remained beyond the understanding of the Companions and their disciples.
The claim of these proponents of forgery loudly speaks that they had thought that the Qur'anic
realities and the high academic principles were only some banal and vulgar ideas, and they are
only distinguished by literary language and erudite expression. (Author's Note)

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 87-

89
 
‫وا ِم َّما َر َزقَ ُك ُم هّللا ُ َحالَالً طَيِّبًا‬ ْ ُ‫} َو ُكل‬87{ َ‫ُوا إِ َّن هّللا َ الَ يُ ِحبُّ ْال ُم ْعتَ ِدين‬ ْ ‫ت َما أَ َح َّل هّللا ُ لَ ُك ْم َوالَ تَ ْعتَد‬ ْ ‫وا الَ تُ َحرِّ ُم‬
ِ ‫وا طَيِّبَا‬ ْ ُ‫يَا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬
‫ط َعا ُم َع َش َر ِة‬ ْ ِ‫اخ ُذ ُكم بِ َما َعقَّدتُّ ُم األَ ْي َمانَ فَ َكفَّا َرتُهُ إ‬
ِ َ‫} الَ يُ َؤا ِخ ُذ ُك ُم هّللا ُ بِاللَّ ْغ ِو فِي أَ ْي َمانِ ُك ْم َولَـ ِكن يُؤ‬88{ َ‫ي أَنتُم بِ ِه ُم ْؤ ِمنُون‬ َ ‫وا هّللا َ الَّ ِذ‬
ْ ُ‫َواتَّق‬
ْ َ
‫ارةُ أ ْي َمانِ ُك ْم إِ َذا َحلَفتُ ْم‬ َّ َ
َ ‫صيَا ُم ثَالَثَ ِة أي ٍَّام َذلِكَ َكف‬ َّ َ َ َ ْ َ
ِ َ‫َم َسا ِكينَ ِم ْن أوْ َس ِط َما تُط ِع ُمونَ أ ْهلِي ُك ْم أوْ ِك ْس َوتُهُ ْم أوْ تَحْ ِري ُر َرقَبَ ٍة فَ َمن ل ْم يَ ِج ْد ف‬
}89{ َ‫وا أَ ْي َمانَ ُك ْم َك َذلِكَ يُبَيِّنُ هّللا ُ لَ ُك ْم آيَاتِ ِه لَ َعلَّ ُك ْم تَ ْش ُكرُون‬
ْ ُ‫َواحْ فَظ‬
{87} O you who believe! Do not forbid (yourselves) the good thing which Allah has made
lawful for you and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the
limits. {88} And eat of the lawful and good (things) that Allah has given you, and fear Allah in
Whom you believe. {89} Allah does not call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, but
He calls you to account for the making of deliberate oaths; so its expiation is the feeding of ten
poor men out of the average (food) you feed your families with, or their clothing, or the freeing
of a neck; but whosoever cannot find (means) then fasting for three days; this is the expiation of
your oaths when you swear. And guard your oaths. Thus does Allah make clear to you His signs,
that you may be grateful.
 

Commentary
These three verses together with the following ones (up to the verse 108) give details of various
commandments related to branches of religion. This whole group is inserted between the verses
describing the story of the Messiah (a.s.) and the Christians. These verses consist of various
groups laying down diverse orders, each being independent and complete in its theme. As such,
it is difficult to decide whether a given group was revealed separately or had accompanied other
verses, because context supports neither alternative. As for the traditions showing reasons of
revelation, important ones shall be quoted under Traditions.

The above comment is applicable to these three verses too, because the third one is independent
in its theme, and the first one too is independent; although they are not devoid of a sort of
affinity, because one type of vain oath may be related to forbidding oneself the good things
which have been made lawful by Allah. Perhaps this was the reason why some exegetes have
narrated that all verses were revealed about vain oaths.

This applies to the first verse vis-a-vis the third, As for the second, it in a way completes the first
verse, as evidenced by some factors in it; that is, the command to: fear Allah in Whom you
believe, and the conjunction: and at its beginning, as well as the order to "eat of the lawful
things," forbidding which has been prohibited in the first one. In this way the two verses are
harmonized, give the same order and have the same context.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Do not forbid (yourselves) the good things which Allah has made
lawful for you: ar-Raghib says in al-Mufradat: "al-Haraam denotes the forbidden thing, be it by
divine subjugation or forcible obstruction; whether this prohibition is by reason or shari'ah or by
one whose orders are followed."

Again he says: "al-Hill basically means to untie a knot; the verse: and loose the knot from my
tongue (20:27), is used in this meaning; and halaltu means: 'I descended'; this is based on the fact
that one unties one's luggage on dismounting, then it was used for dismounting and
disembarkation in general, and in this sense they say: 'He disembarked'; someone made him
disembark, i.e., hosted him. Allah says: or it will alight close by their abodes (13:31); and made
their people to alight into the abode of perdition (14:28). When time to repay a loan comes, they
say, the loan has arrived; al-hillah is used for the people who alight; the same is the meaning of
hayy hallal; al-mahillah is the place of disembarking; halla hillan means it is lawful - this
metaphorical expression is derived from 'untying the knot'. Allah says: And eat of the lawful and
good (things) that Allah has given you; also He says: This is lawful and this is unlawful
(16:116)."

Apparently the contraposition between hill (lawfulness) and hurmah (unlawfulness), and
opposition between hill (area beyond a sanctuary) and haram (sanctuary) or ihraam (the robe
worn when entering haram) is based on imaginary tying of knot when forbidding something, i.e.
unlawfulness; then it (hurmah) is put opposite of hill (which is metaphorically used for
lawfulness). The two words, hill, and hurmah were generally used for lawfulness and
unlawfulness, respectively, even before Islam; it is not that shari'ah or its followers have coined
them.

The verse: "O you who believe! Do not forbid (yourselves) the good things which Allah has
made lawful for you ..." prohibits to the believers forbidding themselves what Allah has made
lawful for them. This forbidding what has been made lawful by Allah can be done either by
laying down a legislation contrary to divine legislation, or by forbidding others or abstention, i.e.
one leaves out a lawful thing by abstaining from it or prohibiting it to oneself or others. All this
behavior is tantamount to forbidding what Allah has made lawful, and it is equal to fighting
Allah in His Power; this transgression against Him is contrary to the belief in Allah and in His
communication. That is why the verse begins with the phrase: "O you who believe!" it implies
that you are believers in Allah and have submitted to His commandments; therefore you should
not forbid to yourself what Allah has made lawful. This explanation is further supported by the
end clause of the next verse: and fear Allah in Whom you believe.

"the good things which Allah has made lawful for you": The addition of the word, "good", -
although the sentence would be complete even without it - aims at completing the cause of
prohibition: If the believers forbid themselves the things which Allah has made lawful for them,
then it is not only that they commit transgression against Allah in His authority and defy the
demands of their belief in, and submission to, Allah, but also go against the law of nature, which
takes these lawful things as good without reservation. Allah has pointed to it where He says
about His Prophet (s.a.w.) and the shari'ah which he has brought: Those who follow the
Messenger Prophet, the Ummi, whom they find written down with them in the Tawrat and the
Injil, (who) enjoins them good and forbids them evil, and makes lawful to them the good things
and makes unlawful to them impure things, and removes from them their burden and the
shackles which were upon them; so (as for) those who believe in him and honor him and help
him, and follow the light which has been sent down with him, these it is that are the successful
(7:157).

The above description supports the following:

First: Forbidding the good things that Allah has made lawful means abstaining, and making
others desist, from lawful things.

Second: Lawful, as opposite of unlawful, includes the permissible and the commendable, even
the obligatory things.

Third: Addition of "the good things" to that "which Allah has made lawful for you" aims at
further elaboration of the same idea.

Fourth: Exceeding the limits (in "do not exceed the limits") means transgression against Allah
in His legislative authority; or over-stepping the limits laid down by Allah by revolting against
His obedience, refusing to submit to Him, and forbidding what He has made lawful. As Allah
says, inter alia, describing the laws of divorce: These are the limits of Allah, so do not exceed
them, and whoever exceeds the limits of Allah then these it is that are the unjust (2:229).
Likewise He says at the end of the verses of inheritance: These are Allah's limits; and whoever
obeys Allah and His Messenger, He will cause him to enter gardens beneath which rivers flow,
to abide in them; and this is the great achievement. And whoever disobeys Allah and His
Messenger and transgresses His limits, He will cause him to enter Fire to abide in it, and he
shall have an abasing chastisement (4:13-14).

As you see, the verses count uprightness and adherence to the shari’ah in obedience to Allah and
His Messenger as praiseworthy; and stepping out of obedience and submission to Him, and
transgression and exceeding the limits of Allah as condemnable act that makes one liable to
chastisement.
In short, the verse prohibits one from forbidding oneself what Allah has made lawful, by keeping
away from it and avoiding it, because it goes contrary to the belief in Allah and His signs. Also it
opposes the fact of their being lawful and good, and of their being free of impurity; otherwise,
why should one abstain from them? It is nothing but exceeding the limits, and Allah does not
love those who exceed the limits.

QUR'AN: and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits:
You have seen and the context apparently shows that exceeding the limits connotes the self-
imposed abstaining of the preceding sentence. As such the prohibition: "do not exceed the
limits," aims at emphasizing the .one in: do not forbid (yourselves).

Some people have said: Exceeding the limits means over-stepping the line of moderation
regarding the lawful things, by throwing oneself down to enjoying them without restraint,
contrary to discarding them abstemiously. So, the verse would mean: Do not forbid yourselves
the good and tasteful things that Allah has made lawful for you. Do not intentionally avoid
enjoying them abstemiously believing that it would bring you nearer to Allah. And do not exceed
the limits by transgressing the line of moderation, going to extravagance and excess which would
be harmful for your bodies or souls.

Or, exceeding the limits may mean overstepping the good and lawful things, indulging in bad
and unlawful things. Then the connotation will be as follows: Do not avoid lawful thing and do
not use unlawful things. In other words, do not forbid yourselves what Allah has made lawful for
you and do not indulge in what Allah has forbidden you.

Although these two meanings are correct in themselves and the Qur'an clearly supports both
themes, but neither fits the verse under discussion as its context and that of the following verse
shows. Obviously, not every correct theme can be applied to every word without looking at its
context and position.

QUR'AN: And eat of the lawful and good (things) that Allah has given you, and fear Allah in
Whom you believe: The conjunction, "And", joins the imperative: "eat", with the prohibition: do
not forbid. As such, this verse apparently repeats and emphasizes the connotation of the
preceding one. This is further supported by its opening phrase, "the lawful and good (things)"
which stands parallel to the phrase in the preceding verse: the good things which Allah has made
lawful for you, and the preceding verse's clause: O you who believe! as explained earlier.

Accordingly, the word: 'eat', coming after the prohibition: do not forbid, implies permission.
Allowing one to eat in particular after the overall prohibition of forbidding is merely a verbal
particularization, and the word: 'eat', implies unrestricted use of good bounties bestowed by
Allah. Also, the word may mean only partaking of food or all aspects of usufruct and disposal. It
has been repeatedly described that use of the word, eating, for general management and disposal
is very common and widespread in literature.

Alternatively, the word 'eat' could have possibly been used here in its literal sense. Thus the two
verses were revealed when some believers had forbidden themselves the good and tasty food,
and the verses were sent down to stop them from it. The first verse is comprehensive and
includes eating as well as other modes of management, and it covers things which are lawful to
eat and lawful to use otherwise.

The clause: "that Allah has given you", is object of the verb: 'eat'; and the words: "the lawful and
good (things)", are its circumstantial phrases - in this way, both verses do conform to each other.

Some others have said that, the words: "the lawful and good (things)", are the object of the verb:
'eat'; and the clause: "that Allah has given you", is attached to that verb; alternatively this clause
might be a circumstantial phrase connected with the words: "the lawful and good (things)", and
has preceded the connecting clause (the lawful ...) because it is a common noun; as a second
alternative, the words: "the lawful and good (things)", might be adjectives to an omitted verbal
noun, sustenance: And eat of the lawful and good sustenance... There may also be some other
interpretations.

Some people believe that sustenance includes lawful and unlawful both, and have argued for it
by the adjective: "lawful", attached to it here.

Reply: The "lawful and good" is not a circumspection condition for keeping out unlawful and
bad sustenance; it is rather an explanatory condition and has the same connotation as the word
explained - in this case, sustenance. The reason why it has been added here is that it’s being
lawful and good does not leave any excuse for anyone for avoiding and keeping aloof from it, as
explained earlier. We have elaborated the meaning of sustenance under the verse 27 of the
chapter of "The House of 'Imran", in the third volume of this book.
.
QUR'AN: Allah does not call you to account for what is vain in your oath, but He calls you to
account for the making of deliberate oaths:
al-Laghw (inconsequential action); al-ayman is plural of al-yamin (vow, oath). ar-Raghib says in
al-Mufradat: "al-Yamin in context of oath is an allusion to the (right) hand, keeping in view what
the parties of treaty or agreement do (that they shake their right hands at the conclusion of the
agreement). Allah says: Or have you received from Us an agreement confirmed by an oath
extending to the Day of Resurrection ... (68:39); And they swear by Allah with the strongest of
their oaths, ... (6:109); Allah does not call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, ...
(5:89)". at-Ta'qid puts emphasis on al-'aqd (to tie); it is also recited without intensified
pronunciation; "in your oath"- is related to "does not call you to account", or to "what is vain",
and this is nearer.

The clause, "what is vain in your oath", has been placed face to face with, "the making of
deliberate oaths"; it shows that the vain oath is the one regarding which the maker of oath is not
serious, his heart is not in it, he merely uses the formula of oath by force of habit, as they
generally say - and particularly in trade dealings - 'No, by Allah!' 'Certainly by Allah!' It is a far
cry from serious deliberation when one declares on oath that: 'By Allah! I'll most certainly do it',
or 'By Allah! I'll most certainly not do it'.

This is what appears from the verse. But the shari'ah also counts it as vain oaths if someone
says: "By Allah! I'll do this unlawful deed"; or, "By Allah! I'll not do that obligatory deed"; it is
because the Supreme Legislator has counted it as vain oath when it is used for something that has
no preference in shari'ah. This rule is added to the above Qur'anic one by the sunnah; and it is
not necessary that the Qur'an should speak about everything that is affirmed by the sunnah
particularly.

As for the clause: "but He calls you to account for the making of deliberate oaths," it includes
only that oath which is endorsed by the shari'ah, as it says at the end: And guard your oaths.
Inevitably it refers to such oaths, and obviously the order to guard your oaths cannot point to that
oath which Allah has declared vain. In short, a vain oath is that one which is not taken with
deliberation; and the one made seriously is endorsed by shari'ah.

QUR'AN: so its expiation is the feeding of ten poor men... or the freeing of a neck: al-Kufr (to
cover, to hide); al-kqffarah (an action which somehow hides or covers the evil of disobedience).
Allah says: ...We will expiate from you your (small) sins ... (4:31). ar-Raghib says: "al-Kaffarah
is that which covers the sin; and from it is the kaffarah (expiation) of oath."

The words: "so its expiation", have branched out from the description of oath, keeping in view
some omitted but understood words; for example: Then if you break your oath, so its expiation...
It is because the word: "expiation", points to a disobedience which demands expiation; and that
disobedience cannot be the oath itself, otherwise the end section of the verse would not have
said: guard your oaths, because there is no sense in guarding an act of disobedience. Obviously,
expiation is related to the breaking of oath, not the oath itself.

It also shows that the calling to account mentioned in the sentence: but He calls you to account
for the making of deliberate oaths, is related to the breaking of, not the making of the oath. This
calling to accounts is related to oaths because it points to its breaking. The word, its expiation,
branches from its breaking because the sentence, He calls you to account for the making of
deliberate oaths, points to it. Similar explanation applies to the sentence: this is the expiation of
your oaths when you swear, i.e. when you swear and break it.

The clauses: "the feeding of ten poor men out of the average (food) you feed your families with,
or their clothing, or the freeing of a neck", mention three items of expiation, any one of which
may be chosen by the person concerned - because of the conjunction, 'or'; i.e. all three are not to
be joined together.

The clause: but whoever cannot find (means) then fasting for three days, prove that the above
three items are matters of choice, without looking at their sequence. Otherwise, the clause: but
whoever cannot find..., would be meaningless, as in case of sequential expiation, it should have
been, "or fasting for three days".

The verse contains many legislative details, for which reference should be made to
Jurisprudence. kadhalika (thus) are of second person singular, while the pronouns that follow
them in: "your oaths", and, clear to you, are second person plural. In a way, the speech turns
from the Prophet (s.a.w.) to the believers. Probably, it is because the divine elaboration reaches
the people through the Prophet (s.a.w.), as Allah has said: ...and We have revealed to you the
Reminder that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to them, and that haply they
may reflect (16:44).

QUR'AN: Thus does Allah make dear to you His signs, that you may be grateful: He makes
clear to you, through His Prophet, His commandments, so that you may express your gratitude to
Him by learning those commandments and acting on them.

Traditions
al-Qummi narrates under the verse: O you who believe! Do not forbid (yourselves) the good
things which Allah has made lawful for you. Narrated to me my father, from Ibn Abi 'Umayr,
from some of his men, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), that he said, "This verse was revealed about the
Leader of the Faithful (a.s.), Bilal and 'Uthman ibn Maz'un. As for the Leader of the faithful
(a.s.), he had sworn that he would never sleep at night; and as for Bilal, he had sworn that he
would never eat during day-time (i.e. would always keep fast); and as for 'Uthman ibn Maz'un,
he had sworn that he would never indulge in sexual relation.

"Then 'Uthman's wife came to 'Aishah - and she was a beautiful woman. 'Aishah said to her,
'Why do I see you without make-up?' She said, 'For whom should I make myself up? By Allah!
My husband has not come near me since a long time, because he has become a monastic, wears
course clothes, and has become an ascetic.'

"When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), entered (the house) 'Aishah informed him of it. So, he
came out, and call was given for congregational prayer. People assembled and (the Prophet,
s.a.w.) ascended the pulpit. He thanked Allah and praised Him; then said, 'What has happened to
(some) people that they have forbidden themselves good things? Well, surely I sleep at night,
and establish sexual relation and eat during day-time; so whoever dislikes my sunnah, he is not
from me.'

"Then people stood up and said, 'But O Messenger of Allah! We have sworn to it. Then Allah
revealed to him: Allah does not call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, but He calls
you to account for the making of deliberate oaths; so its expiation is... this is the expiation of
your oaths when you swear." (at-Tafsir)

The author says: It is not clear how the sentences: Allah does not call you to account for what
is vain in your oaths, but He calls you to account for the making of deliberate oaths, could refer
to their oaths; and some explanation of it has been given earlier. at-Tabrisi has narrated the story
in Majma'u'l-bayan from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) and that narrative does not have the last paragraph;
so meditate over it.

Imam al-Hasan ibn 'Ali (peace be on both) said to Mu'awiyah and his companions inter alia, in a
hadith:
"I adjure you by Allah, do you know that 'Ali was the first among the companions of the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), to forbid the desires to himself; then Allah revealed: O you who
believe! Do not forbid (yourselves) the good things which Allah has made lawful for you. (al-
lhtijaj)

(at-Tabrisi) writes under the above-mentioned verse: The exegetes have said, "The Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.), sat one day and reminded the people and described the resurrection. The people
were overwhelmed and cried; and ten companions gathered in the house of 'Uthman ibn Maz'un
al-Jumahi, and they were: 'Ali, Abu Bakr, 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, Salim
mawla Abu Hudhayfah, 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar, al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad al-Kindi, Salman al-Farisi
and Mu'qil ibn Muqrin. They agreed among themselves that they would fast in the day and stand
(for worship) in the night, would not sleep on bedding; would not partake of meat or fat, nor
would go near women or perfume. (They decided) to wear coarse fabrics, discard the world and
roam into the earth; some of them even intended to cut off their genitals.

"This news reached the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). He went to the house of 'Uthman (ibn
Maz'un) but did not find him there. So he said to his wife - her name was Hawla' and she was a
perfume vendor - 'Is it true what I have been informed about your husband and his companions?'
She did not like to tell lie to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) nor did she like to speak against her
husband; so she said, 'O Messenger of Allah! If 'Uthman has told you so then he has told you the
truth.' So the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) returned. When 'Uthman entered (his house) she
informed him about it. So, he and his companions came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.); and
the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said to them, 'Have not I been informed that you have agreed on
such and such?' They said, 'Certainly, O Messenger of Allah! And we did not intend except
good.' The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said, "I have not been ordered this. Then he said, 'Surely
your souls have rights on you; so keep fast and eat, stand (at nights) and sleep. Certainly, I stand
(at nights) and sleep, and keep fast and eat, and I partake of meat and fat, and I go to women; and
whoever dislikes my sunnah, is not from me.'

"Then he gathered the people and spoke to them; and said, 'What has happened to some people
that they have forbidden themselves women, food and perfume, as well as sleep and desirable
things of the world? Well, certainly I have not ordered you to become monks, because it is not in
my religion to abstain from meat or women, nor (to live in) hermitages; and surely the wandering
of my ummah is fast, and their monasticism is jihad. Worship Allah and do not associate
anything with Him; perform hajj and 'umrah, establish prayer, pay zakat and keep fast of
Ramadan; and remain straight, it will remain right for you. Those who were before you fell in
perdition only because of zealotry. They put heavy burdens on themselves, so Allah intensified
their load. So, these are their remnants in hermitages and monasteries. Then Allah revealed this
verse.'" (Majma'u l-bayan)
The author says: It appears by referring to the traditions that this narrative is a synopsis of
traditions on this topic; there are a lot of such traditions, and at-Tabrisi has written it here after
combining them together and abridging them into one tradition.

As for those numerous narrations, none of them mentions names of those companions together.
The most comprehensive of them says, 'Uthman ibn Maz'un and his companions; some others
say, a group of the companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.); still others say, some people among the
companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.). Likewise, the different sentences of the Prophet's talk and his
detailed sermon are found scattered in various traditions. In the same way, the narratives do not
say clearly that each of those companions had intended to avoid all those good things. Rather
some traditions clearly show that various companions had wanted to leave out various things. al-
Bukhari and Muslim narrate from 'Aishah that some companions had asked the wives of the
Prophet (s.a.w.) about his life in secret. Then some of them said: "I'll not eat meat"; some said:
"I'll not go to women"; and some others said: "I'll not sleep in bedding." This news reached the
Prophet (s.a.w.), so he said, "What is the matter with the people, that some of them say this and
this? But as for me, I keep fast and eat, sleep and stand (in prayer), and eat meat and go to the
women; so whoever dislikes my sunnah is not from me."

Probably, when at-Tabrisi says that "they agreed among themselves that they would fast...", he
does not mean that each of them had intended to do all those things; he only means that those
people among themselves had decided to do one or the other of those things.

Although the traditions vary in their themes and there are weak, mursal and reliable ones among
them, yet meditation on all of them creates a certainty that a group of the companions had
decided to adopt that type of abstinence and asceticism, and 'Ali (a.s.) and 'Uthman ibn Maz'un
were among them, and that the Prophet (s.a.w.) had said to them, "Whoever dislikes my sunnah
is not from me." And Allah knows better. You should refer to the books of exegesis which
explain the Qur'an with the help of traditions, like at-Tafsir of at-Tabari, ad-Durru'l-manthur,
Fathu'l-qadir and so on.

It has been narrated by at-Tirmidhi (who said that it was good), Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn
'Udayy (in al-Kamil), at-Tabarani and Ibn Marduwayh, from Ibn 'Abbas that he said, "A man
came to the Prophet (s.a.w.) and said, 'O Messenger of Allah! Whenever I eat meat I become
roused and overcome by sexual desire; and I have forbidden meat to myself.' Then the verse was
revealed: O you who believe! Do not forbid (yourselves) the good things which Allah has made
lawful for you." (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim have narrated from Zayd ibn Aslam that he said, "Verily 'Abdullah
ibn Rawahah had a guest from among his relatives; and he ('Abdullah) was near the Prophet
(s.a.w.). Then he returned to his family and found that they had not given food to their guest,
waiting for him (to return). So he said to his wife, 'You detained my guest because of me, this
(food) is unlawful to me.' So his wife said, 'It is unlawful to me'; the guest said, 'It is unlawful to
me. When ('Abdullah) saw this, he put his hand (in food) and said, 'Eat you in the name of
Allah.' Then he went to the Prophet (s.a.w.) and informed him. The Prophet (s.a.w.) said, 'You
did right.' Then Allah revealed: O you who believe! Do not forbid (yourselves) the good things
which Allah has made lawful for you. (ibid.}

The author says: Possibly, the two reasons mentioned in the last two traditions are the narrators'
attempts to fit an event on the verse, and this is very common in the reasons of revelation. Also,
possibly there may be several reasons for a single verse.

'Abdullah ibn Sinan said, "I asked him (the Imam) about a man who said that his wife would be
divorced, or his slaves would be free, if he drank any unlawful or lawful (drink). (The Imam)
said, 'As for the unlawful he should not go near it, whether he swore the oath or did not swear;
and as for the lawful he should not leave it, because he has no right to forbid what Allah has
made lawful, because Allah says: O you who believe! Do not forbid (yourselves) the good things
which Allah has made lawful for you; therefore, there is nothing on him regarding his oath
concerning lawful things.'" (at-Tafsir, al-' Ayyashi)
(al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Mas'adah ibn Sadaqah that he heard Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.) saying about the words of Allah: Allah does not call you to account for what is vain in your
oaths: "al-Laghw (vain) is the word of a man, "No, by Allah', and 'Certainly, by Allah', while he
has no serious thought of anything." (al-Kafi)

The author says: al-'Ayyashi has narrated in his at-Tafsir a similar hadith from 'Abdullah ibn
Sinan; and another similar one from Muhammad ibn Muslim with one difference at the end
where it says, "no serious thought on it."

Ibn Jarir has narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said, "When the verse: O you who believe! Do not
forbid (yourselves) the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, was revealed regarding
those who had forbidden women and meat to themselves, they said, 'O Messenger of Allah!
What should we do with the oaths which we have made?' Then Allah revealed: Allah does not
call you to account for what is vain in your oaths." (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: This tradition resembles the end part of the first tradition, which we have
quoted in the beginning. The trouble is that it does not fit the apparent meaning of the verse,
because making oath for avoiding an obligatory or permissible action is not devoid of deliberate
serious thought; the verse has put: what is vain in your oaths, opposite the clause: making of
deliberate oaths; it shows that a vain oath is that which is devoid of deliberation and thinking.
This apparent meaning agrees with the hadith which explains vain oath as someone's saying,
‘No, by Allah', and 'Certainly, by Allah' without any serious thought on it. As for that oath which
is nullified by the shari'ah, it is, or was, made with deliberate seriousness. Therefore it is impera-
tive to ascribe its nullification to the sunnah, not the Book.
Moreover, the context of the verse is the strongest proof that it aims independently at describing
the expiation of breaking of oath, and orders to preserve its sanctity; and it is not just an aside, as
that explanation would make it.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 90-

93
 
‫} إِنَّ َما ي ُِري ُد‬90{ َ‫ان فَاجْ تَنِبُوهُ لَ َعلَّ ُك ْم تُ ْفلِحُون‬ َ ‫صابُ َواألَ ْزالَ ُم ِرجْ سٌ ِّم ْن َع َم ِل ال َّش ْي‬
ِ ‫ط‬ َ ‫وا إِنَّ َما ْال َخ ْم ُر َو ْال َم ْي ِس ُر َواألَن‬ْ ُ‫يَا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬
}91{ َ‫صالَ ِة فَهَلْ أنتُم ُّمنتَهُون‬َ ‫هّللا‬ ْ
َّ ‫ص َّدك ْم عَن ِذك ِر ِ َوع َِن ال‬ ُ ْ ْ
ُ َ‫ضاء فِي الخَ ْم ِر َوال َم ْي ِس ِر َوي‬ َ ‫ال َّش ْيطَانُ أَن يُوقِ َع بَ ْينَك ُم ال َعدَا َوةَ َوالبَغ‬
ْ ْ ْ ُ
ْ ُ‫وا َو َع ِمل‬
‫وا‬ ْ ُ‫ْس َعلَى الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬ َ ‫} لَي‬92{ ُ‫غ ْال ُمبِين‬ ُ َ‫وا أَنَّ َما َعلَى َرسُولِنَا ْالبَال‬ ْ ‫ُوا فَإِن تَ َولَّ ْيتُ ْم فَا ْعلَ ُم‬ْ ‫ُوا ال َّرسُو َل َواحْ َذر‬ ْ ‫ُوا هّللا َ َوأَ ِطيع‬
ْ ‫َوأَ ِطيع‬
ْ ‫هّللا‬ ْ ُ َ ْ َّ ُ ْ
}93{ َ‫ت ث َّم اتقَوا وَّآ َمنوا ث َّم اتقَوا وَّأحْ َسنوا َو ُ يُ ِحبُّ ال ُمحْ ِسنِين‬ ُ ْ َّ ُ ْ ُ ْ ُ ْ َّ َ ْ َ
ِ ‫ت ُجنَا ٌح فِي َما ط ِع ُموا إِذا َما اتقَوا وَّآ َمنوا َو َع ِملوا الصَّالِ َحا‬ ِ ‫الصَّالِ َحا‬
{90} O you who believe! Intoxicants and games of chance and (sacrificing to) stones set up and
(dividing by) arrows are only an abomination of the Satan's handiwork; shun it therefore that you
may be successful. {91} The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your
midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance
of Allah and from prayer. Will you then desist?. {92} And obey Allah and obey the Messenger
and be cautious; but if you turn back, then know that only a clear deliverance (of the message) is
(incumbent) on Our Messenger. {93} There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds
for what they have eaten, when they fear Allah and believe and do good deeds, then they fear
Allah and believe, then they fear Allah and do good, and Allah loves those who do good.
 

Commentary
The verses are in conformity with each other in context; probably they all were revealed together
or at short intervals. The last verse aims at removing a possible misunderstanding, as we shall
describe. All this deals with the topic of intoxicants, although one adds to it the games of chance;
and the other, games of chance and sacrificing to set up stones and dividing by arrows.

It has been mentioned earlier in volume two of the book under the verse: They ask you about
intoxicants and games of chance. Say: "In both of them there is a great sin and (some) profit for
men; and their sin is greater than their profit." (2:219); and in volume four (English volume 8)
under the verse: O you who believe! Do not go near prayer when you are intoxicated until you
know (well) what you say,... (4:43), that these two verses together with the verse: Say: "My Lord
has only prohibited indecencies, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are
concealed, and sin... (7:33), and the verses under discussion, i.e.: O you who believe! Intoxicants
and games of chance and (sacrificing to) stones set up and (dividing by) arrows are only an
abomination of the Satan's handiwork; shun it therefore that you may be successful. The Satan
only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and
games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer. Will you
then desist? If these verses are studied together, their diverse context shows that the Legislator
had adopted a course of gradual progression in prohibition of intoxicants.

By gradual progression we do not mean that He had gone step by step; that it began with
aversion and loathing, then displeasure, and finally ended at clear prohibition; giving an example
of abrogation. Nor do we say that it had progressed from vague description to clear declaration,
or from secret allusion to clear statement because of the religious policy in enforcement of the
laws of shari'ah. Such ideas are untenable because the verse 7:33 had clearly prohibited 'sin', and
it was in a Meccan chapter; then came the verse that in them there is a great sin (2:219), and it is
in the chapter of "The Cow" which was the first detailed chapter revealed at Medina. When these
two verses are studied in conjunction, they clearly show the prohibition of intoxicants without
leaving any room for any excuse or re-interpretation.

The gradual progression mentioned above, in fact, means that the Qur'an first forbade the
intoxicants in a general context, and it was when it described it as a sin. Then it went ahead by
prohibiting it in particular in the form of advice and admonition; this method was used in the
verses: Say: "In both of them there is a great sin and some profit for men; and their sin is
greater than their profit"; and, do not go near prayer when you are intoxicated until you know
(well) what you say (if this verse had spoken about intoxication of liquor, and not of sleep).
Finally, there came the prohibition of intoxicants in particular conjoined with the most emphatic
intensity which is seen in the verses under discussion: O you who believe! Intoxicants and games
of chance and (sacrificing to) stones set up and (dividing by) arrows are only an abomination of
the Satan's handiwork; shun it therefore that you may be successful. The Satan only desires to
cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance,
and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer. Will you then desist?

These verses were the last to be revealed concerning the intoxicants. We may easily see as to
how many devices of emphasis have been used in them: They begin with innama (but only); then
name it "an abomination" and ascribe it to the Satan's handiwork; then give an unambiguous
order to shun it and give the hope that by shunning it "you may be successful"; then it elaborates
the evil consequences of taking intoxicants, and asks them whether they would desist. This is
followed by the order of obeying Allah and His Messenger and warning them to be cautious,
implying that Allah and His Messenger have no need of them if they disobey their laws. The last
verse of this piece (There is no blame on those who ...) also hints to this connotation, as we shall
explain later.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Intoxicants and games of chance and (sacrificing to) stones set
up and (dividing by) arrows are only an abomination of the Satan's handiwork; shun it therefore
that you may be successful: The meanings of intoxicant, games of chance, sacrificing to set up
stones and dividing by arrows have been explained in the beginning of this chapter. al-Khamr is
every intoxicating fermented liquid, which covers the reason. al-Maysir is gambling of any type.
al-Ansab means the idols or stones which were set up for slaughtering the sacrificial animals
upon, and which were held in esteem and considered a source of blessings. al-Azlam were the
arrows used for division of a camel's shares; often this name was given to the arrows used for
omen before beginning an important work like journey, etc. But this word has been used in the
chapter's beginning for the former meaning (because it is included among the things unlawful to
eat); therefore, it has the same meaning in this verse too.
Objection: Games of chance in its general meaning includes the former meaning of al-azlam,
i.e. division by arrows; and there is no reason to mention a particular after the general without
any apparent cause. Therefore, the only alternative would be to interpret al-azlam as the arrows
of oracle, which was common feature in the Era of Ignorance. A poet had said:

If the tribe of Judhaymah have killed their (own) chiefs,

So their women hit with arrows.

Reportedly, the method of oracle-seeking through arrows was like this: They used to take three
slim arrow-like pieces of wood; on one was written, 'Do'; on another was written, 'Don't do'; and
the third was left blank; all three were put in a small bag, and all were similar (in size, etc.).
When a man wanted to begin any important work, like a journey, etc., he took out one arrow; if it
was the one with 'Do', he determined to do it; if the arrow was the one with 'Don't do', the idea
was abandoned; if the blank arrow came out, the process was repeated - until one of the written
arrows came out. This method was called istiqsam (to seek a share), i.e. what is in his fate like
sustenance or some other good things. The verse proves its unlawfulness because it contains the
claim of the knowledge of future. The same is the position of similar other things like istikharah
by rosary and so on.

Reply: You have seen that the clause: [Forbidden to you is]... that you divide by the arrows,
which has come at the beginning of the chapter [verse 3], manifestly speaks about prohibition of
dividing the meat of an animal by using the arrows, which was a sort of gambling, because it is
included among the unlawful food; and it supports the view that in this verse too 'arrows' has the
same connotation.

However, if we admit that this verse has no connection with the verse 3, then the word 'arrows'
will be having more than one meaning, and it will need an association for pinpointing its
intended meaning; in sort, its interpretation will depend on traditions. And there are numerous
traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahlul 'l-Bayt (a.s.) which allow seeking divine guidance
through rosary, etc. when one feels really perplexed. [It is generally called istikharah, (i.e to seek
good)]

What is istikharah? When man intends to embark on an important work, it is possible for him to
know of its appropriateness, by using the power of thought which Allah has given him, or by
seeking the advice of those who have the ability to distinguish between right and wrong.
However, if these two methods fail to make him recognize the correct way, and he is still
bewildered, then he should choose his course of action after paying some attention to his Lord,
and seeking His help.

When man chooses what he chooses through this type of seeking good, or istikharah, he cannot
be accused of claiming to know the unseen; nor does he meddle with the divine affairs, which are
exclusively reserved with Allah. It does not involve allowing someone other than Allah to join
with Him in management of affairs, nor it entails any other religious problem. Because the only
function of istikharah is to decide positively or negatively about a course of action without
making it obligatory or unlawful or giving it any other shade of religious responsibility. Also, it
does not claim to unveil the good or the evil that is hidden behind the curtains of the unseen. It
only shows what is better for the man concerned whether he should or should not do that work;
in this way he comes out of bewilderment and hesitation [with a firm resolve.]

As for what follows that action or non-action, it may turn out to be good and it may equally
result in evil - in the same way as it happens when a man opts for a course of action by his own
thinking or by someone's advice. Thus, istikharah, like one's own thinking or well-wishers'
advice, is merely a way to remove hesitation or confusion while taking a practical step; and the
result of acting upon it is not different from that of an action done by one's own meditation or by
someone's advice.

Of course, someone may think looking at the traditions about seeking good omens from the
Qur'an, etc., that it entails a sort of a claim of the knowledge of the unseen; because often the
soul expects from it good or bad result, or benefit or harm. But it has been narrated in correct
hadith, through the chains of both sects that the Prophet (s.a. w.a.) sought good omen by good
things and ordered it, and forbade (to believe in) ill omen and ordered to pass over it and rely on
Allah.

Therefore, there is nothing to prevent seeking omen from the Qur'an, etc.; if the result of that
omen seeking is good, it is OK. Otherwise, he should proceed ahead in that affair relying on
Allah, the High. Its ultimate effect is to create satisfaction in mind about the affairs and actions,
which he believes, would bring happiness and benefit to him. We shall write on this topic in
detail in a place devoted to it particularly.

Now, it is clear that some exegetes are totally wrong when they have taken the 'arrows' as
referring to their practice of oracle seeking; and then arriving at the conclusion that istikharah
was unlawful.

As for the clause: an abomination of the satan's handiwork: ar-rijs (abomination) is dirty thing
as ar-Raghib has said in his al-Mufradat; so ar-rajasah like an-najasah and al-qadharah is that
factor because of which one keeps away and refrains from a thing as the nature distastes it.

The items enumerated in the verse - intoxicants, games of chance, sacrificing to set up stones and
dividing by arrows - are described as abominations because they have such a characteristic which
the human nature is repulsed with and does not like to go near it. And that characteristic is its
being devoid of all such things that contain human happiness - the happiness which sometimes
appears in its pure form, which is probably alluded to in the divine words: they ask you about
intoxicants and games of chance. Say: "In both of them there is a great sin and (some) profit for
men; and their sin is greater than their profit" (2:219). Note how sin is given dominance over
profit without exception.

Probably, that is the reason why these abominations have been ascribed to the Satan's handiwork
alone without joining him to others. Then He says in the next verse: The Satan only desires to
cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance,
and to keep you off from remembrance of Allah and from prayer.
It is because Allah has clearly described the Satan as the enemy of man who never wants any
good to reach to man. He says: ...surely the Satan is an open enemy to man (12:5). Against him it
is written down that whoever takes him for a friend, he shall lead him astray... (22:4); ...and they
do not call on anything but a rebellious Satan; Allah has cursed him;... (4:117-8) In these verses
Allah has confirmed His curse on the Satan and has removed him away from every good.

Also, He has mentioned that the Satan's contact with man and the extent of his action about him
is only through seduction, temptation and enticement by putting ideas in his mind; as Allah
quotes him as saying: He said: "My Lord! Because thou hast left me to stray, I will certainly
make (evil) fair seeming to them on earth, and I will certainly cause them all to deviate, except
Thy servants from among them, the freed ones." He said: "This is a straight path with Me:
Surely as regards My servants, thou hast no authority over them except those who follow thee of
the deviators." (15:39-42). It should be noted that the Satan had threatened only to cause them to
deviate, and Allah negated the Satan's authority except on his followers from among the
deviators. Again, Allah quotes him as speaking to the children of Adam on the Day of
Resurrection:... and I had no authority over you, except that I called you and you answered my
call,... (14:22). And Allah describes the Satan's call in these words: O children of Adam! Let not
the Satan cause you to fall into affliction as he got your parents out from the garden, ...he surely
sees you, he as well as his host, from whence you cannot see them;... (7:27). It means that his call
is not like men calling someone being face to face with each other; but the Satan calls men while
he sees them but not vice versa.

This topic has been clarified in the chapter 114, where it says: From the evil of the whisperings
of the slinking Satan, who whispers into the hearts of men, from among the jinn and the men
(vrs.4-6). Thus, Allah makes it clear that the Satan's dealings with man are based on his creating
ideas in man's heart, and in this way he calls him to error.

All this shows that when intoxicants and other items are called abominations of the Satan's
handiwork, it is because these items are ultimately based on the Satan's action which is
exclusively related to him; and his modus operandi is creating ideas in man's heart - the Satanic
whispering that calls him to error. That is why it is called abomination or uncleanness; Allah has
called error as uncleanness, as He says:... and (for) whomsoever He intends that He should leave
him to err, He makes his breast strait and narrow as though he were ascending into the sky; thus
does Allah lay uncleanness on those who do not believe (6:126).

What is the connotation of intoxicants and other items being an abomination of the Satan's
handiwork? The next verse clarifies it: The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to
spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the
remembrance of Allah and from prayer. That is, the Satan's motive in calling you to intoxicants
and games of chance is nothing except evil; thus it is an abomination of his handiwork.

Objection: The sum total of the above explanation is that the intoxicants and other items
mentioned therein are abominations only because making it, drinking it [or using it] ultimately
returns to the satanic temptation. But several traditions prove that it was the Satan himself who
appeared before man and made liquor for the first time and taught him how to make it.
Reply: Yes. Although these traditions are merely solitary and as such it is not incumbent on us to
accept them; yet there are many and diversified traditions, narrated under different chapters,
which show that the Satan took shape and appeared before many prophets and friends of Allah
and even before some other men. Also, there are reports about the angels appearing before them.
There are still other narrations showing that the world and the deeds take [human or other]
shapes; and so on. The divine Book too supports this view to some extent, as Allah says:... then
We sent to her Our spirit, and so he appeared to her as a well-made man (19:17). We shall fully
discuss this topic, God willing, in the exegesis of the chapter 15, under the verse: Glory be to
Him Who made His servant to go on a night... (vr.l), or in some other appropriate place.

It should be understood that if a report or story appears in one or more traditions, it does not have
the authority to change the apparent connotation of a Qur'anic verse, especially when it is
supported by other verses. The verses clearly show that the Satan has no more authority on man
than creating ideas in his mind. Even if he appeared in physical form before a man and made
something or taught him to make it, the net result was no more than seduction and temptation in
his mind or imparting some information and knowledge. You should wait for the coming
elaborate discussion.

"Shun it therefore that you may be successful": It lays down the prohibition in unambiguous
words, after describing its evil effects; this style has more impact on the souls. Then is expressed
the hope of being successful if they would shun it. This gives intense emphasis to the prohibition,
as it asserts that there would be no hope of success for those who would not refrain from these
abominations.

QUR'AN: The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring In your midst... Will you
then desist?: ar-Raghib has said in his al-Mufradat: "al-'Adw connotes overstepping,
transgression and disharmony; sometimes it is related to heart, then it is called enmity and feud;
at other times it is ascribed to walking, then it is called running; yet at other occasions it refers to
lack of justice in dealings, then it means transgression and overstepping; Allah says:... lest
exceeding the limits they should abuse Allah out of ignorance... [6:108]; at times it refers to parts
of habitation, and then it is said, al-'adwa', they say: a place having 'adwa', i.e. whose parts are
not in harmony with each other; from 'enmity' is derived 'aduww' so they say, enemy man,
enemy nation; Allah says:... some of you being the enemies of others;... [2:36]. Its plural comes
as 'idayy and a 'da' , Allah says: And on the day that the enemies of Allah shall be brought
together..." [41:19].

al-Bughd and al-baghda' are the opposites of love; as-sadd (to turn away); al-intiha' is to obey a
prohibition; also it is opposite of beginning.

As mentioned earlier, this verse aims at explaining the clause: the Satan's handiwork, or an
abomination of the Satan's handiwork. It is the reality of these items being: the Satan's
handiwork, or an abomination of the Satan's handiwork, that the only goal and purpose he wants
to achieve from the intoxicants and the games of chance (which are abominations of his
handiwork only) is to create enmity and hatred amongst you by making you transgress your
limits and hate one another, as well as to divert your attention from the remembrance of Allah
and from prayer, keeping you engaged in the intoxicants, games of chance, sacrificing to set up
stones and dividing by arrows.

Only the intoxicants and the games of chance are singled out as causing enmity and hatred,
because the two effects are their more apparent results. Look at liquor and intoxicants: Its use
agitates nervous system in such a way that it covers and dominates the reason and brings up
bigotry. If it incites anger, it lets the intoxicated person commit any felony, however serious and
ugly it might be, which even beasts of pray do not do. If incites desire and lust, it makes to seem
fair in his eyes all types of ugliness and debauchery, be it in his self, property or honor, in what
he believes to be sacred and sanctified in religion or society, etc. He will commit theft and
embezzlement, will not keep a secret, nor maintain the limit of a prohibited thing; in short he will
indulge in affairs, which are destructive to humanity. Available data show that intoxicants have
the lion's share in various types of felonies and debaucheries in that society where drinking
liquor is prevalent.

As for the games of chance, i.e. gambling, it squanders in a short time all the endeavors a man
had exercised for a long period in acquirement of wealth, property and status. Gambling throws
the wealth away, and often it destroys honor, life, and prestige. If a gambler wins and gets
wealth, it encourages him to abandon moderate way of life and indulge extravagantly in
debauchery; he becomes indifferent towards earning his livelihood through lawful means. And if
he loses, the loss of wealth and bitterness of defeat, leads to enmity and hatred towards the
winner, and leaves irritation and grief in its wake.

Although these evil results do not manifest themselves so clearly to the simple minds in
infrequent and rare cases for the first or second time, but the rare leads to dominant, the little
pulls to numerous, and once becomes many times; and it does not take long for this evil to
prevail in the society, and seep through all strata of the community; it thus turns into a barbaric
free for all where unruly passions dominate and destructive desires rule.

All this shows that the exclusive particle innama (only, but) in the verse: "The Satan only desires
to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance,
and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer", covers all the items
enumerated earlier on the whole, yet prevention from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer
is inflicted by all, and the enmity and hatred are especial effects of the intoxicants and games of
chance by nature.

Although prayer is a kind of the remembrance of Allah, yet Allah has mentioned it separately in
the clause: "and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer"; it shows how
much importance the prayer has in the eyes of shari'ah, because it is the perfect entity of the
remembrance. The Prophet (s.a.w.) has said in a correct hadith: The prayer is the pillar of
religion'; and the Qur'an in numerous verses shows its unparalleled significance, which no one
can entertain any doubt about. For example: Successful indeed are the believers, who are humble
in their prayers (23:1-2); And (as for) those who holdfast by the Book and keep up prayer, surely
We do not waste the reward of the right-doers (7:170); Surely man is created of a hasty
temperament; being greatly grieved when evil afflicts him, and niggardly when good befalls him,
except those who pray (70:19-22); Recite that which has been revealed to you of the Book and
keep up prayer; surely prayer keeps (one) away from indecency and evil, and certainly the
remembrance of Allah is the greatest... (29:45); ...then hasten to the remembrance of Allah...
(62:9), [it refers to prayer]; ...and keep up prayer for My remembrance (20:14); and there are
many other such verses.

Allah, in this verse under discussion, has given precedence to His remembrance over prayer,
because the remembrance is the only objective of the Divine Mission; it is the spirit of life in the
body of servitude, and the basis of happiness in this world and the next. It may be seen in the
words of Allah to Adam the first day He laid down the shari'ah for him: He said: "Get down you
two there from, all (of you), one of you (is) enemy to another. So if there comes to you guidance
from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, he shall not go astray nor be unhappy. And
whoever turns away from My remembrance, his shall surely be a straitened life, and We shall
raise him, on the Day of Resurrection, blind." (20:123-4); And on the day when He shall gather
them, and whatever they worshipped besides Allah, He shall say: "Was it you who led astray
these my servants, or did they themselves go astray from the path?" They shall say: "Glory be to
Thee! It was not beseeming for us that we should take any guardians besides Thee, but Thou
didst make them and their fathers to enjoy until they forsook the remembrance, and they were a
people in perdition." (25:17-18); Therefore turn aside from him who turns his back upon Our
remembrance and does not desire anything but this world's life. That is the (last) reach of their
knowledge; ...(53:29-30).

Remembrance in the Qur'anic verses only connotes that which stands opposite to oblivion of the
side of Lordship which brings in its wake oblivion of the side of servitude; and the servitude, the
humble adoration, is that religious behavior which is the only path to bring good fortune and
happiness to the soul. Allah says: And be not like those who forgot Allah, so He made them
forget their own souls... (59:19).

As for the end clause: "Will you then desist?" it is a reproving question, which indicates that the
Muslims had somehow failed to desist from the prohibitions that had preceded this one. The
verse: "The Satan only desires..." is a sort of explanation that explains the verse: They ask you
about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: "In both of them there is a great sin and some profit
for men; and their sin is greater than their profit." (2:219). That is, their profit which is supposed
to accompany the great sin is not of a type that could be separated at sometime from the sin or
the greater sin; unlike the lie which contains sin and profit, and occasionally its profit may be
separated from its sin, e.g., a lie spoken for removing misunderstanding between two persons.

It is because of the exclusive particle: "only", in the verse: "The Satan only desires to cause
enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to
keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer", which comes after the words:
only an abomination of the Satan's handiwork. It means that it is nothing other than an
abomination of the Satan's handiwork, and the Satan's only aim is to create enmity and hatred
among you through the intoxicants and the games of chance, and to prevent you from the
remembrance of Allah and from the prayer. In this framework, no situation can arise where these
items' profit could be separated from their sin. In no circumstances they could ever be supposed
to be lawful. Understand it.

QUR'AN: And obey Allah and the Messenger and be cautious; ...on Our Messenger: The verse
emphasizes the preceding command to abstain from these abominations. It does so by first
ordering obedience to Allah, and He has the authority to lay down a law; then by ordering
obedience to the Messenger, and he has the authority of implementation; and lastly by giving
warning in clear words.

Then comes further emphasis in the words: "but if you turn back, then know that only a clear
deliverance (of the message) is (incumbent) on Our Messenger." This emphasis contains a
serious warning, particularly as it begins with the word: "then know"; it has an allusion that if
you turn back and indulge in these sins, probably you think that you are showing arrogance to the
Prophet (s.a.w.) by going against his prohibition and that in this way you have defeated him; but
you do not understand - or you have forgotten - that he is Our Messenger to you; he has no
authority except a clear delivery of the message which is revealed to him and which he is ordered
to deliver; actually you are only disputing with Allah in His Lordship.

It has been described in the beginning that these verses contain numerous modes of emphasizing
the prohibition of these items. Look how it begins with the words: O you who believe! Then
comes the exclusive particle, innama (only), then its description as an abomination, then its
ascription to the Satan's handiwork, then the clear order to shun it; then the hope of success
resulting from that shunning. Then comes the description of their general evil - enmity and
hatred, averting from remembrance of Allah and from prayer. Then the rebuke at their
indifference to desisting followed by the command to obey Allah and the Messenger, and the
final warning in case of turning away after the clear deliverance.

QUR'AN: There is no blame on those who believe and do good for what they have eaten, when
they fear Allah and believe and do good, then they fear Allah and believe, then they fear Allah
and do good, and Allah loves those who do good: at-Ta'm and at-ta'am means to eat; it is used
for taking food, not drink; the Medinians use it for wheat only; sometimes it is used in the
meaning of taste, and then it is used for drinking too, as it is for eating. Allah says:...whoever
then drinks from it, he is not of me, and 'whoever does not taste of it, he is surely of me, . . .'
(2:249). And it has come in a hadith of the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he said about the water of
Zamzam: "Verily it is (ta 'amu tu 'min) a satisfier of the stomach (of man, like as is food), and a
remedy for a disease."

The context of the verse makes it certain that it is connected with the preceding verses. As such it
aims at answering an unspoken question: What will be the position of those believers who were
indulged in drinking liquor before the revelation of (its) prohibition, or before the revelation of
these verses? It is because the words: "for what they have eaten" are general, it is not restricted
by anything that could restrict it. The verse aims at removing blame from this general food, and
this removal of blame has been qualified with the clauses: "when they fear Allah and believe,
then they fear Allah and do good." This condition in which fear of Allah or piety has been
mentioned three times makes it certain that it means intense piety, as the piety should be.

Now, let us see what would be the implication of the disavowal of blame from pious believers
for whatever they eat (lawful nourishment): If it implies assertion of blame for the opposite
group, i.e. affirmation of general prohibition to non-pious persons from all believers and
unbelievers, it is rebuttable by verses such as: Say: "Who has prohibited the embellishment of
Allah which He has brought forth for His servants and the good provisions?" Say: "These are
for the believers in the life of this world, purely (theirs) on the Resurrection Day;..." (7:32).
Moreover, it is known from the taste of this religion that it does not stop anyone from savoring
the lawful good things which human nature is bound to use in the life.

Alternatively, if the verse is not meant to show its prohibition to the opposite group, then it
would imply that that food is lawful for those who believe and do good provided that they fear
Allah, then fear Allah, and then fear Allah. But it is known that its lawfulness is not restricted to
the believers who do good, rather it is common to believers and unbelievers altogether; and even
if we suppose that it is restricted to them, no one says that the permission depends on such a hard
condition. [As both these alternatives are untenable, the supposition, that the verse removes
blame from pious believers for whatever lawful food they eat, has no leg to stand upon.]

There are many such interpretations, based on the view that: "for what they have eaten" refers to
lawful food in a general way; but none is free from either of the two objections mentioned above.
It is because the meaning given by them revolves around the following proposition: There is no
blame on those who believe and do good, when they avoid unlawful things, for eating lawful
things. And this meaning cannot be free from either objection, as is clearly understood.

Some have said: There is an omission in verse; the complete verse is as follows: There is no
blame on those who believe and do good for what they have eaten and for other things when they
abstain from unlawful things.

COMMENT: It supposes an omission without any proof to support it; apart from that, the
original objection still stands.

Someone else has said: The belief and good deed altogether is not a real condition; the main idea
is to show the obligation of avoiding unlawful things, and belief and good deed have been joined
to it to show its compulsoriness.

COMMENT: The verse manifestly shows that it aims at removal of blame for what they have
eaten, and it is not dependent on belief, good deed, or avoidance of unlawful things - as we have
explained earlier. How far is this supposed meaning from the apparent meaning of the verse!

A third one has said: So far as a believer is concerned, it is all right to say that there is no blame
on him; but an unbeliever deserves punishment, so he cannot be declared blameless.

COMMENT: There is no reason why the verse should be restricted to the believers. In fact, it is
not unlike the verse: Say: "Who has prohibited the embellishment of Allah which He has brought
forth for His servants and the good provision1?"... (7:32); and the verse: Say: "I do not find in
that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden for an eater to eat of except that it be
what has died of itself, or blood poured forth, or flesh of swine..." (6:145), inasmuch as it lays
down a general principle without addressing it to believer or unbeliever. Or it is like the verse: O
you people! Surely We have created you of a male and a female and made you nations and tribes
that you may recognize each other; surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one
among you who is most pious. (49:13), as it is addressed to the people, which include believers
and unbelievers both.

Another one has said: The unbeliever has closed for himself the path of knowing unlawfulness
and lawfulness; that is why the verse speaks particularly about the believers.

COMMENT: The objections mentioned earlier apply to this interpretation also; moreover, it
does not remove the difficulty arising out of the words: when they fear Allah , . .

Thus, it is appropriate to say that the verse is connected with the preceding ones, and it looks at
the condition of those Muslims who had indulged in drinking liquor, or in using it or eating from
winnings of gambling or from what had been sacrificed to idols. It appears as if they had asked,
after the clear prohibition was revealed to them, regarding him who had used liquor or indulged
in other unlawful things mentioned above, before the revelation of prohibition - from among
those Muslims who had passed away, or those who were present at that time and had willingly
surrendered to the divine law.

Now, this verse answers their question, saying that there was no blame on those Muslims
provided they were among those who believed and did good deeds, if they were proceeding on
the path of piety with belief in Allah and good deeds, then believing in every law revealed to the
Prophet (s.a.w.), then doing good in acting according to the revealed commandment.

It appears from the above discourse that the relative clause: "what they have eaten", refers to
intoxicants [and 'eaten' stands for drunk]; or it includes all the above mentioned items -
intoxicants, gambling, and animals sacrificed to stones or divided by arrows - while the eating
points to their various uses. The meaning: There is no blame on those who believe and do good
for what they have tasted - before the revelation of prohibition - of intoxicants; or of intoxicants
and the other unlawful items described in the verse.

The clauses: "when they fear Allah and believe and do good deeds, then they fear Allah and
believes, then they fear Allah and do good." Apparently, the clause: "when they fear Allah and
believe and do good deeds," repeats the same theme that has been described in the preceding
clause: "There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds"; it shows that these
characteristics of belief and good deeds have a hand in nullification of blame. The same style is
seen in the verse:... with this is admonished whosoever among you believes in Allah and the last
day... (2:232). Such expressions are widely used in the language.

The clause: then they fear Allah and believe: It takes into account "belief after the first
mentioned belief." It can only mean a detailed belief in every law brought by the Messenger
(s.a.w.) from his Lord, without rejection or denial; inevitably it implies submission to the
Messenger in all that he orders and forbids. Allah says: O you who believe! Fear Allah and
believe in His Messenger:... (57:28); And We did not send any messenger but that he should be
obeyed by Allah's permission; ...But no! By your Lord! They do not believe until they make you a
judge of that which has become a matter of disagreement among them, and then do not find any
straitness in their hearts as to what you have decided and submit with total submission (4:64-65).
There are numerous verses of this theme.
The clause: "then they fear Allah and do good." Apparently, it adds doing good to the belief after
belief, with an aim to show its importance. al-Ihsan means performance of an act because of its
goodness - without false intentions. Allah says: Surely (as for) those who believe and do good,
We do not waste the reward of him who does a good work (18:30). Also, He says: (As for) those
who responded to the call of Allah and the Messenger (even) after the wound had afflicted them,
those among them who do good and fear (Allah) shall have a great reward (3:172). That is, their
response emanates from their seeking nearness to Allah and their total submission to Him, and
not for any other motive. al-Ihsan (doing good) is also used as transitive verb, i.e., to do with
someone what he thinks good; as Allah says:... and (you shall do) good to (your) parents,...
(2:83); ...and do good (to others) as Allah has done good to you,... (28:77).

According to the context the first of the two meanings is more appropriate for the clause under
discussion, i.e. to do a work because of its goodness. The religious piety is not given its full due
with merely believing in Allah and affirming truth of His religion, unless one believes in detail in
each and every laid down law of the shari'ah; because rejection of even one of those laws is
rejection of the religion itself. And even the detailed belief in each and every law does not give
piety its full due unless he acts according to the law in good manner, proceeding according to the
demands of the law by implementing it or abstaining from it; and that proceeding must be based
on total obedience, not on a hypocritical intention. Therefore, it is incumbent on him who is
equipped with provision of piety to believe in Allah and do good deeds, and to believe in His
Messenger in all that he has brought with him, proceeding in all this on the path of obedience
and good-doing.

The verse has repeated piety (fear of Allah) three times and has qualified all the three stages with
it. It emphatically points to the fact that all three stages must be connected to real piety without
any shade of any other irreligious motive. It has been mentioned somewhere in the preceding
discourses that piety is not a special religious position; it is rather a spiritual condition that co-
exists with all spiritual positions. In other words, each spiritual station has a particular piety,
which is reserved to it.

In short, the foregoing discourse shows that the verse means as follows: There is no blame on
those who believe and do good deeds for what they had tasted and used of the intoxicants and the
other unlawful items, provided they adhere to piety in all their conditions, hold fast to the belief
in Allah and His Messenger, and do good deeds by performing all obligatory things and
refraining from all unlawful things prohibited to them. However, if they had indulged in any
abomination of the Satan's handiwork, before the revelation of the prohibiting verse, before it
had reached them, or before they understood its connotation, it will do them no harm.

It is like the words of Allah in the matter of the change of qiblah, in reply to their query
regarding the prayers which they had prayed facing other than the Ka'bah:... and Allah was not
going to make your faith to be fruitless;... (2:143).

Its context is another witness that the verse: "There is no blame on those who believe and do
good deeds,..." is connected with the preceding verses, and that it was revealed with those verses
(whose language testifies that they were the last to be revealed on the subject of intoxicants); and
that some Muslims had not discarded the habit of drinking liquor between the period when the
first verses were revealed till the revelation of these verses.

Then the question arose, after these verses were revealed, about the condition of those who had
indulged in it: Some had used it before the prohibition; others had done so before learning the
law, and some without any excuse. Allah replied them specifying for each group its order as
related to its particular condition. He who drank it while he believed and did good deed - and it
could be only those believers who did so before the revelation of prohibition or because they did
not know of its unlawfulness - there was no blame on him; and as for others, the law concerning
them is different.

The exegetes have written lengthy discussions on this verse. Some are concerned with
explanation of: "what they have eaten," and we have given a short detail of it.

Others have expressed their opinions about the end portion of the verse, where it repeats piety
and fear of Allah three times, and repeats belief and then good deeds and ends at doing good.
[Their opinions may be summarized as follows]:

The clause: "when they fear Allah and believe and do good deeds", means: When they avoid
unlawful things and remain steadfast on belief and good deeds; then the clause: "then they fear
Allah and believe", means: Then they avoid what has been forbidden them like intoxicants, and
believe in its prohibition; and the clause: "then they fear Allah and do good", means: Then they
remain steadfast and continue to firmly shun the disobedience, and remain engaged in good
deeds.

This repetition looks at three situations as a man uses belief and piety between himself and his
soul, between himself and the people, and between himself and Allah; accordingly doing good
means doing good to others.

The repetition looks at three stages: The beginning, the middle, and the end, i.e. the piety as it
should be.

The repetition is in consideration of what is feared of. One should leave the forbidden things for
fear of chastisement; should avoid doubtful things as a precaution against falling into unlawful
things, and should abstain from some permissible things for preventing the soul from meanness
and keeping it clean from blemish.

The first piety is avoidance of drinking liquor, and the first belief is the belief in Allah; the
second piety is the continuation of the first piety, and the second belief is the continuation of the
first one; and the third piety is performance of obligatory deeds, and doing good is performance
of supererogatory deeds.

The first piety is avoidance of sins known through reason, and the first belief is believing in
Allah and in evil of theses sins; the second piety is avoidance of sins known through shari'ah,
and the second belief is believing in obligation of avoiding these sins; and the third piety
concerns especially with rights of the people and with the injustice and iniquity vis-a-vis other
persons; and doing good refers to doing good to others.
The first condition [i.e. when they fear Allah ...] is reserved for the past; the second, for its
continuation, and the third one is reserved particularly to the people's rights.

There are many similar opinions. But there is no proof either in the wording of the verse or
somewhere else that could justify application of the verse on any of their interpretations; and it
becomes manifest when one contemplates on its context and refers to what we have explained
earlier.

Traditions
Hisham ibn Salim narrates from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he heard him saying, "While Hamzah
ibn 'Abdi 'l-Muttalib and (some of) his companions were (drinking) a liquor named as-sukarkah
(liquor made from a variety of sorghum or millet)." He said, "Then they talked about ash-sharif
and Hamzah said, 'How can we find it?' They said, There is this she-camel of your nephew, 'Ali.
So he went forth to it and slaughtered it; then took its liver and hump and brought it to them." He
said, "When 'Ali (a.s.), came and saw his she-camel, he was smitten by it. They said to him,
'Your uncle Hamzah has done it.'" He said, "So he went to the Prophet (s.a.w.), and complained
to him of it."

He said, "Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) came with him. Hamzah was told, 'Here is the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) at the door.'" He said, "So Hamzah came out and he was enraged.
When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) saw (the sign of) anger in his face, he returned." He said,
"Then Hamzah said to him, 'If the son of Abu Talib wanted to lead you by a halter he could do
it.' Then Hamzah entered his house and the Prophet (s.a.w.) came back."

He said, "It was before (the battle of) Uhud." He said, "Then Allah revealed the prohibition of
liquor. So, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) ordered their (liquor) pots to be turned over." He said,
"Then the call went out to the people to proceed to Uhud. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) went
forth, and the people went forth, and Hamzah went forth. He stood in the side of the Prophet
(s.a.w.)." He said, "When they stood in line, he attacked the people (i.e. unbelievers) until he was
swallowed up among them; then he returned to his place. The people (i.e. the believers) said to
him: 'Allah! Allah! O Uncle of the Messenger of Allah! That you should go (i.e. die) and there
be something against you in the heart of the Messenger of Allah.'" He said, "Then he attacked
again until he disappeared amongst the people; then he returned to his place. They (again) said to
him: 'Allah! Allah! O Uncle of the Messenger of Allah! That you should go and there be
something against you in the heart of the Messenger of Allah.'

"So he proceeded towards the Prophet (s.a.w.). When he saw him (coming towards him), he
proceeded to his direction, embraced him, and the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) kissed his
forhead, then said, 'Launch attack on the people.' Then Hamzah was martyred, and the
Messenger of Allah gave him a shroud of tamrah." Then Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) explained it saying,
"Like this suryam. When his face was covered his feet were opened, and when his feet were
covered his face was opened." He said, "So he covered his face with it and put idhkhir  (a well-
known wide-leafed aromatic grass) on his feet."

He said, "The people fled away and 'Ali (a.s.) remained. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said to
him, 'What did you do?' He said, 'O Messenger of Allah! I adhered to (this) place.' He said, This
was expected of you."1 He said, "And the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said, 'Fulfil, O my Lord!
Your promise to me, because, if you wished (so), You would not be worshipped.'" (at-Tafsir,
al-'Ayyashi)

az-Zamakhshari has written: Three verses were revealed on the subject of intoxicants: They ask
you about intoxicants and games of chance,... [2:219]. Some Muslims then left it and some
continued to drink; until a man drank it, began his prayer, and talked nonsense. Then was
revealed: O you who believe! Do not go near prayer when you are intoxicated until you know
(well) what you say,... [4:43]. Still some Muslims continued drinking it; until 'Umar drank it;
then he took a jaw-bone of a camel and bashed with it the skull of 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn 'Awf,
and then sat lamenting those (unbelievers) who were killed in the battle of Badr, reciting the
poem of al-Aswad ibn Yaghfur:

How many spears (i.e. braves) and noble drinkers are (thrown)
In the well - the well of Badr? How many nobles and feeders of humps are (there)
In the well - the well of Badr? Does Ibn AbiKabshah threaten us that we shall be made alive
again?
And how can (happen) the life of ghosts and skulls? Is he helpless in averting death from me?
And will raise me (again) when my bones become rotten? Well, who will convey my message to
the Beneficent (God)
That I am abandoning the month of fast; So tell Allah to stop my drink from me, And tell Allah to
stop my food from me.

This (news) reached the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and he came out enraged, dragging his
cloak along; he raised something that was in his hand to strike him ('Umar). So he ('Umar) said,
"I seek refuge in Allah from the wrath of Allah and the wrath of His Messenger." Then Allah, the
Glorified, the Sublime, sent down (the verse): The Satan only desires to cause enmity and
hatred... Will you then desist? So 'Umar said, "We desist." (Rabi'u'l-abrar)

Ibn Jarir, Ibnu'l-Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Abu 'sh-Shaykh, Ibn Marduwayh, and an-Nahhas (in
his an-Nasikh) have narrated from Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas that he said, "Regarding me was
revealed the prohibition of intoxicants. A man from the Helpers prepared a feast, and he invited
us. People came to him, ate, and drank until they became intoxicated with liquor - and it was
before the intoxicants were prohibited. So they began boasting. The Helpers said, The Helpers
are superior;' and the Quraysh said, The Quraysh are superior.' Then a man came down with a
jaw-bone of a camel and hit at my nose tearing it - and Sa'd's nose was torn." He said, "Then I
came to the Prophet (s.a.w.) and mentioned it to him. So this verse was revealed: O you who
believe! Intoxicants and games of chance... (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: The traditions about the stories, which resulted in prohibition of intoxicants,
are numerous, through the Sunni chains, with great discrepancies among them. As for those
traditions which mention some companions who had been drinking, we have no concern to go
into them analyzing and sifting, because our purpose is to explain the Qur'anic verse. However,
these narratives support what we have written in the Commentary that these verses imply, nay,
rather clearly say, that a group of Muslims had not left drinking liquor since the verse, 2:219 was
revealed until these verses of chapter five came down.

Of course, some traditions say that 'Ali (a.s.) and 'Uthman ibn Maz'un had forbidden intoxicants
to themselves before the verse of prohibition was revealed; and it has been mentioned in al-Milal
wa 'n-Nihal, that a few Arabs in the Era of Ignorance had forbidden intoxicants to themselves,
and Allah helped some of them to find Islam and enter into its fold. Among them were 'Amir ibn
az-Zarib al-'Udwani and Qays ibn 'Amir at-Tamimi (who attained Islam). Also, among them
were Safwan ibn Umayyah ibn Muhrith al-Kinani, 'Afif ibn Ma'di Karb al-Kindf, al-Uslum al-
Yami (who forbad to himself both intoxicants and fornication). These few individuals were those
on whose tongue the word of truth had appeared. Otherwise, generally the Arabs of that era like
all other people of the world (except the Jews) were habituated to drink freely, until Allah
forbade it in His Book.

It appears from the verses of the mighty Book that intoxicants were forbidden in Mecca before
the hijrah, as is shown by the verse: Say: "My Lord has only prohibited indecencies, those of
them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and sin and rebellion without
justice..." (7:33). It is a Meccan verse; and when it is joined to the divine words: They ask you
about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: "In both of them there is a great sin and (some)
profit for men, and their sin is greater than their profit."... (2:219); which is Medinite verse
revealed in early days of hijrah, there does not remain room for any doubt that at that time its
prohibition was clear to the Muslims. And if we meditate on the context of the verses of the
chapter 5, "The Table", and especially on the implications of the words: Will you then desist?
And the verse: There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds for what they have
eaten, when they fear Allah and believe... it will be clear that the indulgence of a group among
them in drinking liquor between the revelation of chapter 2 and 5, was a residue of the previous
bad habit. It was like some people continuing to sinfully cohabit in the nights of Ramadan until
Allah revealed: It is made lawful to you on the night of fast to go in unto your wives; they are an
apparel to you and you are an apparel for them; Allah knew that you were acting unfaithfully to
yourselves, so He has turned to you (mercifully) and forgave you... (2:187).
However, it is clear that these traditions invite two observations:

One: They differ among themselves concerning the date of the prohibition of intoxicants. The
first narrative says that it was shortly before the battle of Uhud [i.e. the 3rd year of hijrah],while
other reports say that it was after the battle of the Allies [i.e. the 5th year of hijrah]. But it is not a
big problem, because possibly the latter may be referring to the revelation of the verses of the
chapter "The Table" in the 5th year of A.H. - although the wording of some of the traditions do
not fully agree with it.

Two: They say that intoxicants were not prohibited before the revelation of the verse of "The
Table", or that its prohibition was not clear before it for people and particularly for the
companions. But the verse 33 of chapter 7, "The Battlements", clearly forbids sin, and the verse
219 of the chapter 2, "The Cow", clearly declares it to be a great sin; and these two declarations
cannot be interpreted away.

Rather it looks far-fetched to think that prohibition of sin was revealed at Mecca before hijrah, in
the verse which included a general summary of forbidden things, i.e.: Say: "My Lord has only
prohibited indecencies, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and
sin and rebellion without justice, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not
sent down any authority, and that you say against Allah what you do not know." (7:33), and then
a long time would pass after it and neither the believers would ask its meaning from their
Prophet, nor polytheists would seek from him its explanation, while their biggest concern was to
refute the Book of Allah and object against it in any way they could imagine.

Rather the history shows that the Prophet's prohibition of the intoxicants like his forbidding
polytheism and fornication was widely known to the polytheists. For the proof, look at the report
given by Ibn Hisham in his as-Sirah; quoting Khallad ibn Qurrah and other learned elders of the
tribe of Bakr ibn Wail that, A'sha ibn Qays went forth towards the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)
intending to accept Islam. He said a Qasidah in praise of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), [which
began with these lines]:-

Did not your eyes remain sore at night? And did you not spend the night awake like one bitten by
snake?

When he reached Mecca - or was near it - some polytheists of Quraysh intercepted him and
asked him his news. He told him that he had come intending to see the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) in order to enter into Islam. (The Qurayshite) said to him, "O Abu Basir! He forbids
fornication." A'sha said, "By God! Certainly, it is a thing that I have no desire of." The
Qurayshite said, "O Abu Basir! And he forbids intoxicants." A'sha said, "As for this, certainly
there are some consolations about it in (my) soul; but I am going back and shall quench my thirst
with it this year, then I'll come to him and accept Islam." So he returned, and died the same year
and did not come back to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.).

Thus, no weight remains at all for the above-mentioned traditions. We can only say that the
narrators had inferred them by their independent thinking on the verses, while they had forgotten
the verse 7:33. The exegetes have offered strange interpretations with an aim to justify these
traditions.

However, after all this lengthy discourse, the net result remains that the Book of Allah had
clearly announced prohibition of intoxicants in Islam before hijrah; and the only purpose of
these verses of the chapter 5, "The Table", was to put intense pressure on the people because they
had not shown any seriousness in submitting to this divine prohibition and enforcing this law.

Hisham narrates through a trustworthy person from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he was asked, "Is it
true what has been narrated from you that intoxicants, set up stones and dividing arrows are
men?" He said, "Allah was not to address His creatures in a language that they did not
understand." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

'Abdullah ibn Sinan narrates from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said, Qudamah ibn Maz'un was
brough before 'Umar ibn al-Khattab; and he had drunk liquor and proof was established against
him. ('Umar) asked 'All (about it) and he ordered him to be flogged eighty stripes. Qudamah said,
"O Leader of the Faithful! There is no penalty for me;

I am of the people of this verse: There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds for
what they have eaten (up to the end of the verse)." 'Ali (a.s.) said to him, "You tell a lie; you are
not from among the people of this verse. What its people had eaten, it was lawful for them; and
they do not eat or drink except what is lawful for them." (ibid.)

The author says: This meaning has also been narrated from Abu 'r-Rabi from the same Imam
(a.s.). Also, ash-Shaykh has narrated it in at-Tahdhib through his chain from Ibn Sinan from the
same Imam (a.s.); and this meaning is narrated through the Sunni chains too. The Imam's words,
"What its people had eaten, it was lawful for them; and they do not eat or drink except what is
lawful for them," agrees with what we have explained in the foregoing Commentary; so refer to
it.

at-Tabari narrates from ash-Sha'bi that he said, "Four verses were revealed about the intoxicants:
They ask you about intoxicants and games of chance... [2:219], so they left it; then was
revealed:... you obtain from them intoxication and goodly provision... [16:67], so they drank it;
then the two verses of "The Table" were revealed: intoxicants and games of chances and... Will
you then desist? [5:90-91]. (at-Tafsir, at-Tabari)

The author says: It appears from it that the verse 16:67 abrogated the verse 2:219, and this in its
turn was abrogated by 5:90-91; this in itself is sufficient to show this claim's invalidity.

[al-Kulayni and ash-Shaykh] have narrated through their chains from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he
said, "Allah did never raise any prophet but it was in Allah's knowledge that when He would
perfect his religion it would include prohibition of intoxicants; and intoxicants were always
unlawful, but they are only carried away from [one] trait to [another] trait; and if it were imposed
on them all together, it would have cut them off short of religion," (The narrator) said, "Abu
Ja'far (a.s.), said, There is no one more kind than Allah, the Sublime; and it is from His kindness
(the Blessed, the Sublime) that He transfers them from (one) trait to (another) trait; and if He had
imposed on them all together, they would have perished,'" (al-Kafi; at-Tahdhib)

(al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from 'Amr ibn Shimr from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said,
"When Allah, the Mighty, the Great, revealed to His Messenger (s.a.w.a,), intoxicants and games
of chance and (sacrificing to) stones set up and (dividing by) arrows are only an abomination of
the Satan's handiwork; shun it therefore, it was said to him, 'What is games of chance? O
Messenger of Allah!' He said: 'Anything you make a bet with, even cubes and walnut.' It was
said, 'Then what is stones set up?' He said, 'What they sacrifice to their deities.' It was said, 'Then
what is arrows?' He said, 'Their arrows which they used for division [of meat].'" (al-Kafi)

[al-Kulayni] narrates through his chain from 'Ata' ibn Yasar from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said,"
The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said, 'Every intoxicant is unlawful, and every intoxicant is
liquor.'" {ibid.)

The author says: This tradition is narrated also through Sunn! chains, from 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar
from the Prophet (s.a.w.), and its wording is as follows, "Every intoxicant is liquor and every
liquor is unlawful." al-Bayhaql and others have narrated it too. There are numerous traditions
narrated from the Imams of Ahlulbayt (a.s.) which are nearly mutawatir that every intoxicant is
unlawful, and that whatever is used for betting on, is game of chance.

Abu 's-Sabah narrates that he asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about nabldh and intoxicants, "Do they
have the same position? (The Imam, a.s.), said, 'No. Surely nabldh is not of the rank of
intoxicants. Certainly, Allah has prohibited intoxicants a little of it and more of it, as He has
prohibited dead body, blood and flesh of swine; and the Prophet (s.a.w.) has prohibited the
intoxicant from among the drinks, and what the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) has prohibited,
Allah has prohibited it.'" (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

al-Kulayni and ash-Shaykh] have narrated through their chains from Musa ibn Ja'far (a.s.) that he
said, "Verily, Allah has not prohibited the liquor because of its name; but He has prohibited it
because of its effect. Therefore, anything, which has the effect of liquor, is liquor." (In another
version, the last sentence is, 'Therefore, anything which does the action of liquor is liquor.') (al-
Kafi; at-Tahdhib)
al-Kulayni and ash-Shaykh] have narrated through their chains from Musa ibn Ja'far (a.s.) that he
said, "Verily, Allah has not prohibited the liquor because of its name; but He has prohibited it
because of its effect. Therefore, anything, which has the effect of liquor, is liquor." (In another
version, the last sentence is, 'Therefore, anything which does the action of liquor is liquor.') (al-
Kafi; at-Tahdhib)

The author says: The tradition in condemnation of intoxicants and gambling that has come
through the Sunni and Shi'ah chains are beyond the limit of enumeration; whoever wants to study
them should consult the Collections of Traditions.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses 94-

99
 
ٌ‫ب فَ َم ِن ا ْعتَدَى بَ ْع َد َذلِكَ فَلَهُ َع َذاب‬ ِ ‫ص ْي ِد تَنَالُهُ أَ ْي ِدي ُك ْم َو ِر َما ُح ُك ْم لِيَ ْعلَ َم هّللا ُ َمن يَ َخافُهُ بِ ْال َغ ْي‬ َّ ‫وا لَيَ ْبلُ َونَّ ُك ُم هّللا ُ بِ َش ْي ٍء ِّمنَ ال‬ ْ ُ‫يَا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬
ْ َ ُ َّ َ ْ َ ُ َ َ
‫ص ْي َد َوأنت ْم ُح ُر ٌم َو َمن قتَلهُ ِمنكم ُّمتَ َع ِّم ًداـ ف َج َزاء ِّمث ُل َما قت ََل ِمنَ الن َع ِم يَحْ ك ُم بِ ِه ذ َوا َعد ٍل‬ ُ َ َّ ‫} يَا أَيُّهَا ال ِذينَ آ َمنوا ال تَقتلوا ال‬94{ ‫أَلِي ٌم‬
ْ ُ ُ ْ َ ْ ُ َّ
‫هّللا‬ ‫هّللا‬ ‫هّللا‬
ُ ‫ق َوبَا َل أ ْم ِر ِه َعفَا ُ َع َّما َسلَف َو َم ْن عَا َد فَيَنتَقِ ُم ُ ِم ْنهُ َو‬ َ َ ‫صيَا ًما لِّيَ ُذو‬ ِ ‫ك‬ َ ِ‫ط َعا ُم َم َسا ِكينَ أَو َع ْد ُل َذل‬ َ ٌ‫ِّمن ُك ْم هَ ْديًا بَالِ َغ ْال َك ْعبَ ِة أَوْ َكفَّا َرة‬
‫ي‬َ ‫وا هّللا َ الَّ ِذ‬
ْ ُ‫ص ْي ُد ْالبَرِّ َما ُد ْمتُ ْم ُح ُر ًما َواتَّق‬ َ ‫ص ْي ُد ْالبَحْ ِر َوطَ َعا ُمهُ َمتَاعًا لَّ ُك ْم َولِل َّسيَّا َر ِة َوحُرِّ َم َعلَ ْي ُك ْم‬ َ ‫} أُ ِح َّل لَ ُك ْم‬95{ ‫َزي ٌز ُذو ا ْنتِقَ ٍام‬ ِ ‫ع‬
‫هّللا‬ َ ْ
‫ك لِتَ ْعلَ ُموا أ َّن َ يَ ْعلَ ُم َما فِي‬ ْ
َ ِ‫ي َوالقَالَئِ َد َذل‬ ْ ْ
َ ‫اس َوال َّش ْه َر ال َح َرا َم َوالهَ ْد‬ ِ َّ ‫ن‬‫ل‬ ِّ ‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬
ً ‫ا‬َ ‫ي‬ِ ‫ق‬ ‫م‬
َ ‫ا‬ ‫ر‬
َ ‫ح‬َ ْ
‫ال‬ َ‫ْت‬ ‫ي‬ َ ‫ب‬ ْ
‫ال‬ َ ‫ة‬ َ ‫ب‬ ‫ع‬ ْ ‫ك‬ َ ْ
‫ال‬ ُ ‫هّللا‬ ‫ل‬َ ‫ع‬َ ‫ج‬
َ } 96 { َ‫ُون‬ ‫ر‬ َ
‫ش‬ ْ‫ح‬ُ ‫ت‬ ‫ه‬
ِ ‫إِلَ ْي‬
‫} َّما َعلَى‬98{ ‫َّحي ٌم‬ ِ ‫ر‬ ‫ر‬
ٌ ‫و‬ ُ ‫ف‬‫غ‬َ َ ‫هّللا‬ َّ
‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬‫و‬ ‫ب‬
َ ِ ِ ‫ا‬ َ ‫ق‬ ‫ع‬ ْ
‫ال‬ ُ
‫د‬ ‫ي‬‫د‬ َ
‫ش‬
ِ َ ‫هّللا‬ َّ
‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬ ْ
‫وا‬ ‫م‬
ُ َ ‫ل‬ ‫ع‬ ْ ‫ا‬ }97 { ‫م‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ل‬
ٌ َِ ٍ ْ ‫ع‬ ‫ء‬ ‫ي‬ َ
‫ش‬ ‫ل‬ ِّ ُ
‫ك‬ ‫ب‬
ِ َ ‫هّللا‬ َّ
‫ن‬ َ ‫أ‬ ‫و‬
َ ِ ‫ض‬ ْ‫ر‬ َ ‫األ‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬‫و‬ ‫ت‬
ِ َ َ ِ َ َ ‫ا‬ ‫و‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬‫س‬َّ ‫ال‬
}99{ َ‫غ َوهّللا ُ يَ ْعلَ ُم َما تُ ْب ُدونَ َو َما تَ ْكتُ ُمون‬ ُ َ‫ُول إِالَّ ْالبَال‬ ِ ‫ال َّرس‬
{94} O you who believe! Allah will certainly try you in respect of some game which your hands
and your lances can reach, that Allah might know who fears Him in secret; but whoever exceeds
the limit after this, he shall have a painful punishment. {95} O you who believe! Do not kill
game while you are in the pilgrim garb, and whoever among you shall kill it intentionally, the
compensation (of it) is the like of what he killed, from the cattle, as two just persons among you
shall judge, as an offering to be brought to the Ka'bah or the expiation (of it) is the feeding of the
poor or the equivalent of it in fasting, that he may taste the unwholesome result of his deed;
Allah has pardoned what is gone by; and whoever returns (to it), Allah will inflict retribution on
him; and Allah is Mighty, Lord of Retribution. {96} Lawful to you is the game of the sea and its
food, a provision for you and for the travelers, and the game of the land is forbidden to you so
long as you are in the pilgrim garb, and fear Allah, to Whom you shall be gathered. {97} Allah
has made the Ka'bah, the Sacred-House, a sanctuary for the people, and the sacred month and the
offerings and the (animals with the) garlands; this is that you may know that Allah knows
whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth, and that Allah is the Knower of all
things. {98} Know that Allah is severe in requiting (evil) and that Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
{99} Nothing is (incumbent) on the Messenger but to deliver (the message), and Allah knows
what you reveal and what you hide.
 

Commentary
The verses describe the law regarding the game of land and sea when a man is in the state of
sanctity, wearing the robes of pilgrims.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Allah will certainly try you in respect of some game which your
hands and your lances can reach: al-Bala' (test, trial); layabluwannakum (will certainly try you);
la is for oath, which together with the doubling of nun connotes emphasis and intensity. The
word: "some game", indicates insignificance, in order that it would help the audience to comply
with the coming prohibition. The clause: "which your hands and your lances can reach", includes
in its ambit game which can be caught easily by hand, like young birds, cubs of wild animals and
eggs; or with difficulty like big games that usually cannot be hunted except with arms.

This verse apparently aims at paving the way for the severe law which follows in the next one;
and that is the reason that this clause is followed by the words: that Allah might know who fears
Him in secret; as it indicates that the ensuing law would be prohibitive; then comes the
concluding statement: but whoever exceeds the limit after this he shall have a painful
punishment.

QUR'AN: that Allah might know who fears Him in secret…; It is not unlikely that the divine
words: "Allah will certainly try you... that Allah might know", allude to the fact that He will
certainly foreordain it in order to distinguish those of you who fear Allah in secret from those
who do not fear Him. Obviously, Allah is not afflicted by ignorance, which should be removed
by knowledge! A full explanation of the meaning of test has been given under the verse: Do you
think that you will enter the garden... (3:142), in the fourth volume of this book37; and also
another meaning of knowledge was given earlier. As for the clause: "who fears Him in secret",
the adverb: "in secret", is related to: "fears"; fearing in secret indicates that man fears his Lord
and is cautious of the next world's punishment and its sufferings which the Lord has warned him
of; all those aspects are unseen for man, and he does not perceive any part of it with his five
senses. Allah says: You can only warn him who follows the reminder and fears the Beneficent
God in secret... (36:11); And the garden shall be brought near to those who guard (against evil),
not far off: This is what you were promised, for everyone who turns frequently (to Allah), keeps
(his limits); who fears the Beneficent God in secret and comes with a patient heart (50:31-33);
Those who fear their Lord in secret and they are fearful of the hour (21:49).

The clause: "but whoever exceeds the limit after this", means: Whoever exceeds the limit which
Allah fixes for him after the said test and trial, shall have a painful chastisement.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Do not kill game while you are in the pilgrim garb, ...may taste
the unwholesome result of his deed: al-hurum (in the pilgrim garb. It is a sifah mushabbahah =
adjective which resembles a verb). [at-Tabrisi] writes: "Haram and muhrim both have the same
meaning; likewise the opposite halal and muhill have the same meaning; ahrama 'r-rajul ('The
man entered into sacred month.'), also it means; 'He entered into the Sanctuary.' Also, ahrama
means: 'He entered into hajj (by saying talbiyah).' al-Harm means the pilgrim garb; this is the
meaning of the hadith, 'I was applying perfume to the Prophet for his ihram.' The basic meaning
of the root-word (h-r-m) is to protect, to prohibit; the women are called haram because they are
protected; and al-mahrum is the one who is deprived of sustenance."
He has also said: "al-Mithl, al-mathal as well as ash-shibh and ash-shabah have all one meaning
[i.e. like, likeness.]"

He says: "an-Na'am denotes camel, cow, sheep and goat; if there is camel alone, it is called
na'am; but if there are cow and sheep or goat alone, they are not called na'am. This has been
mentioned by az-Zajjaj."

Again he says: "al-Farra' has said: 'al-'Adl is a thing which is equal to another thing not from the
same species, al- 'Idl is like; you say: 'I have 'idl of your slave or goat,' when you have a slave
like his slave or goat like his goat; but if you mean his/its value from another species, you will
say, ' 'adl.' The Basrite grammarians say that al- 'adl and al-idl both mean 'like', no matter it is of
the same species or not."

Also, he has said: "al-Wabal (translated here as 'the unwholesome result') means burden of a
thing in hateful situation; accordingly they say: Ta'am wabil and ma' wabil when the food and
water are heavy, not nourishing; thus Allah says:... so We laid on him a violent hold [73:16]; i.e.
heavy and hard; and for this reason, the board of washer man is called wabil."

The words: "Do not kill game while you are in the pilgrim garb," forbid the killing of game. But
it is partially elaborated by the next verse: Lawful to you is the game of the sea - this explains the
kind of game; and the nature of killing is elaborated by the next sentence: "and whoever among
you shall kill it intentionally..." The word: 'intentionally' is the circumstantial clause related to:
"whoever among you shall kill it." Apparently, intentional killing is opposite of unintentional
one, i.e. killing without intention, e.g. one shoots arrow to a certain target, and it missing the
target hits a game. The verse makes it clear that he must pay the compensation if he did have the
intention of killing the game, no matter whether he remembered that he was in the pilgrim garb,
or had forgotten it or was oblivious to it.

The sentence: "the compensation (of it) is the like of what he killed, from the cattle, as two just
persons among you shall judge, as an offering to be brought to the Ka'bah." Its meaning is clear:
He has to offer a compensation, which should be like the game he has killed; it should be from a
kind of cattle which is like the killed game; that similar cattle will be decided by two just
religious persons among you; that offering should be brought to the Ka'bah and slaughtered in
the sanctuary in Mecca or Mina, as explained by the Prophetic sunnah.

Grammatically the word: 'compensation' is a subject whose predicate is omitted [although this
aspect is lost in English translation. tr.]. The clauses: "the like of what he killed, from the cattle,"
and, "two just persons... shall judge", are descriptions of the compensation; the clauses: "an
offering," and "to be brought to the Ka'bah," are the noun and its adjective, respectively, while
the "offering" is the circumstantial clause related to "the compensation", as described above. The
verse has been analyzed in some other ways too.

The clauses: "or the expiation (of it) is the feeding of the poor or the equivalent of it in fasting",
lay down two other alternatives for the expiation of killing a game. The particle, 'or', does not
show more than alternativeness, and its elaboration comes from the sunnah; however, the verse,
first names the feeding of the poor as its expiation, and then mention its equivalent fasting, and it
is not without some indication of sequence between these alternatives.

The clause: "that he may taste the unwholesome result of his deed": The letter, lam (that)
indicates the objective; this and the preceding sentences to which it is attached, show that it is a
kind of retribution.

QUR'AN: Allah has pardoned what is gone by; and whoever returns (to it), Allah will inflict
retribution on hint; and Allah is Mighty, Lord of Retribution: Pardon is bestowed to what is gone
by. It shows that "what is gone by" refers to those game killings, which had occurred before the
verse was revealed giving this law. Obviously, if pardon was to apply to the game killed when it
was being revealed or after its revelation, it would contradict the law. This sentence was revealed
to remove the possible misunderstanding that the law of compensation was retroactively
applicable to the incidents preceding the time of revelation.

The verse proves that pardon may be applied to such deeds too which are not sins, provided
those deeds contain evil, which by their nature would be liable to attract legislative prohibition.
The clauses: "and whoever returns (to it), Allah will inflict retribution on him; and Allah is
Mighty, Lord of Retribution." Apparently, returning to it means repeating the sin, and the clause:
"Allah will inflict retribution on him," speaks about future recurrence, not to a present order. It
shows that the returning means repeating the deed that had attracted compensation and the divine
retribution refers to something other than the imposed compensation.

In this backdrop, the verse, together with the preceding and the following ones, deals with
various aspects of the law of killing the game. Allah has pardoned those who had done so before
revelation of the law; but he who would kill a game after law was promulgated, would have to
offer in compensation cattle like of what he had killed -this is for the first offence. However, if
he repeats the sin, Allah will inflict retribution on him, and there is no compensation on him.
This is seen in most of the traditions of the Imams of Ahlulbayt (a.s.) which deal with the
explanation of this verse.

Had not this explanation been given in traditions, we would have to say that the retribution,
mentioned in the clause: "Allah will inflict retribution", covered general laws including
expiation; and the returning connoted killing a game again; it would then mean: Whoever
indulged in killing a game as they were doing before promulgation of this law -i.e. whoever
would kill a game - Allah would inflict retribution on him - i.e. would make him liable to pay the
compensation/expiation. But, as you see, this meaning is far from the wording of the verse.

QUR'AN: Lawful to you is the game of the sea... and fear Allah, to Whom you shall be
gathered: All these verses aim at describing the law of hunting [intentionally, while the hunter is
in ihram]on land or in sea. It proves that what is made lawful in this verse is hunting the game of
the sea, not [only] its eating; in this context, the word, ta'amuhu [= which can be translated as, its
food, or its eating] gives here the meaning of food, and not of eating; and it means that you are
allowed to eat from the game of the sea. In short, the verse says that you are allowed to hunt the
game of the sea, and also to eat from what you have hunted.

The seafood covers what is hunted from it, like good meat of the game, as well as what is thrown
up by sea like a dead animal, etc. However, the traditions of the Imams of Ahlu '1-Bayt (a.s.)
explain it as good meat of game, salted or otherwise.

The words: "a provision for you and for the travelers," is a circumstantial clause related to "the
game of sea and its food." It contains a shade of bestowal of gracious boon.

The verse is addressed to the believers who are in condition of ihram; therefore the clause: "a
provision for you and for the travelers", may be translated as, a provision for those in the
condition of ihram and for others.

It should be noted that there are numerous topics of jurisprudence contained in these verses,
which are written in detail in the books of fiqh; and whoever wants to know more should refer to
those books.

QUR'AN: Allah has made the Ka'bah, the Sacred House, a sanctuary for the people, and the
sacred month and the offerings and the (animals with the) garlands;...: The talk begins with the
Ka'bah, which is followed by its explicative apposition the Sacred House; then month is
described with the attribute, the sacred, which is followed by the offerings and the animals with
garlands, which in their turn are related to the sanctity of the House. All this shows that the
essential prerequisite of this verse's topic is Sanctity.

Qiyam (that with which something stands). ar-Raghib has said: "al-Qiyam and al-qawam is the
name of that with which a thing stands, i.e. remains firm; like al-'imad (pillar) and as-sinad
(prop) which are used for that with which a thing remains upright; as Allah says: And do not give
away your property which Allah has made for you a (means of) support to the weak of
understanding,... [4:5], i.e. He has made it for you a means to keep you upright; and He says:
Allah has made the Ka'bah, the Sacred House, a support for the people, i.e. it provides their
means of support in this life and in the hereafter; al-Asamm has said: '(It means), firmly standing
which will not be abrogated. It has an alternative version, qayyiman, with the same meaning.'"

The verse basically means that Allah has made the Ka'bah a sacred house and laid down its
sanctity. Also, He has made some months sacred, and joined them together in some respects, like
the hajj which is done in the sacred month of Dhi 'l-Hijjah. He has also ordained something
connected to it, which share in this sanctity like sacrificial animals [marked as such by cutting
off a piece of their ears, or putting garlands on their necks]. All this has been prescribed as a
means of support for the people's blissful social life.

So, He has prescribed the Sacred House as the qiblah, towards which the people face in their
prayers, keep to it the faces of their dead bodies and slaughtered animals, and maintain its respect
in their shameful conditions [i.e. they do not face it while evacuating the bowels]. In this way
their community is united and their ties are strengthened; their religion is revived and
maintained; they come to it for hajj from different lands and furthest regions, and therein witness
advantages for themselves and proceed on the path of servitude. The people throughout the
world get guidance by the Ka'bah's name, by its remembrance and by looking at it. They seek
divine nearness through it and by fixing their attention to it. Allah has described its excellence in
another way which is not far from above, as He says: Most surely the first house appointed for
men is the one at Bakkah, blessed and a guidance for the nations (3:96). And you have seen a
discourse in volume three of this book, under this verse, which illuminates this subject.39

Similar is the case of the sacred month, inasmuch as it is a sanctuary for men. Allah has
forbidden fighting in it, and has therein given them safety and security in their lives, honor and
properties so that they get a chance to mend what had gone bad in the affairs of their lives. The
position of sacred month within all months is like a station where a wayfarer - weary and tired -
gets an opportunity to rest and restore himself. In short, the sacred house and the sacred month
with the sacrificial animals connected with them are a means of support for the people,
encompassing various aspects of their lives here and in the hereafter. If a deep-thinking person
reflects comprehensively on the particulars of the benefits which the people acquire from the
Ka'bah and the sacred month - the benefits that are ever-flowing or firmly fixed - he will get
enormous blessings and will be highly amazed: He will see that because of the sacred house and
sacred month, blood relationships are strengthened, friendships are fortified, wealth is gladly
spent on needy and poor; markets flourish, mutual love between near relatives blossoms, and
strangers recognize each other; hearts come nearer, souls become purified and powers are
revitalized; the community gets support from one another, religion is revived, and standards of
truth and banners of monotheism are raised high.

It seems this fact is mentioned here after the verses forbidding the game in order to remove any
misgiving that these laws were of little or no benefit at all. What is the benefit of forbidding
hunting in a certain place or time? What is the advantage of bringing sacrificial animals to a
fixed area? And so on. Were not these laws merely vestiges of the superstitious rites of the
ignorant and barbaric nations?

This doubt was removed here by saying that the dignity of the sacred house and the sacred month
and related rules are based on an academic reality and serious basis, i.e., they are the means of
support for their lives.

This explanation shows how the verse: "this is that you may know that Allah knows whatever is
in the heavens and whatever is in the earth, and that Allah is the Knower of all things", is
connected with the preceding verses. The demonstrative pronoun: "this" may point to the law
described in the preceding verses (the underlying reason of whose legislation is explained in the
sentence: "Allah has made the Ka'bah..."). In this case the meaning will be as follows: Verily
Allah has made the sacred house and the sacred month sanctuaries for the people and has laid
down relevant laws, in order that by preserving their sanctity, obeying the laws enacted about
them, the people may proceed to the realization that Allah knows what is in the heavens and the
earth, and is fully cognizant of what is beneficial for them; that is why He has laid down for you
these laws with full knowledge. There is no superstition involved in these laws that could have
emanated from delusive imagination.

Alternatively, that pronoun (this) may be pointing to the explanation of the law which is
elaborated in the sentence: "Allah has made the Ka'bah..." In this case, the meaning will be as
follows: We have explained to you this reality (i.e., making the sacred house and the sacred
month and their related affairs as sanctuaries for the people) in order that you may understand
that Allah fully knows what is in the heavens and in the earth and the related laws which are
beneficial to their affairs. Therefore, you should not think that these laid down laws were useless
and ineffectual, or were based on superstition.

QUR'AN: Know that Allah is severe in requiting (evil) and that Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
Nothing is (incumbent) on the Messenger but to deliver (the message), and Allah knows what
you reveal and what you hide: It re-enforces the preceding declarations and firmly establishes the
ground of the above-mentioned laws; it threatens disobedient persons and offers (good) promise
to obedient ones. The both clauses have a shade of threatening; that is why Allah has described
Himself first as being severe in punishment and then has mentioned His forgiveness and mercy.
Also, it is for this reason that the talk has ended with the sentences: "Nothing is (incumbent) on
the Messenger... and what you hide."

Traditions
[al-Kulayni] narrates through his chains from Hammad ibn 'Isa and Ibn Abi 'Umayr, from
Mu'awiyah ibn 'Ammar, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said in explanation of the words of
Allah, the Mighty, the Great: Allah will certainly try you in respect of some game which your
hands and your lances can reach. "Wild animals were crowded for the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.), in the 'umrah of Hudaybiyyah until their hands and their lances could reach them." (al-
Kafi)

The author says: Also, al-'Ayyashi has narrated it as a mursal tradition from Mu'awiyah ibn
'Ammar; and this theme has been narrated by al-Kulayni and ash-Shaykh (in al-Kafi and at-
Tahdhib, respectively) through their chains to al-Halabi from as-Sadiq (a.s.). al-'Ayyashi has also
narrated it from Sama'ah from the same Imam, as a mursal one; and similarly al-Qummi has
narrated it as a mursal; this is also narrated from Muqatil ibn Hayyan as quoted below.
[as-Suyuti says:] Ibn Abi Hatim has narrated from Muqatil ibn Hayyan that he said: "This verse
was revealed in the 'umrah of Hudaybiyyah; wild animals, birds and games used to come to them
in their stations like of which they had never seen in the past; so Allah forbade them to kill it
while they were in the condition of ihram; so that He might know who fears Him in secret." (ad-
Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: These two traditions do not go against what we have written in the
Commentary that the verse's meaning is general.
[al-Kulayni] narrates through his chains from Ahmad ibn Muhammad, about the words of Allah,
the Blessed, the Sublime: which your hands and your lances can reach; he said, "What the hands
can reach are eggs and nestlings, and what the lances can reach refers to what cannot be caught
by hands." (al-Kafi)

[al-Ayyashi] narrates, through his chains in his at-Tafsir, from Hariz, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.)
that he said, "If a muhrim (one in the condition of ihram) kills a pigeon, then in it [its expiation]
is a goat; if he kills a bird chick, then in it is a camel; and if he sets foot on an egg and breaks it,
then on him is one dirham, all these (expiations) shall be given in sadaqah at Mecca and Mina;
and this is (the meaning of) the word of Allah in His Book: Allah will certainly try you in respect
of some game which your hands will reach - eggs and chicks - and your lances - big mothers."

The author says: ash-Shaykh has narrated it in at-Tahdhib, from Hariz from the same Imam
(a.s.), giving only its last section.

ash-Shaykh narrates through his chains from Ibn Abi 'Umayr, from Hammad, from al-Halabi,
from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said, "When a muhrim kills a game, then its compensation is
(incumbent) on him, and the (killed) game will be given to a poor as sadaqah; then if he repeats
and kills another game, there is no compensation on him, and Allah will inflict retribution on
him, and (that) retribution (will be) in the next world." (at-Tahdhib)
[ash-Shaykh] narrates from al-Kulayni, from Ibn Abi 'Umayr, from some of his companions,
from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), that he said: "If a muhrim kills a game by mistake, then compensation
is incumbent on him; then if he kills it again intentionally, then he is from those on whom Allah
will inflict retribution, and he is not liable to pay expiation." (ibid.)

[ash-Shaykh] narrates from Ibn Abi 'Umayr, from Mu'awiyah ibn 'Ammar, that he said, "I said to
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), 'A muhrim has killed a game?' He said, 'He has to give its expiation.' I said,
Then if he repeats?' He said, 'He has to give expiation whenever he repeats.'" (ibid.)

The author says: As you see, the traditions differ one from another; and ash-Shaykh has
reconciled them by saying that they mean: 'If a muhrim intentionally kills a game it is incumbent
on him to give expiation; and if he intentionally repeats then there is no expiation on him and he
is among those on whom Allah will inflict retribution; and as for him who kills forgetfully, he
has to give expiation whenever he repeats.'

[ash-Shaykh] narrates through his chains from Zurarah from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) about the words of
Allah, the Mighty, the Great: as two just persons among you shall judge. "So the just is the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and the Imam after him, who shall judge, and he is just. So, when
you have known what Allah has ordered from the Messenger of Allah and the Imam, then it is
sufficient for you and you should not ask (others) about it." (ibid.)

The author says: There are several traditions of this meaning; one of which says, "I recited near
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), 'dhawa 'adlin minkum' (two just persons among you); he said, 'dhu 'adlin
minkum' (just person among you); it is among the mistakes of the scribes. And it returns to
variations of recital, as is apparent."

[al-Kulayni] narrates from az-Zuhri from 'Ali ibn al-Husayn (a.s.), that he said, "Fast in
compensation of game is obligatory; Allah, the Mighty, the Great, has said: and whoever among
you shall kill it intentionally, the compensation (of it) is the like of what he killed, from the cattle,
as two just persons among you shall judge, as an offering to be brought to the Ka'bah or the
expiation (of it) is the feeding of the poor or the equivalent of it in fasting. Well, do you know
how will the equivalent of it in fasting be? O Zuhri!" (Zuhri) says, "I said, 'I do not know.' He
said, The (price of) the game will be assessed; then that price will be broken up on wheat (i.e., it
will be seen how much wheat may be bought with that price); then the wheat will be measured in
sa' (equivalent of 3 kg.), and he will fast one day for each half a sa'.'" (al-Kafi)

[al-Kulayni] narrates through his chains from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from one of his men, from
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said, "Whoever is obligated to offer a sacrifice in his ihram, he is free
to slaughter it wherever he wishes, except the compensation of game, because Allah says: an
offering brought to the Ka 'bah." (ibid.)

al-'Ayyashi narrates from Hariz, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said about the words: Lawful
to you is the game of the sea and its food, a provision for you and for the travelers. "Its salty one,
which they eat." (And he said:) "Distinguish between the two: Every bird that lives in thickets,
lays egg in land and brings up its chick on land is a game of land; and whatever bird lives in
land, and lays egg in sea and bring up its chick (there) is among the game of the sea." (at-Tafsir)

[al-'Ayyashi narrates] from Zayd ash-Shahham that he said, "I asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), about
the word of Allah: Lawful to you is the game of the sea and its food, a provision for you and for
the travelers; he said, 'It is salty fish; also whatever you take from it as supply, even if it is not
salty, it is provision.'" (ibid.)

The author says: There are numerous traditions of this meaning narrated through Shi'ah chains
from the Imams of Ahlulbayt (a.s.)

[as-Suyuti quotes] Ibn Abi Shaybah from Mu'awiyah ibn Qurrah and Ahmad, from a man of the
Helpers, "Verily a camel of a man trod a nest of an ostrich and broke its eggs. So the Messenger
of Allah (s.a.w.) said, '(Incumbent) on you is fast of one day in lieu of every egg, or feeding of
poor.'" (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: He has also narrated this theme from Ibn Abi Shaybah, from 'Abdullah ibn
Dhakwan, from the Prophet (s.a.w.); and has also narrated it from Abu 'z-Zinad, from 'Aishah
from the Prophet (s.a.w.).

Abu 'sh-Shaykh and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated through the chain of Abu '1-Muhzim, from
the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he said, "In the eggs of ostrich it is (incumbent to pay) its price." (ibid.)

Also, he quotes Hatim from Abii Ja'far Muhammad ibn 'Ali [a.s.]: A man asked 'Ali about
sacrificial animal, from what it is (i.e. from which species it should be). He said, "From the eight
pairs." Then it seemed as if the man had some doubts; so 'Ali said, "Do you read Qur'an?" It
seemed as if the man said, "Yes." ('Ali) said, "Then have you heard Allah saying: O you who
believe! Fulfill the covenants. The cattle quadrupeds are made lawful for you... [5:1]." He said,
"Yes." ('Ali) said, "Have you heard Him saying:... and mention the name of Allah during stated
days over what He has given them of the cattle quadrupeds... [22:28]; And of the cattle (He
created) beasts of burden and those which are fit for slaughter only;... [6:142]?" He said, "Yes."
('Ali) said, "And have you heard Him saying:... two of sheep and two of goats... [6:143]? And
two of camels and two of cows... [6:144]?" He said, "Yes." ('Ali) said, "And have you heard Him
saying: O you who believe! Do not kill game while you are in the pilgrim garb... as an offering
to be brought to the Ka 'bah!" The man said, "Yes." Then (‘Ali) said, "If I killed a deer, then
what is (incumbent) on me?" He said, "A goat." ‘Ali said, "An offering to be brought to the
Ka'bah?" The man said, "Yes." Then ‘Ali said, "Allah has named it: to be brought to the Ka
'bah, as you hear." (ibid.}

Ibn Abi Hatim narrates from 'Ata' al-Khurasani that 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, 'Uthman ibn 'Affan,
‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, Ibn 'Abbas, Zayd ibn Thabit and Mu'awiyah had judged that if a muhrim kills
a game for which an offering is given in compensation, the price of that offering should be
assessed and poor persons fed from it. (ibid).

Ibn Jarir has narrated from Abu Hurayrah that he said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said,
'Lawful to you is the game of the sea and its food, a provision for you.' He said, 'Whatever dead
animals it throws (on the shore), it is its food.'" (ibid.)

The author says: Similar themes have been narrated from some companions too; but what is
narrated from the chains of Ahlu ‘l-Bayt contradicts it, as described earlier.                

[al-'Ayyashi] narrates from Aban ibn Taghlib that he said, "I said to Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), '(What
is the meaning of:) Allah has made the Ka'bah, the Sacred House, a sanctuary for the people!'
He said, 'Livelihood.'" (at-Tafsir)

The author says: The explanation of this tradition has been given earlier.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verse 100

 
ِ ‫وا هّللا َ يَا أُوْ لِي األَ ْلبَا‬
}100{ َ‫ب لَ َعلَّ ُك ْم تُ ْفلِحُون‬ ْ ُ‫ث فَاتَّق‬
ِ ‫ك َك ْث َرةُ ْال َخبِي‬
َ َ‫يث َوالطَّيِّبُ َولَوْ أَ ْع َجب‬
ُ ِ‫قُل الَّ يَ ْست َِوي ْال َخب‬
{100} Say: "The bad and the good are not equal, though the abundance of the bad may enchant
you;" so fear Allah, O men of understanding, that you may be successful.
 

Commentary
The verse seems as if it is independent and complete in itself, because its connection with the
preceding and the following verses is not clear. Therefore, one should not needlessly strive to
seek its connection with foregoing verses. It only explains a universal parable Allah has used to
describe a characteristic which distinguishes the True Religion from other prevalent religions and
customs: That consideration and respect belongs to the Truth even if the people adhering to it are
few and its band scattered; that one should rely on good and bliss even if majority has turned
away from it and powerful people have forgotten it. It is because Truth does not rely in its
intrinsic values except on sound reason; and far be it from the sound reason to lead to other than
the good of human society - the good which supports man in the affairs of life and means of
pleasant livelihood, no matter whether it agrees with majority's desires or not (and often it goes
against majority's wishes!). So it is this system prevalent in creation, and it is the basis of correct
views and opinions; it does never follow their desires, and if the Truth were to follow their
desires, the heavens and the earth would perish.

QUR'AN: Say: "The bad and the good are not equal, though the abundance of the bad may
enchant you;": Apparently, inequality of the bad and the good means that the good is better than
the bad. It is a very clear idea; therefore the speech must be an allusion to some deeper factor:
The good by it very nature enjoys a higher status than the bad; now if we suppose the opposite,
that because of some accidental development, the bad becomes better than the good, it would
mean that the bad had gradually risen and ascended the stairs until it reached a step where it
became level with the good in rank and status, before surpassing it and gaining ascendancy over
it. So, when equality between them is negated, it more clearly and forcefully would negate the
idea of the bad being better than the good.

It also makes it clear why "the bad" has been placed in this verse before "the good." It is because
the speech aims at showing that abundance of the bad does not make it better than the good; and
it could only happen if the bad rose from the abyss of vileness and meanness to the height of
nobility and glory until it became level with the good in its position and then ascended higher. If
the speaker were to say: The good and the bad are not equal,' then the motive would be to show
that the good cannot be more vile and mean than the bad, and in that case it should have
mentioned smallness of the good in place of abundance of the bad. Understand it.

Goodness and badness are two real attributes for real things found outside imagination, like
good/bad food, good/bad land. Allah says: And as for good land, its vegetation springs forth
(abundantly) by the permission of its Lord, and (as for) that which is bad (its herbage) comes
forth but scantily;... (7:58); ...and the good provisions? (7:32). If at any time, goodness and
badness are used for any type of subjective approach or situation, like good/bad judgment or
good/bad behavior, then it is based on a sort of consideration.

However, in this speech, the clauses: so fear Allah, O men of understanding, that you may be
successful, have branched out from, "The bad and the good are not equal...;" and fear of Allah or
piety results from action or inaction, while its goodness and badness emanate from metaphorical
consideration; and the sentence: "The bad and the good are not equal," is taken as a well-
accepted principle; all these factors together offer the strongest proof that goodness and badness
here connote the real things outside imagination - only then the proof will be successful. If on the
other hand, it were to describe good and bad and behavior, the meaning would not be so clear,
because every community believes that its system is the good one and what goes against its
wishes and opposes its desires is bad.

Therefore, the speech is based on another meaning which Allah has described in various places
in His Book; that is, the religion is based on nature and creation, and what the religion invites to
is the life that is good, and what it forbids is the bad; that Allah has not made lawful except the
good things, and has not forbidden except the bad things. Allah says: Then set your face upright
for religion in natural devotion (to truth); the nature made by Allah in which He has made men;
there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion,... (30:30); ...and makes lawful to
them the good things and makes unlawful to them impure things,... (7:157); Say: "Who has
prohibited the embellishment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants and the good
provisions?"... (7:32)

It comes out from above that the sentence: "The bad and the good are not equal, though the
abundance of the bad may enchant you," is a parable to show that religious laws, which are based
on the things' good or bad inherent attributes, do affect the human bliss and misery; that they do
not vary because of smallness or abundance; the good is good even it is in small quantity, and the
bad is bad even it is in abundance.

Thus it is incumbent on every man of understanding to distinguish the bad from the good, and to
decide that the good is better than the bad. He must realize that man is obligated to exert himself
to make his life blissful, and to opt for the good against the bad; he must fear Allah, his Lord,
and proceed on His path. He should not be deceived when he sees the multitude of the people
addicted to heinous deeds and perilous characteristics and conditions; base desires should not
turn him away from following the truth, and fear or favor should not influence him in anyway.
Probably then he will succeed in attaining the human bliss.

QUR'AN: so fear Allah, O men of understanding, that you may be successful: It branches out
from the preceding parable. The meaning: Piety and fear of Allah are connected with divine
shari'ah, which in its turn is based on creative good and bad for looking after the interest of the
man's bliss and success; and no man of reason can entertain any doubt about it. Therefore, O men
of understanding! It is incumbent on you to fear Allah by acting on His shari'ah, in order that
you may be successful.
Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses
101-102
 
‫وا َع ْنهَا ِحينَ يُنَ َّز ُل ْالقُرْ آنُ تُ ْب َد لَ ُك ْم َعفَا هّللا ُ َع ْنهَا َوهّللا ُ َغفُو ٌر َحلِي ٌم‬
ْ ُ‫وا ع َْن أَ ْشيَاء إِن تُ ْب َـد لَ ُك ْم تَس ُْؤ ُك ْم َوإِن تَسْأَل‬
ْ ُ‫وا الَ تَسْأَل‬
ْ ُ‫يَا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬
}102{ َ‫ُوا بِهَا َكافِ ِرين‬ ْ ‫} قَ ْد َسأَلَهَا قَوْ ٌم ِّمن قَ ْبلِ ُك ْم ثُ َّم أَصْ بَح‬101{
{101} O you who believe! Do not put questions about things which if declared to you may
trouble you, and if you question about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they shall be
declared to you; Allah has pardoned of this, and Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing. {102} A people
before you indeed asked such questions, and then became disbelievers in them.
 

Commentary
The two verses clearly have no connection with the preceding ones, and their meaning does not
require any relation with any previous talk for clarification of any of their part. Therefore, there
is no need for the over-exertion and the mental gymnastic which many exegetes have indulged
into to discover the verses' connection with the theme preceding ones, or with the beginning of
the chapter, or with its; so it is better to ignore it altogether.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Do not put questions about things which if declared to you may
trouble you... and Allah is Forgiving,
Forbearing: al-Ibda' (to declare, to disclose); sa'ahu is opposite of sarrahu (it pleased him).

The verse forbids the believers to put questions about such things, which may pain and displease
them if disclosed. It has left it vague who was the person asked from. But the sentence: "if you
question about them while the Qur'an is being revealed", as well as the next verse: A people
before you indeed asked such questions, then became disbelievers on account of them, clearly
show that it is the Prophet (s.a.w.) who is intended here - that the believers should not put such
questions to him which would result in such and such. However, the underlying reason of this
prohibition conveys the idea that it covers also other situations; that it forbids man to enquire
about, and search, the things Allah has left vague and put a veil on them which cannot be
removed by normal means and usual ways. Obviously, there is a strong chance of misery and
perdition if one were to acquire somehow the knowledge of such realities as, for example, the
date when he would die, the cause of his death, the life-span of his near and dear ones, the fall of
his kingdom and honor; probably the very knowledge might cause his perdition or misery.

The system of life has been streamlined by Allah and implemented by Him in the world. He has
disclosed some things and put veil on the others. He has not made open what He has but for an
underlying reason; and has not hidden what He has but for an underlying reason. Therefore, to
cause hiding of what is apparent or to disclose what is hidden would disrupt the system, which
covers the universe. It is not unlike the human life based on the body-system which is made up
of various powers, organs and limbs - if one of it is removed from, or added to it, a major
function of life would be lost, and may be at times the life itself- or its meaning - will be ruined.
The second factor, which the verse has left vague, is the nature of the things about which they are
forbidden to ask. It only describes them as being such that they may pain or trouble you if they
are disclosed. There is no doubt that the words: "which if declared to you may trouble you," are
the attribute of the preceding word: "things." It is a conditional sentence that shows that if the
condition takes place, its concomitant is bound to take place. As those things were of such a
nature that if disclosed they would certainly trouble them; therefore, putting questions about
them and seeking to unearth their hidden affairs was tantamount to asking to be troubled and
pained.

Objection: A sane person does not seek that which would give him pain or put him in trouble.
Therefore, it would have been better if the prohibition was rephrased, for example: do not put
question about things that contain factors which if disclosed to you may trouble you. Or, do not
put questions about things which you are not sure would not trouble you if disclosed to you.

Someone has replied to it in a really strange way. He has said: "It is established in the Arabic
grammar that the particle, in (if) describes a condition which is not certain to take place, to
appear; and the concomitant follows the condition in coming into existence or not coming; as
Qur'an has used in, and not idha (if, when) [which gives a shade of certainty], it proves that mere
possibility of its disclosure being troublesome, is sufficient to forbid putting questions about it."

COMMENT: He has clearly erred in this reply. Would that I knew which rule of the Arabic
grammar has said that a condition followed by in was not sure to take place; and that
consequently its concomitant too was not certain to come into being. What does it mean when
we say: 'If (in) you come to me I'll bestow honor upon you?' Doesn't it mean that if you came
you'll certainly be bestowed honor upon? Therefore, his view that, mere possibility of its
disclosure being troublesome is sufficient to forbid putting questions about it, could hold water
only if the verse had forbidden asking about things which could possibly trouble them if
disclosed. But as you already know the fact is different; it forbids putting question about things,
which were definitely going to trouble them if disclosed. So the objection remains unanswered.

Another Reply: Similar in weakness is another view, based on some traditions, that the: "things
which if declared to you may trouble you", points to those unseen things which some people
appear eager to know, like dates of deaths, final result of many affairs, flow of the good and the
bad, and avidity to unearth the hidden destiny, which by nature is not free from what gives pain
to man; for example, when a man asks how many years have remained in his life, how will he
die, what will be his end result, who was his father and so on; and such questions were usually
asked in the Era of Ignorance. Therefore, the verse forbids them to put questions about such
things; because usually such disclosures may expose information which may afflict man with
pain and grief; for example, that his death is nearer, or that his end is disastrous, or that his real
father is someone other than the one he is affiliated to. These are the things which usually throw
man in trouble and sorrow; and there was a possibility that if questions about them were put to
the Prophet (s.a.w.), he would answer them with what would not please the questioner, and
arrogance and pride might push him to refute the words of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and become a
disbeliever, as the next verse points to it: A people before you indeed asked such questions, and
then became disbelievers on account of them.
COMMENT: Although this interpretation seems perfect at the first glance, yet it does not agree
with the divine words: and if you question about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they
shall be declared to you - whether we say that this verse permits such questions at the time of the
revelation of Qur'an, or that it emphatically forbids it at that time by pointing to the fact that at
other times the replier, i.e. the Prophet (s.a.w.) has the option of not replying to such questions,
keeping in view the well-being of the questioners; but such things are in fact unveiled before his
eyes, their reality is known to him from the beginning; therefore you should not ask about them
while the Qur'an is being revealed.

As for its disagreement with the first meaning, it is because the questions about such things, by
their nature, entail scandals; therefore, there is no sense in saying that such questioning is
allowed while the Qur'an is being revealed, as the scandal will remain even then.

As for its being unfit with the second meaning, it is accepted that the time of the revelation of
Qur'an was the time of disclosure and unveiling for those things which needed to be disclosed
and unveiled; yet this especially was reserved to realities of cognition and the laws of do's and
don'ts, and related affairs. However, fixing the age of Zayd, disclosing how 'Amr will die,
identifying who was that man's father and things like that have no connection at all with the
Qur'anic descriptions. In this backdrop, there appears no reason why the prohibition of putting
questions about such things should be followed by the clause: "and if you question about them
while the Qur'an is being revealed, they shall be declared to you."

Therefore, the more appropriate reply is the one inferred from some other persons' talk that: The
next verse: A people before you indeed asked such questions, and then became disbelievers on
account of them, as well as the clause: "and if you question about them while the Qur'an is being
revealed, they shall be declared to you," show that the things questioned about were connected
with the laid down laws; the verses discourage and forbid the believers to seek minute details
regarding those laws, because too much interrogation and too deep delving in questions would
certainly lead to harder details and put the questioners in greater troubles, as Allah has described
in the story of the cow of the Israelites. The more they indulged in enquiry, asking for more and
more particulars of the cow which they were told to slaughter the more Allah went on tightening
the conditions and narrowing their choices.

The clause: "Allah has pardoned of this," is apparently an independent sentence, put here to
explain the reason of the prohibition: "do not put question about things which if declared to you
may trouble you."

Some exegetes have said: The clause: "Allah has pardoned of this", is the attribute of "things";
and the speech has to be re-arranged as follows: do not put questions about things, which Allah
has pardoned, which if declared to you may trouble you.

COMMENT: This interpretation is not correct; the verb: 'afa (pardoned) has taken the
preposition: 'an, and it is the best proof that the things pardoned are those which are related to
shari'ah and laws; had they been from among the creative affairs, it was almost certain to be
described as, Allah has pardoned this.
In any case, the reasoning in terms of pardoning, indicates that the word: "things", refers to the
particulars of the laws and shari'ah, and the conditions pertaining to them; and makes it clear
that if the Qur'an is silent about them, it is not because Allah was unmindful of them or had
neglected them; it is but a concession from Allah to His servant which He has bestowed on them
to make their lives easier; as He says [at the end of the verse]: "And Allah is Forgiving,
Forbearing." When they put questions asking for an order's particulars, they make themselves
liable to more hardship, to further tightening - and it is bound to afflict them with pain and grief
as in this way they reject the divine pardon which was offered to them to make life easy to them,
and to affirm the divine attributes of forgiveness and forbearance.

The theme of the verse may be expressed in our words as follows: 'O you who believe! Do not
ask the Prophet (s.a.w.) about the things regarding which the shari'ah is silent, Allah has
pardoned them and has not spoken about them in order to make your life easy and free from
burden; because they are such that if you ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they
shall be declared to you, and they will put you in trouble and pain if they are disclosed to you.'

The above discourse has made it clear that:

The divine words: "and if you question about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they shall
be declared to you", are the ending part of the prohibition, as has been explained; they are not
intended to erase the prohibition of questioning at the time when the Qur'an is being revealed, as
some people have thought.

The clause: "Allah has pardoned of it," is an independent sentence, put here to give the reason of
the prohibition of the questioning; it thus gives the benefit of adjective, although grammatically
it is not an adjective.

The speech ends with the clause: "and Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing," although the speech
contains prohibition which does not agree with the attributes of forgiveness and forbearance.
Therefore these two attributes are related to the pardon mentioned in the clause: "Allah has
pardoned of it," and not to the prohibition contained in the verse.

QUR'AN: A people before you indeed asked such questions, and they became disbelievers on
account of them: It is said that sa 'alahu and sa'ala 'anhu have the same meaning: He asked
about him; thumma (then) indicates delay in terms of speaking, not in terms of time; biha (in
them) is connected with, disbelievers, as the verse apparently shows; it is intended to forbid
putting questions concerning the conditions of laws and orders which were left vague at the time
of legislation. Thus, the disbelief here indicates disbelief in the laws as it entails diffidence of
soul and straitness of hearts against their acceptance.

There is also a possibility that bi in it may be used to show the cause; then the meaning will be:
on account of it; but this is a farfetched idea.

Although the verse has not named the people who had turned disbelievers, yet there are some
episodes mentioned in the Qur'an to which the verse may be applied, like that of the table
(among the Christians' stories) and several others related to the ummah of Musa and others.

Traditions
[as-Suyuti] quotes Ibn Jarir, Abu 'sh-Shaykh and Ibn Marduwayh who have narrated from Abu
Hurayrah that he said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), delivered a sermon before us, and said,
'O people! Allah has prescribed hajj for you.' 'Ukashah ibn Muhsin stood up and said, 'Every
year? O Messenger of Allah!' (The Prophet) said, 'As for it, if I had said, "Yes," it would have
become obligatory; and if it had become obligatory and then you were to leave it, you would
have gone astray. Remain silent before me when I am silent before you, as those who were
before you had perished only because of their questionings and their discord against their
prophets.' Then Allah revealed: O you who believe! Do not put questions about things which if
declared to you may trouble you. ." (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: This story has been narrated by several narrators from Abu Hurayrah and Abu
Amamah, etc.; and it has been narrated in Majma'u'l-bayan and other Shi'ite books. It fits on the
explanation that we have written earlier.

[as-Suyuti] quotes Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim who have narrated from as-Suddi about the word
of Allah: O you who believe! Do not put questions about things which if declared to you..., that
he said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), became angry one day, and stood up to address the
people; and he said, 'Ask me, for you will not ask me about anything but I shall inform you about
it.' So there stood up a Qurayshite man from Banu Sahm, 'Abdullah ibn Hadhaqah by name - and
people used to vilify him - and said, 'O Messenger of Allah! Who is my father?' He said, 'Your
father is so-and-so (and he asserted his relationship to his father).' 'Umar betook himself to him,
kissed his foot and said, 'O Messenger of Allah! We are pleased with Allah as the Lord, and with
you as the Prophet, and with the Qur'an as the leader; so pardon us, may Allah pardon you!' So
he continued beseeching him until his anger subsided. It was on that day that he said, The child
belongs to the bed and for the adulterer is the stone.' And it was (then) revealed to him: And
people before you indeed asked such questions, [and then became disbelievers on account of
them]." (ibid.)

The author says: This tradition is narrated through several chains with variations in their
wordings. However you have seen earlier that it does not fit on the verse.

[as-Suyuti] quotes Ibn Jarir, Ibnu 1-Mundhhir and al-Hakim (who said that it is correct), who
narrated from Tha'labah al-Khashni that he said, "Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said,
'Verily Allah has laid down (some) limits, so do not transgress them; and has prescribed for you
(some) obligations, so do not neglect them; and has made (some) things unlawful, so do not
commit them; and has left (some) things, not because of forgetfulness, but as a mercy from
Himself for you, so accept them and do not delve in them.'" (ibid.)

'Ali (a.s.) said, "Verily Allah has enjoined upon you some duties, so do not neglect them; and
laid down for you some limits, so do not transgress them; and has forbidden you some things, so
do not commit them; and has passed over some things, and has not left them because of
forgetfulness, so do not force yourself concerning them." (Majma'u'l-bayan; Tafsir as-Safi)

[al-Kulayni] narrates through his chains from Abu'l-Jarud that he said, "Abu Ja'far (a.s.), said,
'When I tell you anything, you should ask me for its authority from the Book of Allah.'
Thereafter he said in one of his talks, 'Verily the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had forbidden idle
talk, squandering of wealth and excessive questioning.' It was said to him, 'O Son of the
Messenger of Allah! Where is it from the Book of Allah?' He said, 'Verily Allah, the Mighty, the
Great, says: There is no good in most of their secret talks except (in his) who enjoins charity or
goodness or reconciliation between people [4:114]; and He has said: And do not give away your
property which Allah has made for you a (means of) support to the weak of understanding [4:5];
and He has said: do not put questions about things which if declared to you may trouble you.'"
[5:101] (al-Kafi)

[al-'Ayyashi] narrates from Ahmad ibn Muhammad that he said: "I wrote to Abu '1-Hasan ar-
Rida (a.s.), [he wrote its reply] at the end of which he wrote: 'Have not you [people] been
forbidden to ask too many questions? Yet you refuse to desist! Beware of it, for those who were
before you had perished only because of abundance of their questions. So Allah, the Blessed, the
Sublime, said: O you who believe! Do not put questions about things which if declared to you
may trouble you, ...A people before you indeed asked such questions, and then became
disbelievers in them.'" (at-Tafsir)

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses

103-104
 
‫} َوإِ َذا‬103{ َ‫ب َوأَ ْكثَ ُرهُ ْم الَ يَ ْعقِلُون‬ َ ‫ُوا يَ ْفتَرُونَ َعلَى هّللا ِ ْال َك ِذ‬
ْ ‫صيلَ ٍة َوالَ َح ٍام َولَـ ِك َّن الَّ ِذينَ َكفَر‬
ِ ‫َما َج َع َل هّللا ُ ِمن بَ ِحي َر ٍة َوالَ َسآئِبَ ٍة َوالَ َو‬
{ ‫ُون‬ ‫قِي َل لَهُ ْم تَ َعالَوْ ْا إِلَى َما أَن َز َل هّللا ُ َوإِلَى ال َّرسُو ِل قَالُوا َح ْسبُنَا َما َو َج ْدنَا َعلَ ْي ِه آبَاءنَا أ َولَوْ َكانَ آبَا ُؤهُ ْم الَ يَ ْعلَ ُمونَ َش ْيئًا َوالَ يَ ْهتَد َـ‬
َ ْ
}104
{103} Allah has not ordained (the making of) a baheerah or a saaibah or a waseelah or a haami
but those who disbelieve fabricate a lie against Allah, and most of them do not understand.
{104} And when it is said to them: "Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger,"
they say: "That on which we found our fathers is sufficient for us." What! Even though their
fathers knew nothing and did not follow the right way
 
Commentary
QUR'AN: Allah has not ordained (the making of) a baheerah or a saaibah or a waseelah or a
haami…; These were some cattle-groups the people of the Era of Ignorance had made for them
some rules which were based on respect and accorded them a sort of freedom, Allah in this verse
rebuts the idea that He had might have made any of it. [The literal meaning: Allah has not made].
This negated making is related to those catties attributes, not their beings; because their beings,
their selves, are Allah's creatures, without any doubt. Likewise, their attributes, so far as they are
attributes, are created by Allah. What may be positively or negatively ascribed to Allah, are the
self-same attributes inasmuch as they were thought to be the source of the rules, which those
Arabs claimed for them. Thus, the negation of making of baheerah and its group means that
Allah had not ordained those rules or laws which were ascribed to them and were well-known
among Arabs.

The exegetes differ about the meanings of the names of these four kinds of cattle, resulting in
difference about details of their related laws - as you will soon see - yet it is accepted by all that
those laws accorded them some sort of freedom, respect and care for their well-being; and that
three groups were of camels, i.e. bahirah, saibah and haami, and one, waseelah, was of goat.

al-Baheerah: Majma'u'l-bayan says: It was a she-camel which gave birth five times, the last one
being a male calf; they used to cleave its ear a wide tear; they refrained from riding or
slaughtering it; it was not driven away from any water or pasture, and even if a tired traveler
found it, he would not ride it. (Reported from az-Zajjaj.)

Also, it is said that when a she-camel had given birth five times, they looked at the fifth issue; if
it was a male, they slaughtered it and men and women all partook of it; but if it was a female,
they cleaved its ear and it was called al-baheerah: its fur was not shorn; if it was slaughtered, the
name of Allah was not mentioned on it; nor was it used for loading or riding; women were
forbidden to taste even a drop of its milk or to get any benefit from it - its milk and benefits were
reserved for men until it died; when it died, men and women joined in eating it. (Reported from
Ibn 'Abbas.)

And it is said that al-baheerah was the daughter of as-saaibah. (Reported from Muhammad ibn
Ishaq.)

as-Saaibah: Majma'u'l-bayan says: It was what they used to let go free; a man made a vow that
if he returned from his journey, or if he recovered from illness, or so on, then his she-camel
would be saaibah; then it would be treated like al-baheerah, in that it would not be used in any
way, nor would it be kept back from any water or pasture. (Reported from az-Zajjaj; and also it is
the saying of 'Alqamah.)

Also, it is said that it was a she-camel that was freed for idols. Usually, a man freed whatever he
wished from among his property; then he brought it to custodians, i.e. servants of their dieties,
and they fed way-farers of its milk and so on. (Reported from Ibn 'Abbas and Ibn Mas'ud.)

Also, it is said that when a she-camel gave birth to ten females consequently, without any male
calf coming in between, it was made free; they did not ride it, nor did they shear its fur, and
except for a guest, no one could drink its milk; if after that she again bore a female, its ear was
torn and it was left to roam with its mother; and it was that was called al-baheerah. (Reported
from Muhammad ibn Ishaq.)

al-Waseelah: Majma'u'l-bayan says: It was taken out from goats. When a goat gave birth to a
female kid, it belonged to them, and if it bore a male, it was slaughtered to their dieties; but if it
gave birth to a male and a female together, they said: It has joined its brother; and then the male
kid was not slaughtered for their dieties. (Reported from az-Zajjaj.)

Also, it has been said that when a goat gave birth seven times, then if the seventh was a male kid,
they slaughtered it for their deities, and its meat was exclusively reserved for men; and if it was a
female kid, it was allowed to live and joined the herd. But if the seventh pregnancy brought forth
male and female kids, they said: The sister has joined its brother, as it is unlawful to us; so both
became unlawful and their benefit and milk was reserved for men to the exclusion of women.
(Reported from Ibn Mas'ud and Muqatil)

Also, it is said that al-waseelah was a goat which brought forth ten female kids in five
pregnancies, without there being any male among them. Then they said she has joined. Then
whatever was born to her after that, was reserved for men, the women being excluded from it.
(Reported from Muhammad ibn Ishaq.)

al-Haami: Majma'u'l-bayan says: It is a male camel. When a male camel had sired ten
pregnancies, they used to say: Its back is protected. Nothing was loaded on it, nor was it
prevented from water or pasture. (Reported from Ibn 'Abbas and Ibn Mas'ud, and also from Abu
'Ubaydah and az-Zajjaj.)

Also, it is said that when a male camel's child's child was impregnated, they said: Its back has
become protected; so it was not ridden. (Reported from al-Farra'.)

Although there is all this difference in meanings of these names, there is a strong probability that
it portrays the variation in different tribes' usage and customs, because such superstitions were
wide spread among ancient barbaric nations.

Be it as it may. The verse aims at refuting the rules they had fabricated for these four types of the
cattle, wrongly ascribing them to Allah. Look at the divine words: "Allah has not ordained (the
making of) a baheerah or a saaibah or a waseelah or a haami"; followed immediately by the
clause: "but those who disbelieve fabricate a lie against Allah."

This latter clause appears to answer a supposed question: When Allah denied ordaining
baheerah and other types of cattle, it was as if somebody had asked: Then what is the position of
the claims made by disbelievers?' And the answer came: those who disbelieve fabricate a lie
against Allah. Then it was further explained, adding the clause: "and most of them do not
understand." It means that their positions differ in this fabrication; most of them fabricate against
Allah what they do and they do not understand; while the remaining small group do understand
the Truth, knowing well that what they ascribe to Allah is mere fabrication. These are the leaders
whose words are listened to and who manage the affairs of the masses; and they are the obstinate
and stubborn ones.

QUR'AN: And when it is said to them: "Come to what Allah has revealed and to the
Messenger," they say: "That on which we found our fathers is sufficient for us." What! Even
though their fathers knew nothing and did not follow the right way: It describes their attitude
when they were invited to come to what Allah had revealed and to the Messenger whose
responsibility was to convey the message. That call invited them to Truth, devoid of fabrication,
and knowledge clear of ignorance. The preceding verse gathers fabrication and lack of
understanding together on their side; obviously nothing remains for the opposite side - the side of
Allah - except truth and knowledge.

But they did not discard it except because of blind imitation, as they said: That on which we
found our fathers is sufficient for us.

at-Taqlid (imitation, following) is not always wrong; sometimes it might Be correct with some
conditions - and that is when an ignorant person follows a knowledgeable one. This 'following' is
the factor on which the progress of human society is based in all those affairs of life in which
man is unable to acquire necessary knowledge. However, if an ignorant man follows another
ignorant one in his ignorance, then it is highly condemnable in the eyes of the understanding
people. Likewise, it is also objectionable if a learned man follows another learned one, going
against his own deductions discarding it for another man's findings.

That is why Allah has refuted their claim and said: "What! Even though their fathers knew
nothing and did not follow the right way." It indicates that reason - if there is reason - does not
allow a man to refer to him who has no knowledge, nor does he follow the right way. This is the
way of life, and it does not permit to follow a path which is not free of dangers, and whose
condition is not known - neither independently nor by following an expert.

Probably, the addition of: "and did not follow the right way", after the clause: "knew nothing",
aims at completing the qualifications of speech, in its true sense; although reference by an
ignorant person to another ignorant one is condemnable, but it is so only when the followed one
is like the follower in ignorance without there being any distinction between the two. But if the
followed one, even if ignorant, proceeds on the way guided by a knowledgeable expert, then he
follows the right way, and then there is no blame if somebody follows him on the way; because
ultimately it turns out to be an imitation of a person who knows the details of the path.

It is now clear from above that the clause: "even though their fathers knew nothing", was not
enough by itself to complete the proof against them, because there would have remained a
possibility that their ignorant fathers might have been following learned guides, in which case
there was no blame on them. Therefore, that possibility was removed by adding the clause: "and
did not follow the right way", so there was no justification in imitating such people.

The preceding verse: Allah has not ordained (the making of) a baheerah..., had shown that those
people either had no understanding, (and they were the majority) or were stubborn and arrogant
[and they were the misleading leaders]; and it had made it clear that such people did not deserved
to be addressed by Allah, or to be presented with divine arguments. That is the reason that this
verse does not argue with them directly; it seems to address another group and avoids talking to
them face to face; and therefore it says: "What! Even though their fathers knew nothing and did
not follow the right way.

There has been given in the first volume (English volume 1)  of this adoption of other people's
concepts and rulings, which you may refer for details.

The verse also makes it clear that referring to the Book of Allah and to His Messenger, i.e., to the
sunnah is not a blameworthy imitation and following.

Traditions
It is narrated in Tafsiru 1-Burhan from as-Saduq, through his chains, from Muhammad ibn
Muslim, from Abu Abdillah (a.s.) that he said about the word of Allah, the Might, the Great:
Allah has not ordained (the making of) a baheerah or a saaibah or a waseelah or a haami. "The
people of (the Era of) Ignorance used to say, when a she-camel brought forth two calves in one
pregnancy, 'it has joined'; then they did not allow its slaughter or partaking of its meat; and when
it bore ten (calves), they declared it to be saaibah; then they did not allow riding it or eating its
meat; and haami   wasthe male camel, they did not allow it [i.e. riding or eating it]. So, Allah
revealed that He had not ordained prohibition of any of these things."

[al-Bahrani says:] Then Ibn Babawayh says: "It has been narrated that al-bahirah was a she-
camel, when it gave birth five times, then if the fifth calf was a male, they slaughtered it (the
calf) and men and women partook of it; and if the fifth was a female they tore its ear, and its
meat and milk was unlawful to women, but if it died then it became lawful to women. as-Saibah
was a camel, which was freed by nadhr (vow); a man vowed that if Allah gave him recovery
from illness or conveyed him to his home, he would do so.

"And al-wasilah was a goat. If a goat gave birth in seven pregnancies, and the seventh kid was a
male, it was slaughtered, and men and women ate from it, but if it was a female, it was joined to
the herd; and if there were two kids, a male and a female, they said: 'It has joined its brother;'
then it was not slaughtered, and its meat was unlawful for women, except that it died (of itself),
the eating it was lawful for men and women.

"And al-ham was a stallion, when a child of its child was (ready to be) ridden, they said: 'Its back
is indeed protected.'" Then he (al-Bahrani) said: "Also, it is narrated that haami is a camel which
brought forth ten pregnancies; so they said: 'Its back is indeed protected;' so it was not ridden,
nor was it prevented from any pasture or water."

The author says: There are other traditions from the Shi'ite and Sunnite chains, regarding the
meanings of these names: baheerah, saaibah, waseelah and haami, some other have been quoted
above from Majma'u'l-bayan.

What is certain about their meanings, is that these groups of cattle enjoyed some freedom in the
Era of Ignorance, and there were related laws, for example, it was not allowed to ride them or eat
their meat, and they were never prevented from any pasture or water; also, that waseelah was
from goats and the other three from camels.

Ibn 'Abbas has narrated from the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he said: "Verily 'Amr ibn Luhi ibn Qam'ah
ibn Khandaf became king of Mecca. He was the first who changed the religion of Isma'il and
obtained idols and put up graven images and invented baheerah, saaibah, waseelah and haami."
(The Messenger of Allah, s.a.w. said:) "And indeed I saw him in the Fire, the smell of his guts
troubles the people of the Fire." Also, it is narrated that [the Holy Prophet said, "I saw him]
dragging his guts in the Fire."

The author says: as-Suyuti has narrated this chains from Ibn 'Abbas and others.

as-Suyuti quotes 'Abdu 'r-Razzaq, Ibn Abi Shaybah, 'Abd ibn Hamid and Ibn Jarir who narrated
from Zayd ibn Aslam that he said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), said 'Verily I know the first
man who invented saaibah and fixed idols, and the first man who changed the religion of
Ibrahim.' They said, 'Who was he, O Messenger of Allah!' He said, 'Amr ibn Luhi, of Banu Ka'b;
I had indeed seen him dragging his guts in the Fire.' [Then he said:] 'And I know who put marks
on dedicated animals.' They said, 'Who was he, O Messenger of Allah?' He said, 'A man from
Banu Mudlij; he had two she-camels, and he tore up their ears and forbade (to himself) their milk
and backs; and he said, "These two are for Allah." Thereafter, he felt the need of them, so he
drank their milk and rode (on) their backs.' He (the Prophet) said, 'And indeed I saw him in the
Fire, and the two (camels) were shattering him with their mouths and trampling him down with
their hooves.'" (ad-Durr 1-manthur)

[as-Suyuti] quotes Ahmad, 'Abd ibn Hamid, al-Hakim at-Tirmidhi (in Nawadiru'l-usul),Ibn Jarir,
Ibnu '1-Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim and al-Bayhaqi (in al-Asma' wa 's-sifaf) who narrated from Abu
'1-Ahwas, from his father, that he said, "I came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) wearing
shabby garments. So he said to me, 'Do you have some wealth?' I said, 'Yes.' He said, 'What type
of wealth?' I said, 'From every kind, camels, goats, horses and slaves.' He said, 'When Allah has
bestowed on you, it should be seen on you.' Then he said, 'Do your camels give birth to (calves
with) unimpaired ears?' I said, 'Yes; and does camel give birth except like this.' He said, Then
perhaps you take a razor and cut off the ears of a group of them and then you say: "It is a
baheerah" and split the ears of (another) group of them, and then you say: "It is separated?'" I
said, 'Yes.' (The Prophet) said, 'Don't do it; whatever Allah has given you is lawful to you.' Then
he said, 'Allah has not ordained (the making of) a baheerah or a saaibah or a waseelah or a
haami.'" (ibid.)
Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verse 105
 
}105{ َ‫ض َّل إِ َذا ا ْهتَ َد ْيتُ ْم إِلَى هّللا ِ َمرْ ِج ُع ُك ْم َج ِميعًا فَيُنَبِّئُ ُكم بِ َما ُكنتُ ْم تَ ْع َملُون‬
َ ‫وا َعلَ ْي ُك ْم أَنفُ َس ُك ْم الَ يَضُرُّ ُكم َّمن‬
ْ ُ‫يَا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬
{105} O you who believe! Take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on
the right way; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will inform you of what you did.
 

Commentary
The verse enjoins the believers to take care of themselves and adhere to the path of their
guidance; they should not be worried because a group of people has gone astray; everyone is to
return to Allah, and He is to judge everyone according to his deeds.
The speech contains very deep meanings.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you
are on the right way;...: 'Alaykum anfusakum (translated here, take care of your souls): 'Alaykum
is a verbal noun, and means, adhere; your soul is its objective; literally it means, adhere to your
souls.

It is known that going astray and being on the right way - the opposites - take place when one
proceeds on a way. If one adheres to the middle of the road, he reaches to the end of the road,
and it is the destination that he had intended to arrive at in his life's journey. On the other hand, if
he was not serious in his proceeding and deviated from the right path, then he goes astray and
misses the intended goal. The verse supposes that man has got a path to tread on and a
destination to arrive at; sometimes he adheres to the way and is guided aright; at other times he
deviates from it and is led astray. However, there is no other destination that a man aims at
except the blissful life and good end. Yet the verse declares that to Allah is the return to Whom
all have to return - those who are guided aright as well as those who go astray.

The reward that a man wants to get in his natural proceeding is only with Allah; the guided ones
achieve it and the misled ones are deprived of it. It inevitably means that all the paths used by the
people of guidance and all the ways trodden upon by the people of misguidance finally end at
Allah, and with Him is the intended destination, although those paths and ways vary in
conveying the man to desire and success or beating him with failure and loss; and likewise
regarding nearness and distance; as Allah says: O man! Surely thou art striving to thy Lord, a
hard striving, so that thou art to meet Him (84:6); ...now surely the party of Allah are the
successful ones (58:22); Didn't you see those who changed Allah's favor for ungratefulness and
made their people to alight into the abode of perdition (14:28); ...then verily I am very near; I
answer the prayer of suppliant when he calls on Me, so they should answer My call and believe
in Me that they may walk in the right way (2:186); ...and (as for) those who do not believe, there
is a heaviness in their ears and it is obscure to them; these shall be called to from a far-off place
(41:44).

Allah has made it clear in these verses that all men are unavoidably proceeding to Him; the road
for some of them is short and it leads to guidance and success, while that for the others is long
and it does not end at bliss and happiness, but takes the walker to destruction and perdition.

In short, the verse supposes for the believers and the disbelievers two paths, both of which end at
Allah; and it directs the believers to look after their own interests and to turn away from the
others, i.e., from the people of misguidance. They should not weary themselves thinking about
those people; because their account is on their Lord, not on the believers; these believers will not
be asked about them, so why should they involve themselves with them. Thus the verse is near in
meaning to another verse: Say to those who believe (that) they forgive those who do not hope the
days of Allah that He may reward a people for what they earn (45:14). And similar is the
connotation of the verse: This is a people that have passed away; they shall have what they
earned and you shall have what you earn, and you shall not be called upon to answer for what
they did (2:134).

Therefore, a believer must remain occupied only in that which concerns his soul by proceeding
on the path of guidance; he should not be shaken by what he sees of misguidance of the people
and pervasion of sins among them; he should not waste his time with involvement in their
affairs. Truth is truth even if abandoned, and falsehood is falsehood even if taken up, as Allah
says: Say: "The bad and the good are not equal, though the abundance of the bad may enchant
you; so fear Allah, O men of understanding, that you may be successful." (5:100); And not alike
are the good and the evil... (41:34).

In the light of the above discourse, the words of Allah: "he who errs cannot hurt you when you
are on the right way," are a sort of illusion which aims at forbidding the believers to be
influenced by misguidance of those who are misled, as it may encourage them to leave the way
of guidance, and to think that the present world does not support religion and does not allow
them to be involved in spiritual affairs, as these things are remnants of the ancient simple
customs whose time has passed away. Allah says: And they say: "If we follow the guidance with
you, we shall be carried off from our country. "... (28:57).

It forbids them -also to fear the others' misguidance and neglect their own guidance; in this way
they would remain engaged in the others' affairs and would forget their own selves; thus they
would become like the others. Actually, what is incumbent on a believer is only to call towards
his Lord, enjoin the good, and forbid the evil. In short he is to arrange the normal causes, and
then he should leave the affairs of the effects in the hands of Allah, because to Him belong all the
affairs. He has not been told to put himself in perdition in trying to rescue others from peril; and
he shall not be called upon to account for what others had done; he is not an overseer to check
others' activities. Thus the verse is similar in meaning to what the Qur'an says in other places:
Then may be you will kill yourself with grief, sorrowing over them, if they do not believe in this
announcement. Surely We have made whatever is on the earth an embellishment for it, so that
We may try them (as to) which of them is best in deed. And most surely We will make what is on
it bare ground without herbage (18:6-8). And even if there were a Qur'an with which the
mountains were made to pass away, or the earth were travelled over with it, or the dead were
made to speak thereby; nay! The commandment is wholly Allah's. Have not yet those who
believe known that if Allah had willed He would certainly guide all the people?... (13:31)
This explanation shows that this verse is not in conflict with those of calling the people, and
those telling the believers to enjoin good and forbid evil; because it only forbids the believers to
remain involved in the people's misguidance, forgetting their own guidance to the right way. In
other words, they should not put their own souls in perdition while endeavoring to rescue others
from peril.

Moreover, calling the others to Allah, and enjoining good and forbidding evil are a part of a
believer's involvement with the affairs of his own self, and of his advancing on the path of his
Lord. How can this verse be considered as going against the verses of the Call or those of
enjoining good and forbidding evil, or taken to be abrogating them, while Allah has counted
these factors as the designation of this religion and a foundation upon which it has been built; as
Allah says: Say: "This is my way: I invite (you) to Allah; with clear sight (are) I and he who
follows me;..." (12:108); You are the best nation raised up for (the benefit of) men; you enjoin
what is right and forbid the wrong... (3:110).

What is incumbent on a believer is this: that he should invite to Allah with clear sight, and
should enjoin the good and forbid the evil, aiming only at discharging a duty imposed upon him
by Allah. He is not expected to kill himself in grief [if they do not listen] or to exert himself
beyond the limit trying to influence the misguided people, as this is not his duty.

The verse proposes that there is one path for the believers that leads them aright, and another one
for the disbelievers that misleads them to error. Then it orders the believers to adhere to their
souls (as it says, 'alaykum anfusakum, which literally means, adhere to your souls). All this
shows that the soul of the believer itself is the path which he should tread on and adhere to;
exhorting one to a path conforms with exhortation to adhere to it, to never leave it; it does not
connote adherence to the walker of the way; as we clearly see in verses like this: And (know)
that this is my path, the right one, therefore follow it; and follow not (other) ways, for they will
lead you away from His way;... (6:153).

Now, when Allah wishes to exhort the believers to vigilantly proceed on the path of their
guidance, He orders them to adhere to their souls. It makes it clear that the path, which they have
to walk on and adhere to, is their own souls. That is, the soul of the believer is his path on which
he proceeds to his Lord; it is the path of his guidance, and it leads him to his everlasting bliss.

In this way, this verse throws brilliant light on the aim and goal to which other verses point
somewhat vaguely, like the words of Allah: O you who believe! Fear Allah, and let every soul
consider what it has sent on for the morrow, and fear Allah; surely Allah is Aware of what you
do. And be not like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget their own souls; these it is
that are the transgressors. Not alike are the inmates of the Fire and the dwellers of the garden;
the dwellers of the garden are they that are the achievers (59:18-20).

These verses enjoin on every soul to consider what it has sent on ahead, and to vigilantly guard
its good deeds, as it is its provision for tomorrow - and the best provision is piety and fear of
Allah. The soul has a today and a tomorrow, and it is proceeding ahead as it has to go a long
way, and its destination is Allah, and with Him is the best reward, and that is the garden.
Therefore, every soul should continuously remember its Lord without forgetting Him for a single
moment; because Allah is the destination, and forgetting the destination would make one forget
the path; because whoever forgets his Lord forgets his soul; such a person would not gather any
provision for his tomorrow and for his future journey, which he could use to preserve his life;
and it would mean perdition. This is the meaning of what both sects have narrated from the
Prophet (s.a.w.) that he said: "Whoever knew his soul knew his Lord."

It is the meaning that is supported by total meditation and correct consideration. Man, in the
journey of his life - no matter to which end it would stretch out - has really no concern at all
except the good of his soul and happiness of his life, even when he sometimes is engaged in what
looks like benefiting the others. Allah says: If you do good, you do good for your own souls, and
if you do evil, it is for them (only)... (17:7). -

There is only this man who changes from one condition to another, and develops from one stage
to the other: fetus, child, youth, middle aged, and old; then continues his life in barzakh, then on
the Day of Resurrection, then to the Garden or the Fire. It is this distance the man completes
from his first existence until he reaches his Lord. Allah says: And that to your Lord is the end
goal (53:42).

And this man does not go ahead in this journey except with some activities of mind (i.e., beliefs,
etc.) and some actions of limbs - be they good or evil. Whatever he produces today will be his
provision tomorrow. Thus, the soul is the path of man to his Lord, and Allah is the final
destination of his journey.

This is a path man has to tread upon compulsorily, as the words of Allah indicate: O man! Surely
thou art striving to thy Lord, a hard striving, so that thou art to meet Him (84:6). This path has to
be trodden by each man, be he a believer or disbeliever, alert and cautious or oblivious and
careless. The verse, when it exhorts to adhere to this path does not intend to push to it those who
do not use it.

The verse's only purpose is to make the believers aware of this reality when they had become
oblivious of it. Although this reality, like all other creative realities, is firmly established and is
not affected by our knowledge or ignorance, yet man's attention to it does have manifest effect
on his activities. And it is the actions that provide to the human soul an upbringing that is proper
for its nature. When the actions are appropriate with reality and agree with purpose of creation,
then the soul, which is brought up with their help, will be blissful in its endeavors; its projects
will not fail and its dealings will not end in loss. We have explained it in many places in this
book, which leaves no room for any doubt.

However, it may be elaborated in this background, as follows: Man, like other creatures of Allah,
is placed under divine training and rearing, His attention encompasses all his affairs. And Allah
has said:... there is no living creature but He holds it by its forelock; surely my Lord is on the
straight path (11:56). This creative rearing, according to the training Allah gives to other things,
proceeds together to Him; and He has said:... now surely to Allah do all affairs eventually come
(42:53). This rearing does not change in any affair, and does not differ even a little between one
thing and the other, because the path is straight, and the affair is the same and constant. Allah has
also said:... you see no incongruity in the creation of the Beneficent God;... (67:3).
The end goal of man, and the destination of his affairs where his final result (his felicity and
infelicity; his success and failure) is established is based by Allah's prescription on his character
and his soul's aspects, which in their turn are based on deeds which are divided into good and
evil, and piety and corruption. Allah says: And (by) the soul and Him Who made it perfect, then
He inspired it to understand what

is wrong for it and right for it; he -will indeed be successful who purifies it, and he will indeed
fail who corrupts it (91:7-l 0).

As you see, these verses put the perfected soul at one end, i.e. at the start of his journey, its
success, or failure at the other end, and it is the end of the journey. Then they base the two ends
of success and failure on the soul's purification and its corruption, i.e. the good and evil deeds,
which the verses say, are inspired to man by Allah.

The verses in all this elaboration do not pass over the condition of soul. They look at soul as a
perfected creation of Allah; it is to which are ascribed the piety and impiety; it is, that is, purified
and corrupted; and it is in which the man becomes successful and fails. As you understand, it
follows the course dictated by creation.

Keep in view this creative reality: Man in journey of his life proceeds on the path of his soul; he
cannot step away from it, even for one step, nor can he leave it, even for a single moment. The
condition of the one who is ever alert to it and remembers its demands without being oblivious to
it at all, cannot be like the position of the one who forgets it and is oblivious of the inescapable
reality, as Allah has said:... Say: "Are those who know and those who do not know alike?" Only
those possessed of understanding shall bear in mind (39:9); So if there comes to you guidance
from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, he shall not go astray nor be unhappy. And
whoever turns away from My remembrance, his shall surely be a straitened life, and We will
raise him on the Day of Resurrection, blind. He shall say: "My Lord! Why hast Thou raised me
blind, and I was a seeing one indeed?" He will say: "Even so: Our signs came to you, but you
forgot them; even thus shall you be forsaken this day." (20:123-6).

When a man becomes aware of this reality and turns his attention to his actual position vis-a-vis
his Lord, and compares himself to all the parts of the universe, he finds his soul cut off from
others (while previously he saw it in another light) and hidden behind a curtain; no one can
encompass or influence it except its Lord Who manages its affairs, and pushes it from behind
and pulls it forward by His power and His guidance. He finds that it is alone with its Lord, and
besides Him it has no guardian or master. Then the man understands the implication of the divine
words: "to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will inform you of what you did," coming
after the words: "take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right
way;" and also he knows the meaning of the verse: Is he who was dead then We raised him to
life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people, like him whose likeness is
that of one in utter darkness whence he cannot come forth?... (6:122).

At this point the soul's perception and discernment will change; and it will emigrate from the
position of polytheism to the station of servitude and place of monotheism. He will be changing
polytheism with monotheism, imaginary with real, distance with proximity, satanic arrogance
with divine humility, imaginary self-sufficiency with devotional dependence - if divine care
takes its hand and leads it ahead.

Regrettably, we are not in a position to perfectly understand these ideas, because we are clinging
to the earth and are involved in it, and it stops us from diving to the depth of these realities,
which are disclosed by the religion and to which the Divine Book points; but we are very much
entangled with unnecessary scum of this transitory life, which the divine speech speaks of only
as a play and idle sport, as He says: And this world's life is naught but a play and an idle sport;...
(6:32); That is the (last) reach of their knowledge;... (53:30).

Even so, the correct consideration, deep investigation and adequate meditation leads us to
general confirmation of its broader outlines, although we fall short of encircling its details. And
Allah is the Guide.

Well, probably we have gone beyond the limits of brevity; therefore we should return to the
beginning of this talk:-

The verse may be taken as addressing the community per se. That is the clause: O you who
believe! may be addressed to the believers' society as a group. In this case, the clause: "take care
of your souls," will mean that the believers should reform their Islamic society by acquiring the
attribute of being guided aright by divine guidance. They should preserve their religious
cognition, virtuous deeds, and general Islamic symbols, as Allah says: And hold fast by the cord
of Allah all together and be not divided... (3:103). It was described in its exegesis that this
holding fast collectively means adherence to the Book and Sunnah.

Accordingly, the clause: "he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right way," will mean
that the erroneous non-Islamic societies cannot hurt them in any way. Therefore, the Muslims are
not obligated to exert most strenuously for spreading Islam among the non-Muslim nations. They
should limit themselves within normal limits, as explained earlier.

Or, it may mean that they should not let the guidance they have got slip out of their hands by
looking at the misguided societies as to how they are engrossed in base desires and how they
enjoy the forbidden fruits of life; because all of them are to return to Allah and He will inform
them of what they had done. Accordingly, the verse has the same implication as the following
ones: Let it not deceive you that those who disbelieve go to and fro in the cities (fearlessly). A
brief enjoyment! Then their abode is hell, and evil is the resting-place (3:196-7); And do not
stretch your eyes after that with which We have provided different classes of them, (of) the
splendor of this world's life,... (20:131).

There may also be another meaning for the clause: "he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on
the right way." The negative may refer to the harm emanating from the persons of those who err,
and not to any of their particular characteristics or actions; thus the meaning will be unrestricted.
Accordingly, the verse negates the idea that the disbelievers could hurt the Islamic society by
forcefully changing it to a non-Islamic society. In this case, the verse will be similar in
implication to the following verses:... This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your
religion, so fear them not, and fear Me... (5:3); They shall by no means harm you but with a
slight distress; and if they fight you they shall turn (their) backs to you,... (3:111).

A group of ancient exegetes have said that the verse gives the believers permission to abandon
the Call to religion and avoid enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. According to them the
verse speaks exclusively about a time or situation when the conditions are not found for the said
Call, and the enjoining and forbidding - i.e. when the believer has no security against harm. They
have narrated in this respect traditions, which shall be quoted under the ensuing "Traditions".

This interpretation means that the clause: "he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right
way," is an illusion to removal of responsibility, i.e., you are not responsible for it. Otherwise, no
one can have any doubt about the damage that the religious society suffers from spreading of
misguidance, disbelief, and debauchery.

However, this meaning seems far-fetched, which does not agree with the context: If this verse is
taken as particularizing the generality of the incumbency of the Call to religion and enjoining the
good and forbidding the evil, then its language is not that of particularization; and if it is taken as
an abrogator, then the verses of the Call and enjoining and forbidding confute abrogation. This
topic has some addenda, which you will later see.

Traditions
al-Amidi narrates from 'Ali (a.s.) that he said, "He who knew his soul knew his Lord." (al-
Ghurar wa 'd-durar)

The author says: Both sects have also narrated it form the Prophet (s.a.w.); and it is a well-
known hadith. Some scholars have said that it uses the style of attaching an impossible to an
impossible; and that it means that it is impossible for man to know his soul because it is
impossible for him to comprehend Allah. But this view has been refuted: First, because of
another Prophetic tradition: The more one of you knows his soul, the more he knows his Lord;
and Second, because the hadith gives a meaning of contradistinction to the verse: And be not like
those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget their own souls [59:19].

'Ali (a.s.) has also said, "Astute is he who knows his soul and purifies his deeds." (ibid.)

The author says: In previous explanation it was described how purification is interconnected
with gnosis of soul.

He (a.s.) has also said, "Gnosis through the soul is the more beneficial of the two gnosis." (ibid.)

The author says: Apparently, the two gnosis refers to the gnosis through the signs of the soul
and the one through the signs of the universe. Allah says: We will soon show them Our signs in
the universe and in their own souls, until it will become quite clear to them that it is the truth. Is
it not sufficient as regards your Lord that He is a witness over all things? (41:53). And in the
earth there are signs for those who are sure, and in your own souls (too); will you not then see!
(51:20-21).

How is the progress of soul more beneficial than the progress of universe? It is because the
gnosis of the soul is usually not separate from the reform in its characteristics and activities,
unlike the gnosis of the universe; gnosis of the signs is beneficial only because the signs per se
lead to the gnosis of Allah, and of His names and attributes. For example, Allah is Living, death
does not touch Him; Powerful, helplessness does not vitiate Him; All-knowing, ignorance does
not mix with Him; He is the Creator of all things, Owner of everything; He is the Lord who takes
care of everything by what it has earned; He created the creatures not because He had any need
of them, but in order that He should bestow His favors on them as they deserve; then He will
gather them for the day of gathering, there is no doubt in it: so that He may reward those who do
evil according to what they did, and He may reward those who do good with goodness [53:31].

This and similar verses describe such true realities which, if man were to receive and master
them, would represent before him the reality of his life; he would understand that it is an eternal
life having everlasting bliss or never-ending misery; that it is not this temporary fantasy, this
distracting pass-time. This academic stand leads man to realize that he does have responsibilities
and duties vis-a-vis his Lord and vis-a-vis his fellow human beings in this world as well as in the
hereafter. No one is devoid of this thought, not even a Bedouin, in a sort of a life after death -
whatever details they may attach to it - and they strive to practice good deeds in order to make
that life happy and blissful. This factor is very clear to all.

The life which man adopts for himself, presents before his eyes the necessities and requirements
which that life demands. Thus he is guided to the deeds, which normally guarantee the
fulfillment of those needs. So he acts keeping his actions in conformity with those requirements.
And it is what we call custom or religion.

In short, looking at the signs in the souls and in the universe, and arriving through them at the
knowledge and gnosis of Allah, leads man to adhere to the true religion and the divine shari'ah,
inasmuch as the said gnosis represents the eternal human life, and it shows this life's connection
with Oneness of God, Resurrection and Prophethood.

This guidance to belief and piety is shared by both ways, i.e. the way of looking at the universe
and that of looking at the souls. Both of these methods are useful; however that of looking at the
signs of the soul is more beneficial. It is because in this process man has every chance to
discover his own soul and its powers as well as its spiritual and physical instruments; he will also
perceive if its affairs are in a moderate position or are inclined to this or that extreme; which
virtuous or evil traits it has acquired, and which good or bad situations it has adhered to.
When man is involved in investigation of these affairs and becomes sure of the security or
danger, the felicity or infelicity which are attached to them, he is bound to diagnose his malady
and know its treatment from close proximity. Then he can easily be engaged in mending the
defective parts and preserving the good ones. It is unlike to looking at the signs in the universe:
Although that too calls to the reform of the soul and its purification from inferior and depraved
characteristics (and to adorning it with spiritual virtues), but that call comes from a far away
place, and it is clear.

The tradition has another deeper meaning which is derived from the results of real researches in
psychology, and it is this: Observation of the signs of the universe and the gnosis acquired
through it are academic observation based on process of reasoning and acquired knowledge.
They are unlike to the observation of the soul, its powers and stages of its existence, and to the
gnosis manifested from it, because it is a witnessing observation and automatic (unacquired)
knowledge. A reasoned proposition depends for its existence on arrangement of analogous
deductions and logical proofs; it continues as long as the man is attentive to its premises, is not
oblivious to them, nor has his attention diverted from them. That is why the knowledge
disappears as soon as attention is diverted from its proof; and then doubts raise their heads and
controversies start.

It is contrary to the gnosis the soul has of its own entity, its own powers and the stages of its
existence, because this knowledge is manifest. When man becomes engaged in looking at the
signs of his own soul, and witnesses its poverty to its Lord and its neediness in all stages of its
existence, he sees an amazing reality. He finds his soul attached to the divine grandeur and
majesty, connected in its existence, life, knowledge, power, hearing, sight, will, love and all its
attributes and activities, to the infinite splendor and brilliance, beauty and perfection of the
[divine] existence, life, knowledge, power and other perfections.

He will then see manifestly what we have described earlier that the human soul has no concern
except with itself, and never goes out of itself. Its only occupation is the compulsive progress in
its own path; and that it is separated from everything it ever thought that it was joined to and
mixed with - except its Lord who encompasses its inner and outer self as well as all things
besides it. The soul now finds that it is always in private audience with its Lord, even if it
happens to be surrounded by a multitude of the people.

At this stage, it turns away from everything and fixes its attention to its Lord; it forgets
everything and remembers only its Lord; now no curtain hides Him from it, nor does any screen
conceal Him from it; it is the height of gnosis ordained for man.

This knowledge deserves to be called knowledge of Allah by Allah. As for the knowledge
acquired through reasoning process, which results from observation of the signs of the universe -
be it through analogy, conjecture or some other ways - it is the knowledge of an image in mind
through an image in mind. Far be it from Allah to be encompassed by a mind, or that His Person
could be equated to an image fabricated by any of His creatures:... and they do not comprehend
Him in knowledge [20:11].

Biharu'l-anwar quotes from al-Irshad and al-Ihtijaj, from ash-Sha'bi that the Leader of the
Faithful (a.s.) said, inter alia, in a talk: "Verily Allah is too great to be hidden from anything, or
for anything to be hidden from Him."

Musa ibn Ja'far (a.s.) said, inter alia, in a talk: "There is no curtain between Him and His
creation except the creation (itself); He is hidden without any covering curtain; and is concealed
without any hiding veil; there is no god except He, the Great, the Sublime." (at-Tawhid)

[as-Saduq] narrates from 'Abdu'l-A'la from as-Sadiq (a.s.) inter alia in a hadith, that he said,
"And whoever thinks that he knows Allah through a curtain, or form, or image, is an idolater;
because curtain, form and image are other than Him, and He is only One, professed to be One;
how can be he a monotheist who thinks that he declares Him to be One through one other than
Him? Only he knows Allah who knows Him through Allah; so whoever does not know Him
through Him, he [in fact] does not know Him, he only knows someone other than Him..." (ibid.).
The traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahlulbayt (a.s.) on this topic are very numerous;
probably Allah will give us tawfiq to quote and explain them, God willing, in the tafsir of
chapter seven, "The Battlements".

It has indeed come out from the above that observation in the signs of the souls is the most
precious and valuable; and only that leads to the real gnosis. Therefore, when 'Ali (a.s.) counted
the gnosis through the soul as the more beneficial of the two gnosis, and not as the only
appointed way of gnosis, he (a.s.) knew that the general public was incapable of attaining to that
gnosis. The Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet (s.a.w.) are agreed, and the custom of
the Prophet and his Ahlulbayt has established, that the belief of the one who believes in Allah
through observation of His creation, is fully accepted; and it is the outlook that is prevalent
among the believers; so the ways are beneficial, although the benefit in the way of the soul is
more complete and comprehensive.

'Ali (a.s.) said, "The Gnostic is he who knows his soul and liberates it and purifies it from all that
removes it far." (ad-Durar wa 'l-ghurar)

The author says: That is, liberates the soul from captivity of desire and slavery of lust.

[The author has quoted here many sayings of the same Imam (a.s.) from the same book, which
are enumerated below.]:-

- The biggest ignorance is a man's oblivion to affairs of his soul.

- The biggest wisdom is man's knowledge of his soul.

- The most knowledgeable of people regarding his soul is the one who fear his Lord most.

The author says: It is because he is the most knowledgeable of all about his Lord, and Allah has
said:... verily fear Allah only those of His servants who are possessed of knowledge;, . . [35:28].

- The best understanding is man's knowledge of his soul; so whoever knows his soul is possessed
of understanding, and whoever
is ignorant of it, has gone astray.

- I am surprised about the man who searches for his lost item, while he has lost his own soul and
does not search for it.

- I am surprised about the man who is ignorant of his soul, how does he know his Lord.

- The end goal of knowledge is that man should know his soul.

The author says: It has been explained earlier, why it is the end goal of knowledge, because it is
the knowledge in reality.

- How can he know another person who is ignorant of his own soul?

- Enough is for man in knowledge that he should know his soul, and enough is for him in
ignorance that he should not know his soul.

- Whoever knew his soul, became free.

The author says: That is, became free from worldly entanglement; or became free from people
being secluded from them; or became free from everything through sincere devotion to Allah.

- Whoever knows his soul fights it, and whoever does not know it leaves it unfettered.

- Whoever knows his soul, his affair (rank) becomes great.

- Whoever knows his soul, shall be more knowledgeable about others; and whoever is ignorant
of his soul, shall be more ignorant of others.

- Whoever knows his soul, he has indeed reached the end goal of all gnosis and knowledge.
- Whoever does not know his soul, goes far away from the path of deliverance, and wanders at
random in error and ignorance.

- Knowledge of soul is the most beneficial of all knowledge.

- He attained the great success who achieved the knowledge of the soul.

- Don't be ignorant of your soul, because he, who is ignorant of his soul, is ignorant of
everything.

as-Sadiq (a.s.) said inter alia in a hadith: "Whoever thinks that he knows Allah through mind's
imagination, is a polytheist; and whoever thinks that he knows Allah by name, not meaning, has
indeed agreed to calumny, because the name is of a later appearance; and whoever thinks that he
worships the name and the meaning, has indeed made a partner for Allah; and whoever thinks
that he worships through attribute, not through perception, refers to an absentee; and whoever
thinks that he joins the characterized [entity] to the attribute, has belittled the great one; and they
esteem not Allah with the estimation due to Him [6:91]."

He was asked: "Then how is the path of monotheism?" He said, "The door of search is possible,
and the pursuit of the way out exists; verily the knowledge of a present person comes before his
attributes, and knowledge of the attributes of an absent one comes before his person."

It was said (to him): "And how can the knowledge of a present person come before his
attributes?" He said, "You know him, and know (about) his knowledge, and you know your own
self through him and do not know yourself through yourself; and you know that whatever is
found in him is for him and through him. As they said to Yusuf. 'Are you indeed Yusuf?' He
said: 'I am Yusuf and this is my brother.' [12:90]. So, they knew him through him, and did not
know him through someone else, nor did they assert his identity by themselves through
imagination..." (Tuhafu ‘l- 'uqul)

The author says: We have described under the third hadith of this section ('Gnosis through the
soul is the more beneficial of the two gnosis') that when man becomes engaged with signs of his
soul and leaves all other things for it, he becomes exclusively connected to Allah and forgets
everything; it brings in its wake the gnosis of his Lord, a direct knowledge without intervention
of any intermediary without causation by any cause. It is because when one adheres exclusively
to Allah, then every curtain is raised; and at this juncture man looks at the arena of Divine
Greatness and Majesty which makes him so dazzled and perplexed that he forgets his own self,
his own soul. This gnosis, this knowledge truly deserves to be called the Knowledge of Allah
through Allah.

And then the reality of his soul will be clear to him that it is totally dependent on Allah, and
completely owned by Him in such a way that it is not independent of Him in any affair. And this
is the implication of the Imam's words, "and you know your own self through him and do not
know yourself through yourself; and you know that whatever is found in him is for him and
through him."

al-Mas'udi has narrated a similar theme in Ithbatu'l-wasiyyah from the Leader of the Faithful
(a.s.) that he said inter alia in a sermon:

"So, glory be to Thee! Thou hast filled everything and hast separated from everything; so Thou
art such that nothing misses Thee; and Thou art the doer of whatever Thou wishest; Blessed art
Thou, O He that every comprehender is of His creation, and every limited is from His make...

"Glory be to Thee! Which eye can stand opposite the splendor of Thy light, or can rise to the
light of Thy power's reflection, or which understanding can comprehend (even) what is below it?
Except the eyes from which curtains have been removed and the blinding covers have been torn
away; thus their spirits have soared high on the wing-tips of the spirits; they talked with Thee in
whisper under Thy pillars, and entered in middle of the lights of Thy splendor; they looked from
the steps of dust to Thy Majesty; so the people of (heavenly) Kingdom have named them
visitors, and the people of (worldly) power have called them settlers." (Ithbatu'l-wasiyyah)

[al-Majlisi] has quoted from Irshadu'l-qulub of ad-Daylami (and has written after that two chains
of narration for this hadith) which inter alia says:

"So whoever acts according to My pleasure, I attach to him three characteristics: I introduce to
him a thankfulness which is not mixed by ignorance, and a remembrance which is not mingled
by forgetfullness, and a love that he does not prefer love of the creatures to My love.

"So when he loves Me, I love him, and I open the eye of his heart towards My greatness; and do
not keep hidden from him My special creation; I talk to him in secret in darkness of night and
light of day, until his talk with the creatures and his social intercourse with them are
discontinued; I make him hear My talk and that of My angels; and I let him know the secret
which I have kept hidden from My creatures; I dress him in modesty until all the creation feels
shy of him; he walks on the earth while [his sins are] forgiven to him; I make his heart attentive
and seeing; I do not hide from him anything of the Garden and the Fire; and let him know what
fright and hardship will afflict the people in resurrection, and how I'll take account of wealthy
and poor, ignorant and knowledgeable. I shall make him sleep in his grave and send to him
Munkar and Nakir in order that they should question him; he will not see (feel) the sorrow of
death, darkness of grave and lahad (charnel vault with a niche for the corpse in the lateral wall)
and terror of the observing place; then I shall set up for him his balance, and spread his book of
accounts, then I'll put his book in his right hand, which he shall read spread about; then I shall
not appoint any interpreter between Me and him. So these are the attributes of the lovers.
"O Ahmad! Keep your concern, and make your tongue one tongue, and keep your body alive
which is never inattentive; whoever is heedless of Me, I don't care in which valley he perishes."

The author says: Although the last three traditions are not related to this topic of uprightness
and rectitude, we have quoted them here to let the scholars with critical insight see for
themselves, as we have described earlier, that true gnosis of Allah is not fully acquired through
thoughtful knowledge. These traditions mention many items of divine gifts, which can never be
attained through rational process.

These are upright and correct traditions, correctness of which is witnessed by the Divine Book,
as we shall fully explain, God willing, in exegesis of the seventh chapter, "The Battlements".

al-Qummi narrates in his at-Tafsir, under the verse: O you who believe! Take care of your souls;
(he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right way), that the Imam (a.s.) said, "Keep
your souls good, and do not pursue the people's shortcomings, nor should you remind them [of
their defects]; because their misguidance will not harm you when you are good."

The author says: The tradition supports what we have explained earlier that the verse aims at
forbidding too much involvement in society's reform, more than is usual for such call and for
enjoining good and forbidding evil; but it does not allow negligence of that call and enjoining
and forbidding.

as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "This verse was revealed concerning taqiyyah (dissimulation)." (Nahju'l-
bayan)

The author says: The tradition explains that the verse speaks particularly for the situation when
one is afraid of the people of misguidance in calling to the truth, enjoining good and forbidding
evil, because in shari'ah this duty is conditional on there being no danger in it. But we have
earlier explained that the apparent meaning of the verse does not support it.

Of course, as-Suyuti has quoted in ad-Durru'l-manthur words of a group of ancient exegetes

giving the same meaning, like Ibn Mas'ud, Ibn 'Umar, Ubayy ibn Ka'b, Ibn 'Abbas and Makhul,
but the traditions narrated from the Prophet (s.a.w.) on this topic do not support it.

The said tradition is the one narrated by at-Tirmidhi (and he has said that it is correct), Ibn
Majah, Ibn Jarir, al-Baghawi (in his Mu'jarn), Ibnu '1-Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, at-Tabaram, Abu
'sh-Shaykh, Ibn Marduwayh, al-Hakim (and he has said that it is correct), and al-Bayhaqi (in
Shu'abu ‘l-'iman) from Abu 'Umayyah ash-Sha'bani that he said, "I came to Abu Tha'labah al-
Khashanl and said to him, 'How do you make (i.e. interpret) this verse?' He said, 'Which verse?' I
said, The word of Allah: O you who believe! Take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt
you when you are on the right way.' He said, 'Indeed, by Allah! You have asked a man who fully
knows it. I had asked the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) about it. He had said, "Rather you should
enjoin each other the good and forbid each other the evil; [continue in this way] until when you
see that niggardliness is obeyed, base desire is followed, worldly [attraction] is preferred, and
every opinion-holder admires his opinion, then you should take care of your own soul especially,
and leave alone the affairs of the general people; because there are ahead of you the days of
patience, the one patient in those days will be like the one holding live coal in hand; the one
doing (good) deeds in those days shall have the reward of fifty men doing (good) deeds like
yours."'"

The author says: The same is the theme of what Ibn Marduwayh has narrated from Ma'adh ibn
Jabal from the Prophet (s.a.w.). The tradition shows that enjoining the good and forbidding the
evil were not eliminated by this verse.

[as-Suyuti] narrates from Ahmad, Ibn Abi Hatim, at-Tabarani and Ibn Marduwayh, from Abu
'Amir al-Ash'an, that there was something among them, and he was restrained from (coming to)
the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.); then he came to him; (The Prophet) said, "What had kept you
away?" He said, "O Messenger of Allah! I read this verse: O you who believe! Take care of your
souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right way." (Abu 'Amir) says, "Then the
Prophet (s.a.w.) said, 'Where have you gone? It only means: He who errs from among the
disbelievers cannot hurt you when you are on the right way.'" (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

The author says: As you see, the tradition reserves the order of the verse particularly to the
permission of abandoning the call of disbelievers to the truth; and diverts it from the permission
of discarding enjoining the good and forbidding the evil in matters of shari'ah. Moreover, the
verses which show obligation of the call to truth, and its related verses regarding jihad and so on
make it crystal clear that the verse under discussion does not go against the verses of enjoining
the good and forbidding the evil.

[as-Suyuti] narrates from Ibn Marduwayh, from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri that he said, "I mentioned
before the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) the word of Allah, the Mighty, the Great: O you who
believe! Take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right way.
The Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.) said, 'Its interpretation has not come yet; its interpretation will not
come until 'Isa son of Maryam (a.s.) comes down.'" (ibid.)

The author says: The same comment, as the above are applicable here too.

[as-Suyuti] narrates from Ibn Jarir, Ibnu'l-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Hatim from Hudhayfah about the
verse: Take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right way, that
he said: "When you have enjoined the good and forbidden the evil."
The author says: It is a moderate interpretation that in the end returns to what we have
explained; and Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab also has narrated like it.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses

106-109
 
‫ض َر ْبتُ ْم فِي‬ َ ‫ان ِم ْن َغي ِْر ُك ْم إِ ْن أَنتُ ْم‬ ِ ‫َان َذ َوا َع ْد ٍل ِّمن ُك ْم أَوْ آ َخ َر‬
ِ ‫صيَّ ِة ْاثن‬ِ ‫ت ِحينَ ْال َو‬ ُ ْ‫ض َر أَ َح َد ُك ُم ْال َمو‬
َ ‫وا َشهَا َدةُ بَ ْينِ ُك ْم إِ َذا َح‬ ْ ُ‫يِا أَيُّهَا الَّ ِذينَ آ َمن‬
ْ ُ
‫ان بِا ِ إِ ِن ارْ تَ ْبتُ ْم الَ نَ ْشت َِري بِ ِه ثَ َمنًا َولَوْ َكانَ َذا قرْ بَى َوالَ نَكتُ ُم‬ ‫هّلل‬ ْ
ِ ‫صالَ ِة فَيُق ِس َم‬ َّ ‫ت تَحْ بِسُونَهُ َما ِمن بَ ْع ِد ال‬ ْ
ِ ْ‫صيبَة ال َمو‬ ُ ِ ‫صابَ ْت ُكم ُّم‬ َ َ ‫ض فَأ‬
ِ ْ‫األَر‬
‫ان‬ِ َ‫ق َعلَ ْي ِه ُم األَوْ لَي‬ َّ ‫} فَإ ِ ْن ُعثِ َر َعلَى أَنَّهُ َما ا ْستَ َحقَّا إِ ْث ًما فَآ َخ َرا ِن يِقُو َمانُ َمقَا َمهُ َما ِمنَ الَّ ِذينَ ا ْستَ َح‬106{ َ‫َشهَا َدةَ هّللا ِ إِنَّا إِ ًذا لَّ ِمنَ اآلثِ ِمين‬
َْ‫وا بِال َّشهَا َد ِة َعلَى َوجْ ِههَا أو‬ ْ ُ‫ك أَ ْدنَى أَن يَأْت‬ َ ِ‫} َذل‬107{ َ‫ق ِمن َشهَا َدتِ ِه َما َو َما ا ْعتَ َد ْينَا إِنَّا إِ ًذا لَّ ِمنَ الظَّالِ ِمين‬ ُّ ‫فَيُ ْق ِس َما ِن بِاهّلل ِ لَ َشهَا َدتُنَا أَ َح‬
ُ
‫} يَوْ َم يَجْ َم ُع هّللا ُ الرُّ س َُل فَيَقُو ُل َما َذا أ ِج ْبتُ ْم‬108{ َ‫اسقِين‬ ِ َ‫ُوا َوهّللا ُ الَ يَ ْه ِدي ْالقَوْ َم ْالف‬ْ ‫ان بَ ْع َد أَ ْي َمانِ ِه ْم َواتَّقُوا هّللا َ َوا ْس َمع‬
ٌ ‫وا أَن تُ َر َّد أَ ْي َم‬ْ ُ‫يَخَاف‬
}109{ ‫ب‬ ُ ْ َّ َ َّ َ
ِ ‫قالوا الَ ِعل َم لنَا إِنكَ أنتَ َعال ُم الغيُو‬ ْ ْ ُ َ
{106} O you who believe! Call to witness between you when death draws nigh to one of you, at
the time of making the will, two just persons from among you, or two others from among others
than you, if you are travelling in the land and the calamity of death befalls you; the two witnesses
you should detain after the prayer; then if you doubt (them), they shall both swear by Allah,
(saying): "We will not take for it a price, though there be a relative, and we will not hide the
testimony of Allah, for then certainly we should be among the sinners". {107} Then if it
becomes known that they both have been guilty of a sin, two others shall stand up in their place
from among those who have a claim against them, the two nearest in kin; so they two should
swear by Allah: "Certainly our testimony is truer than the testimony of those two, and we have
not exceeded the limit, for then most surely we should be of the unjust". {108} This is more
proper in order that they should give testimony truly or fear that other oaths be given after their
oaths; and fear Allah, and hear; and Allah does not guide the transgressing people. {109} On the
day when Allah will assemble the messengers, then say: "What answer were you given?" They
shall say: "We have no knowledge, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things".
 

Commentary
The first three verses deal with affairs of testimony, and the last one is not without some
connection with it in meaning.

QUR'AN: O you who believe! Call to witness between you... "... for then most surely we should
be of the unjust": The gist of the two verses is as follows: If a Muslim is on journey and wants to
make a will, he must call to witness, at the time of will, two just witnesses from among the
Muslims; if he does not find them, then he should call two witnesses from among the People of
the Book. If the near relatives of the deceased feel some doubt about the will, the two witnesses
shall be detained after the prayer, they shall swear by Allah for their truth in witnessing, and the
discord will be removed. Then if it becomes known that the two witnesses have lied in
testimony, then two other witnesses shall stand up in the place, and testify against them swearing
in the name of Allah.
This is apparently the connotation of the two verses. The phrases: "'O you who believe'",
addresses the believers and the law is reserved to them. "Call to witness between you when death
draws nigh to one of you, at the time of making the will, two just persons from among you": It
means, witness between you is witness of two just persons from among you; there is an omitted
but understood mudaf (first construct of a genitive), i.e. two just persons from among you. It
means that the required number of witnesses is two; thus the masdar here gives meaning of
active participle, as they say, a just man, two just men.

The phrase: "when death draws nigh to one of you," is an allusion for drawing near to you the
cause for making will, because people naturally do not get involved in such things unless there
appears something which indicates death's nearness; usually it means serious illness which brings
man nearer to death.

The clause: "at the time of making the will," is an adverbial phrase of time, related to "witness",
i.e. witness at the time of making the will. The masdar, al-'adl means probity, and the context
shows that it means probity and rectitude in religious affairs. This, in its turn, ascertains the
"from among you" and "from among others than you" means from among .the Muslims and the
non-Muslims respectively, and not near relatives and clan; Allah has mentioned "two" parallel to
"two others", then has described the former as "just persons" and "from among you", while the
latter has only been described as "from among others than you" without the qualification of
justice. The qualification of probity or otherwise in religious affairs differs in the Muslim and the
non-Muslim; there is no reason why probity in religious affairs should be necessary if the
witnesses were from among the relatives or clan of the principal, but unnecessary if the witness
were a non-relative.

Accordingly, the phrase: "or two others from among others than you," presents an alternative
with sequence. The meaning: If there are Muslims two of them shall be made witnesses; but if
there is none other than non-Muslims then two of them will be called to witness; all this is
understood from the associations.

This very association makes it understood that the clause: "if you are travelling in the land and
the calamity of death befalls you," is a restriction related to the words: "or two others from
among others than you"; a Muslim usually lives in a Muslim society, and normally in a Muslim
environment there does not arise a need to call two non-Muslims to act as witnesses; contrary to
the condition of travelling when such chances or emergencies may occur and the need may arise
to approach non-Muslims for witnessing, etc.

The same association, i.e. affinity between the subject and the order, joined with the taste
perceived from the divine speech, proves that the word, non-Muslims, here exclusively points to
the People of the Book, because the divine speech does not bestow any nobility to the
polytheists.

The clause: "they shall both swear by Allah," i.e. the two witnesses shall swear; the clause: "then
if you doubt," i.e. if you are in doubt about what the executor of the will describes concerning the
will, or about the property governed by the will, or about its condition; what they shall swear to,
is explained in the next sentence: "We will not take for it a price though there be a relative ...,"
i.e. We will not accept any big or small price for testifying for the claim of the executor of the
will, even if he be a relative of ours. Selling the testimony for a price indicates that the witness
turns aside from the truth in his testimony for a worldly goal, like wealth, prestige or feeling of
relationship; thus he offers his testimony in exchange of a worldly price, and it is a small price
indeed.

An exegete has said that the pronoun, it, (in the phrase: We will not take for if) refers to the oath,
i.e. We will not take for our oath a price; but it would entail swearing twice by Allah, and the
verse does not give any such hint.

The clause: "and we will not hide the testimony of Allah", i.e. by testifying against the reality
and truth; "for then certainly we should be among the sinners," i.e. carriers of sin. This sentence
is in conjunction with, "We will not take for it a price,..." as an explicative apposition.

In the possessive case: "the testimony of Allah", 'the testimony' is related to "Allah", because
Allah testifies for the reality as the two witnesses do it; therefore it is the testimony of Allah as it
is the testimony of the two witnesses; and Allah has more right to possession; thus it is His
testimony by right and primarily, and the testimony of the two witnesses follows it secondarily.
Allah has said: ...and Allah is sufficient as a witness. (4:79); ...and they cannot comprehend
anything out of His knowledge except what He pleases;... (2:255).

Alternatively, it may be because witnessing it a right of Allah imposed on His servants and it is
incumbent on them to offer it with truth without alteration, without hiding it. It is as we say,
religion of
Allah, thus we ascribe the religion to Allah although it is the servants who are covered by it.
Allah says: ...and give upright testimony for Allah.... (65:2); ...and do not conceal testimony,...
(2:283).

The clause: "Then if it becomes known ..."; al- 'uthur followed by preposition 'aid. means to get
something, to find something. This verse elaborates the law if it becomes known that the two
witnesses have lied and testified wrongly.

The clause: "that they both have been guilty of a sin": Istihqaq (to be entitled; to deserve); al-
ithm (= sin); to be entitled to a sin means to commit a sin or crime; it is said: The man deserved a
sin, i.e. he committed a sin; Zayd deserved a sin against Bakr, i.e. Zayd committed a crime
against Bakr. That is why in the coming sentence it has taken the preposition 'aid, as it says: two
others shall stand up in their place "from among those who have a claim against them," i.e. those
against whom the two witnesses have sinned by giving false testimony and perfidy. The basic
meaning of istahaqqa 'r-rajul is as follows: The man demanded that the sin or its punishment be
established and confirmed against him. Accordingly it is here an extended metaphor in which
demand is used for describing the thing demanded, and path is mentioned in place of destination.
The word, sin, in the clause: "that they both have been guilty of a sin," is inferred from the
preceding clause: "for then certainly we should be among the sinners."

The words: two others shall stand up in their place, i.e. if it is found that the two witnesses have
committed perjury and perfidy, then two other witnesses shall stand in their place for swearing
that the first two have committed perjury and perfidy.

The clause: "from among those who have a claim against them," denotes situation, i.e., while
these two new witnesses against whom the first two had committed perfidy, and who are nearest
in kin to the deceased according to the will, as ar-Razi has stated in his tafsir. In short, it denotes
that if it was known that the two witnesses have committed perjury and perfidy against the near
relatives of the deceased, then two other witnesses shall stand up in their place from among those
against whom the first two have committed that perjury, before their guilt was known.

This interpretation is based on the recital of 'Asim from Hafs who has recited ustuhiqqa in
passive voice; then the apparent context would make, "the first two" the subject and its predicate
would be, "two others shall stand up in their place". The meaning: If it becomes known that the
two witnesses have committed perjury and perfidy against the near relatives of the deceased,
then two near relatives of the deceased shall stand up in their place against whom the perfidy was
committed.

In the recital of Asim through Abu Bakr, Hamzah, Khalaf and Ya'qub, al-awlayan  is recited al-
awwalin (the first ones, opposite to the last ones), and apparently it means the nearest of kin who
have first claim (on the deceased's estate); it is adjective or appositional substantive standing for
"those who".

The exegetes have written much numerous modes and aspects so far as the construction of
various parts of the verse is concerned; so much so that if some aspects are multiplied by the
others in order to infer the full meaning of the verse, it would result in hundreds of aspects. az-
Zajjaj has reportedly said that it is the most complicated verse of the Divine Book so far as its
construction is concerned.

What we have written in its explanation is manifestly clear from the context, without any
aberration or arbitrariness; we have avoided thoroughly looking at all the possibilities, which
they have mentioned, because it would only increase the vagueness of the word, leaving a
scholar bewildered.

From the clause: "two others shall stand up in their place", sprouts the clause: "so they two
should swear by Allah;" it means the two other witnesses, nearest in kin to the deceased; they
should swear by Allah that certainly our testimony (which unmasks the falsity and perfidy of the
first two witnesses) is truer than that of the first two concerning the aspects of the will; and we
have not exceeded the limit against them by testifying contrary to what they had testified,
otherwise, most surely we should be among the unjust people.

QUR'AN: This is more proper in order that they should give testimony truly or fear that other
oaths be given after their oaths;...:
The verse describes the underlying reason of the preceding rule. It says that this law, with the
sequence prescribed by Allah, is the safest way of arriving at the truth in this place, and is the
nearest method of ensuring that the first two witnesses would not commit injustice in their
testimony, as they would be afraid that, otherwise their testimony would be refuted and rejected.
Man is entangled in his desire; the desire invites him to enjoy whatever he can, and grasp to
whatever he longs for, provided there is nothing to divert him from it; it makes no difference
whether he has any right to that desired item or not, whether it is based on justice or injustice
even by nullifying someone else's right. The man desists from that transgression and exceeding
the limit either because of some exterior thing which prevents him from it through punishment or
chastisement, or because of some inner prohibition from his own soul; and the strongest
psychological prohibitive factor is the belief in Allah to Whom the servants have to return and
Who takes reckoning of the deeds, decides with justice and awards full recompense.

If, as is supposed at this juncture, the reality about the deceased's will is unknown and the only
way to find it is through the testimony of the two witnesses whom the deceased had appointed,
then the strongest way of keeping their testimony nearer to truth is to compel them to swear by
Allah, and to make the nearest of kin of the deceased swear by Allah if it transpires that the first
two witnesses have committed perjury and perfidy. Thus, these two methods, i.e. their oaths in
the beginning and then returning the oath to the nearest of kin, are the most effective ways to
keep the first two witnesses on truth, as they would be afraid to be ignominiously exposed and
their oaths refuted. These two are the strongest factors to prevent them from deviation from truth.

Then Allah ended the speech with the admonition and warning: and fear Allah, and hear; and
Allah does not guide the transgressing people.

QUR'AN: On the day when Allah will assemble the messenger, then say: "What answer were
you given?" They shall say: "We have no knowledge, surely thou art the great Knower of the
unseen things.":
The verse is not averse to be connected with the previous subject; although the end part of the
preceding verse: "and fear Allah, and hear ...," is general, yet the context denotes that it contains
prohibition of deviation, committing injustice in witnessing or disdaining the oath by the name of
Allah. Thus it is appropriate to describe what is to take place between Allah and His messengers,
who shall be witnesses over their nations, and what an excellent witnesses they are! Allah shall
ask them what answer they were given by their people, and although they knew very well what
their people had done, and they were appointed by Allah to be their witnesses, yet they will reply
by saying:  "We have no knowledge, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things."

The matters being like this and with Allah being the Knower of everything, it is appropriate for
the witnesses to be afraid of divine majesty, and not to deviate from the truth which Allah has
given them the knowledge of; they should not conceal the testimony of Allah, otherwise they
would be one of the sinners, unjust and tyrants.

The divine words: "On the day when Allah will assemble ...," is an adverb of time, related to the
preceding clauses: "and fear Allah ..." The verse speaks of assembling of the messengers (instead
of saying, when Allah will say to the messengers), as it has more affinity with gathering of the
witnesses for testimony, as shown by the words: the two witnesses you should detain after the
prayer;... they shall both swear by Allah.

As for the messengers' negating the knowledge from themselves, when they shall say: " 'We have
no knowledge, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things.1" They restrict the
knowledge of all unseen things exclusively to Allah, and it proves that the negated is not the
knowledge per se, because the clause: "surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things",
apparently aims at explaining the reason of negation; and it is understood that confinement of the
knowledge of all unseen things does not entail removal of all knowledge from other than Allah,
especially so when it is a knowledge of testimony; and what will be asked, i.e. how the people
answered their messengers, is related to the testimony not to the unseen.

Their reply: '"We have no knowledge'", does not negate knowledge in general; it negates the
truly inside knowledge which is not without some relationship with the unseen. It is known that
the knowledge discloses to the knower the reality .as much as it is related to a certain affair
concerning its causes and concomitants; and the reality is inter-connected with all parts present
externally, whether they precede the reality in external existence or are found simultaneously;
knowledge of any external affair, in true sense, does not occur except by comprehending all parts
of its existence and acquiring comprehension of its Maker - far be it from His majesty that
anything could ever comprehend Him, and it is an affair beyond the human power. Thus, man
has not been given knowledge in this universe - the universe thinking on whose vast dimension
leaves him flabbergasted, looking at the magnitude of its stars and galaxies makes him scared, if
he observes its minute items his reason is bewildered, and if he wants to walk between these two
extremes he becomes giddy - except a little that is needed by him in the journey of his life, just
as a walker in utterly dark night carries a small candle which gives him only enough light to see
where to put his next step.

What the human knowledge is connected to, adheres with its being, and attaches with its reality
to its fringes and then to the fringes of the fringes and so on. All of it is unperceived by human
perceptions. Knowledge, in its true meaning, cannot be attached to anything except when it is
connected to all its unseen factors of existence, and this is not possible for any limited creature,
be it human or something else, except Allah, the One, the Subduer, with Him are the keys of the
unseen, none but He knows them. Allah says: ...and Allah knows, while you do not know (2:216).
The verse shows that man's nature is ignorance, and he is not given knowledge except to a
limited measured quantity. Allah says: There is not a thing but its treasures are with Us, and We
do not send it down but according to known measures (15:21). The same is the connotation of
the ma'sum's reply when he was asked, "Why Allah is concealed from His creatures?" He said:
"Because surely He has built their structure on ignorance." Allah has also said: ...and they cannot
comprehend anything out of His knowledge except that which He pleases;... (2:255). It shows
that knowledge, all of it, belongs to Allah and man comprehends out of it only what Allah wills.
Also He says: ...and you have not been given the knowledge but a little (17:85). This proves that
there is a multitude of knowledge, but man has not been given except a little.

So, the reality is this: knowledge, the real one, is not found except with Allah. When the Day of
Resurrection comes, the things will appear in their true forms and shapes, as the related verses
show. Thus, there would not be on that day any place except for the true speech, as Allah says:
...they shall not speak except he whom the Beneficent Lord gives leave, and he will speak the
truth. That is the certain day,, .. (78:38-39). That is why when the messengers shall be asked,
"What answer were you given?" the true reply will be to repudiate from themselves all
knowledge as it will be a part of the unseen, and to affirm it to their Load, by saying: "We have
no knowledge, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things."
This reply of theirs, emanates from their humility before His Grandeur and Majesty; it is a
confession of their personal neediness and essential nullity vis-a-vis their True Master; keeping
the manner of His audience and displaying the truth of the matter. However, it is not a final
answer shutting the door to further replies, because:

First: Because Allah has made them witnesses for their peoples, as He says in this Book: How
will it be, then, when We bring from every people a witness, and We bring you as a witness over
those (witnesses)? (4:41); ...and the book (of deeds) shall be set up, and the prophets and the
witnesses shall be summoned... (39:69). And there is no meaning of making them witnesses
except that they should be witnesses over their peoples - as the witnessing should be on that day.
Inevitably they will testify on that day as Allah has ordained it. Thus, their reply, "We have no
knowledge," is based on the manner of worshipful homage vis-a-vis the True King in whose hand
is command and kingdom on that day. It also explains the reality of the affair, i.e. Allah
possesses knowledge by Himself, and others possess it only as much as He makes them have it;
and there is no wrong if, after this reply, they disclose what knowledge they had of the
conditions of their peoples. This supports what we have previously written in the first volume of
this book, under the verse: And thus we have made you a justly balanced group so that you may
be witnesses over mankind, and so that the Messenger may be a witness over you... (2:143),
where we have explained that this knowledge and witnessing are not of the type of knowledge
and witnessing as we understand them; rather they are of the knowledge which is particularly
reserved to Allah and which is bestowed to a group of His honored servants

Second: Because Allah has confirmed that a group of his nearer servants will possess knowledge
on the Day of Resurrection. He says: And those who have been given knowledge and faith will
say: Verily you have tarried according to the decree of Allah till the Day of Resurrection, ..."
(30:56); ...and on the heights shall be men who know them all by their marks (7:46); And those
whom they invoke beside Him do not own any power of intercession, save he who bears witness
to the truth, and they know the truth (43:86); and 'Isa son of Maryam is included in this verse,
and he was a messenger; therefore he is among those who bear witness to the truth and they
know the truth; And the Messenger shall say: "O my Lord! Verily my people took this Qur'an as
a thing abandoned." (25:30). The Messenger refers to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and his
speech quoted in this verse is exactly the reply to the question contained in the verse under
discussion, i.e., the divine words: "What answer were you given?" Now, it is clear that the words
of the Messengers: "We have no knowledge, ..." is not the final answer, as described above.

Third: Because the Qur'an mentions that the questioning will cover both the Messengers and
those to whom they were sent. Allah says: Then surely We shall question those to whom (Our
messengers) were sent, and certainly We will also question the messengers (7:6). Also, He
mentions many replies given by the people to whom the messengers were sent of many questions
asked of them; and replying entails knowledge and questioning confirms it. Also, Allah says:
Certainly, you were heedless of this (day), now We have removed from you your veil, so your
sight is sharp today (50:22); And could you but see -when the guilty mil stand before their Lord,
heads hung low, (and say): "O our Lord! We have seen and we have heard; now send us back;
we will do good; verily now we are convinced." (32:12). There are many verses of similar theme.
Now, when the peoples - and especially the guilty among them - were having knowledge on that
day, how could it be imagined that the honored messengers would be lacking that knowledge.
Thus the end result is the same as we have said.

A Talk on the Meaning of Testimony

The society in which we live, and the interaction that takes place between our active powers in
general aspects of this worldly life, pushes us willy-nilly to various kinds of discords and
disputes. What one of us exclusively enjoys, often another one wants to share it with him, or
even acquire it solely for himself, displacing the original owner. This made man realize that
jurisprudential judgments and decrees were essential for settling such disputes.

The first requirement for judging a case is that the events and occurrences should be preserved
exactly as they took place and recorded in a way that no change or alteration sneaks in them, in
order that the judge may decide accordingly. Nobody can doubt its importance.

This can be ensured only through making someone look at the event: He observes the episode
and takes upon himself to convey the report truly when need arises, or records it in some other
way, like writing or using other instruments which serve the same purpose (like audio or video
cassettes, etc.).

There are some important differences between witnessing and other means of preservation and
recording: First, The means of preservation and recording, other than witnessing, are not
available generally; its most common and well known method is writing, but even today it has
not covered the whole mankind, let alone the ancient times; contrary to the witnessing. Second,
Rendering testimony, i.e., description with tongue by a witness through his undertaking to
convey the fact truly and based on his memory, is less likely to be affected by any defectiveness
and more secured against various afflictions in comparison to writing and other means of
recording.

That is why we see that no nation shuns giving credence to testimony - it is true in all nations,
despite their excessive discord in sociological customs, tribal and religious dispositions and
progress or regress in culture and barbarism - in short every group gives some credence to
testimonies.

Consideration is given in this respect to someone who is counted as a member of the nation and
part of the group. That is why no importance is given to the evidence of a child below the age of
discretion or to that of an insane who does not know what he speaks. The same is the reason why
some barbarous nations did not recognize women's evidence, as they did not accept women as
part of the society; and most of the social norms in ancient nations were based on the same
thinking, like Rome, Greece and other regions.

Now, Islam is the natural religion, and as such recognizes testimony, and accepts this alone as
the definite proof, while all other means of substantiation and corroboration have no value unless
and until they create "Knowledge". Allah says: ...and establish the evidence for Allah;... (65:2);
...and do not conceal evidence, and whoever conceals it, then surely his heart is sinful;... (2:283);
And those who stand firm in their testimonies (70:33).
Islam has fixed the number of two for witnesses regarding all affairs except fornication (where
the required number is four) so that each supports the other. Allah says: ...then call to witness
two witnesses from among your men, and if there are not two men, then one man and two women
from among those whom you choose to be witnesses, so that should one of the two forgets the
(second) of the two may remind the other; and the witnesses should not refuse when they are
summoned; and be not averse to writing it (whether it be) small or large, with the time of its
falling due. This (procedure) is more equitable in the sight of Allah, and assures greater
accuracy in testimony, and the nearest (way) to not entertaining any doubts (afterwards);...
(2:282). It shows that what the verse explains and lays down in respect of the laws of witnessing,
including the addition of one witness to the other to make them two, is more in conformity with
justice, rendering of testimony and removal of doubt.

When Islam looks at the individual members of the society who are the bricks to build the
society - it counts woman among them, and bestows on her the right, like the men, to render the
witness. At the same time, it has decided that the society created by it should be founded on
understanding, rather than emotions. Woman is an emotional human being; and therefore it has
given her half the right and weight of man; thus two women's testimonies equal to that of a man,
as the above-quoted verse points to: so that should one of the two forgets, the (second) of the two
may remind the other. In the fourth volume of this, we have written on the right of woman in
Islam, which will be useful here. Witnessing has many detailed laws, which are elaborated in the
books of jurisprudence, which is beyond the limit of this discussion here.

A Talk on Justice
A research scholar in Islamic Laws often comes across the word Justice; and he often finds
different definitions and diverse explanations of this word, depending on diversity of the scholars
and their ways.

But what is appropriate at this juncture of the Qur'anic discourse - in analysis of its meaning and
the way of its application to the nature on which Islam is based - is that we should adopt another
way of explanation. So we say:

al- 'Adalah is moderation and middle position between two modes of high and low, and two
sides of exaggeration and shortfall. It has a real value and great weight in human societies. The
via media, the moderate position, is the substantial ingredient or the core around which the social
structure is built. A noble man of high rank who would be dressed in high social virtues, and
represent the utmost wish of society, is not born every day; such a person appears on the scene
only rarely and it is known that society is not made up of a rare person even if he be looked up as
a cardinal organ wherever he be found.

On the other side is a vile and despicable person who does not uphold social rights, and who
does not fulfill the average aspirations of the society. He does not have any caller inviting him to
observe the general social principles on which depends the life of society; nor does he have any
deterrent which would prevent him from committing social sins which destroy the society and
nullify the essential mutual attraction between its ingredients; in short, no trust can be had for his
being a part of the body of society, nor can one rely on his good influence and proper advice.

(We find, after leaving these two high and low ranks aside, that) the rule is exercised by the
medium rank of the society on whom depends the society's structure, and who fulfill its aims and
aspirations; and it is through them that its good effects take place - its ingredients and organs
have not come together except for achieving this goal and enjoying it.

A member of the society cannot entertain any doubt about it when he looks at it even once.

It is self-evident to him that he, in his social life, greatly depends on some individual members of
the society on whose social deportment he relies - they are covered with moderation in affairs,
are cautious against being indifferent to breaking the laws or violation of prevalent customs and
manners in various fields like jurisprudence, judgment and testimonies, etc.

This imperative or nearly imperative quality demanded by nature is what Islam looks for in a
witness. Allah says: ...and call to witness two just men from among you, and establish the
evidence as before Allah. Thus is admonished he who believes in Allah and the last day;... (65:2);
...when death draws nigh to one of you, at the time of making the will, two just persons from
among you, . . (5:106). Both these verses are addressed to those who believe. Therefore, the
condition that the witnesses should be two just men from among them implies that they should
have a moderate and medium position vis-avis their religious society; but as for its position vis-
a-vis national or political society, Islam does not care for such non-religious relationships.
Apparently, if the witnesses are on a medium position vis-a-vis the religious society, they must
be from among those whose religiosity is relied upon and who do not indulge in major sins,
which adversely affect the religion. Allah says: If you avoid the major sins, which you are
forbidden, We will remit from you your (minor) sins and We will make you enter an honorable
entering (4:31). We have described the meaning of major sins under this verse in the fourth
volume of this book.

This meaning is evident in the divine words: Those who accuse chaste women (and) then do not
bring four witnesses, scourge them
with eighty stripes, and do not accept their testimony for ever and they are the transgressors.
Save those who afterwards repent and make amends. So Allah is Oft-forgiving, Merciful (24:4-
5).

Similar to the previous verse which lays down the condition of justice and probity, is the divine
word: . . .from among those whom you are pleased with to be witnesses,... (2:282), because the
pleasure mentioned here means pleasure of a religious society; and it is known that a religious
society, per se, will not be pleased with anyone unless he behaves in a manner that makes him
trustworthy in religious affairs.

It is what we call in fiqh the faculty of 'adalah. It is other than what is called 'adalah in Ethics.
The 'adalah of fiqh is the psychological aspect which in common point of view prevents one
from committing major sins; and the 'adalah of Ethics is the deep-rooted trait of character in
reality.
What we have inferred from the meaning of 'adalah is what is understood from the madhhab of
the Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (peace be upon them) as is reported through their chains:

(as-Saduq) narrates in Man la yahduruhu'l-faqih, through his chains from Ibn Abi Ya'fur, that he
said: "I said to Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), 'By what is known the 'adalah of a man among the Muslims,
so that his testimony is accepted for and against them?' He said:

" '(It is) that they recognize him with covering and abstinence, and control of stomach, and
genitals, and hand, and tongue; and he is known to avoid major sins for whom Allah has
threatened the Fire, as drinking liquor, fornication, interest, disobedience of parents, fleeing from
jihad and so on.

" 'And it is known from the fact that he conceals all his defects, in order that the Muslims are
forbidden to search for his slips and defects, and are obliged to pronounce his integrity, and
declare his 'adalah among the people; and he is considered regular in the five prayers when he
diligently prays and preserves their times with attending the Muslims' congregational prayers,
and does not remain behind from their congregation in their prayer place except because of some
(genuine) cause.

" 'When he is like that, inseparable from his prayer-place at the advent of the five prayers; when
he is asked about in his tribe and quarter, they would say: "We did not see from him except
good", (he is) regular in his prayers, waiting for their times in his prayer place, then surely it
would make his testimony valid, and (establish) his 'adalah among the Muslims. And it is
because prayer is a curtain and expiation of sins. And it is not possible to testify about a man that
he prays if he does not come to his prayer place and does not regularly attend the Muslims'
congregation.

" 'Congregation and gathering for prayer has been prescribed only for this purpose that he who
prays may be distinguished from him who does not pray; and he who preserves the times of
prayer from him who neglects it. And if it were not so, no one could testify for the goodness of
the other, because he who does not pray has no goodness among the Muslims. Verily the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had intended to burn a group in their houses because they avoided
attending the Muslims' congregations; and there were among them people who used to pray in
their homes, but it was not accepted from them. Therefore, how can evidence or probity of
someone be accepted among the Muslims about whom decision of Allah, to Whom belong Might
and Majesty, and of His Messenger was taken to burn (him) with fire inside his house? And he
(s.a.w.) used to say: "There is no prayer for him who does not pray in the mosque with the
Muslims except because of some reason (illness)."'" (Man la yahduruh 'l-faqih)

The author says: ash-Shaykh has narrated it in at-Tahdhib with some addition, which we have
left out. Covering and abstinence both mean avoidance, as (Jawhari) has said in as-Sihah. As you
see, the tradition makes basic 'adalah a thing which is well-known among the Muslims; and
shows that the effect resulting from it and which proves this psychological characteristic is
avoidance of the things prohibited by Allah, and abstention from forbidden desires; and it is
recognized through avoidance of major sins; then proof of all this is seen in (his) good
appearance among the Muslims, as the Imam (a.s.) has described it in detail.
'Abdullah ibn al-Mughfrah narrates from Abu'l-Hasan ar-Rida (a.s.) that he said: "He who was
born on fitrah (i.e., of Muslim parent) and is known with goodness in himself, his evidence is
allowed." (ibid.)

Suma'ah has narrated through Abu Basir from Abu" 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "There is
nothing wrong with evidence of an old (or weak) person when he is righteous and chaste." (ibid.)
(al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from 'All ibn Mahziyar from Abu 'Ali ibn Rashid that he
said: "I said to Abu Ja'far (a.s.): 'Verily, your followers are of different types; so should I pray
with them all?' He said: 'Don't pray except behind him of whose religion you are confident.'" (al-
Kafi) The author says: The tradition clearly indicates what we have explained above. There are
other topics in it, which are beyond our theme here.

A Talk on Oath
What do you mean when you say: 'By my life, it is so'; or 'By my life, the thing is as I have said?'
It means that you somehow attach that statement in its truthfulness to your life - which has a
great position and dignity in your eyes - in such a way that they become inseparable in existence
and non-existence; if you were wrong in your statement, you would nullify the dignity of your
life and its honor in your eyes, and thus would fall down from the level of humanity which
demands respect for life's affairs.

When you say, 'I adjure you by Allah to do (or, not to do) this thing', it means that you have
attached your order or prohibition to the dignity and honor which Allah has in the believers'
eyes; in this way if anyone goes against that order or prohibition it would be an insult to the
divine position and would negate the sanctity of the belief in Allah.

Likewise, when you say, 'By Allah! I'll do such and such', you affect a special connection
between your intention to do it and the dignity and honor which Allah has in your eyes according
to your belief in Him, so much so that if you cancel your intention it would entail a negation of
the divine dignity in your eyes. Its purpose is to create a deterrent against cancellation of that
plan. Thus, oath creates a special connection between a statement and another thing which has a
dignity and honor in such a way that if the former is nullified, the latter too would be negated;
and because the latter has such a dignity and honor that the person concerned would not be
pleased by its loss of dignity or by an insult to it, therefore he is truthful in what he says and is
obeyed in what he orders or forbids, or is bound to implement what he plans. So the oath results
in intensified emphasis.

In some languages, there is found another kind of connection vis-a-vis oath; it connects the
statement with something which has no value or importance at all in the eyes of the speaker; it is
done to show the contempt or disdain of the information given or received - it is a sort of abuse
and it is very rare in Arabic language.

Swearing and oath, as we know, is a prevalent custom on people's tongue, which is inherited
generation after generation; and it is not particular to one language beside others. It proves that it
is not something related to a language; rather man is led to it by his social life on occasions when
he realizes the need to seek refuge in it and get its benefit.

Oath was always prevalent among the nations; they relied on it on various imprecise occasions,
which occurred in their societies for various purposes, e.g. removal of blame, lifting a slander,
making oneself happy, or supporting information. This continued at random until civil laws took
it in their hands and gave it a legal stand on some occasions, like swearing in of Presidents and
Executives when they assume great responsibilities and are appointed to great and high posts,
etc.

Islam gave oath full consideration when it was sworn in the name of Allah in particular. It is not
but because of the high regard that it accords to the Majesty of God, as it aims to protect the
divine grandeur from unbecoming attachments. That is why it has laid down special expiation for
breaking the oath and dislikes frequent swearing in the name of Allah. He say: Allah does not
call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, but He calls you to account for the making of
deliberate oaths; so its expiation (for breaking an oath) is the feeding often poor men out of the
average (food) you feed your families with, or their clothing, or the freeing a neck;... (5:89). And
make not Allah in your oaths a hindrance against that you may do good and... (2:224).

Islam has recognized oath in those cases of litigation where there is no proof. Allah says: ...so
they two should swear by Allah: "Certainly our testimony is truer than the testimony of those
two, and we have not exceeded the limit, ..." (5:107). And the Prophet (s.a.w.) has said: "The
proof is on the claimant, and oath is on him who denies."

The essence of recognition of oath is that only the oath is a sufficient proof in cases where no
other proof exists. The religious society is founded on individuals' belief in Allah, and a believer
is a part of this composite whole; he is the fountain-head from which spring forth the customs
which are followed and laws which are enforced; in short, all signs which appear in the
community and which rise from their religious condition. It is not unlike a secular society that is
based on peoples' belief in their national objects, and from which the social laws and customs as
well as the manners and culture are born which are found in it.

This being the case, as it is OK to rely in all social affairs, and in general concomitants of life, on
individuals' oaths in various ways, then it should also be OK to rely on their oaths in cases where
no other reliable proof exists - and it is the oath in cases where no proof is offered; the denier
would attach his denial of the claimant's claim with his belief in such a way that if falsity of his
claim becomes apparent, ho reliance can be put on his belief in Allah.

As he ties his belief and faith with that oath, he pawns his faith putting it under the control of the
pawn-broker, and its return to the borrower depends on his true promise and repayment of the
loan within the agreed period; otherwise the pawned property goes and he remains empty-
handed.

Likewise, the one who swears is considered as if he has pawned his faith in exchange of what he
has sworn for until its falsity is found out; when its falsity appears, he becomes empty-handed
from faith, falls down from the height of reliability, is deprived of enjoying the fruit of belief; in
other words, in the religious society he loses all social benefits; he is banished from the well-knit
society; neither the sky puts him under its shadow nor the earth accepts his burden.

This discourse is supported by what used to happen at the time of the Prophet (s.a.w.), when
people openly showed their hatred for those who stayed behind from religious assemblies like
congregational prayer, jihad and so on; as it was the time when religion had total domination and
authority over desires.

But what is the situation nowadays? Religion has lost its hold; base desires have seeped into
hearts; we are living in a society composed of religious objectives (whose structure is weakened
and people have turned away from it) and modern civilization's objectives. It is submerged in
material enjoyments whose foundation is strong and general public eagerly proceeds towards it.
Then there appeared severe quarrel and dispute between religious factors and modern
civilization, in which constantly the latter is winning and the former retreating. The religious
system that was supposed to dominate the society lost it coherence, and chaos and confusion
appeared in spiritual affairs. In this condition, neither oath nor anything stronger can be of any
benefit; there remains nothing to protect the people's rights. People have lost confidence not in
the religious safeguards found in society, but even in modem laws.

However, the divine rules and shari’ah cannot be abrogated merely by the people's turning away
from it or by their being tired of it, Verily the religion with Allah is Islam, He is not pleased with
disbelief for his servant, and if Truth had followed their desires the heavens and the earth would
have perished. Certainly, Islam is a religion which deals with all conditions of human life, it
explains them and describes their laws - the laws that consist of parts which are in conformity
with each other, are interlinked and mutually complementary; they are alive with spirit of
monotheism. If one part ails the whole becomes sick; if some portions become rotten, it
adversely affects the whole - just like a human body.

If a limb of body starts ailing or becomes decayed, it is essential to preserve the healthy parts and
treat the ailing one; it is not correct in reason to leave the ailing limb as it is and also neglect the
healthy parts.

Islam is the True Religion, of easy laws and forgiving nature; its shari'ah has various vast
degrees; its responsibilities are assessed according to what one has the ability to do. Its rope is
stretched from secured social condition (where its laws and rules comprehensively cover all
situations without exception) to individual conditions of emergency (when prayer is allowed by
sign); but coming down from a high step to a lower one is conditional to emergency that removes
responsibility and allows respite and extension. Allah says: He who disbelieves in Allah after he
has believed- except he who has been forced (to do so), while his heart remains firm in faith -
and opens (his) breast for disbelief, will suffer the wrath of Allah. For them there shall be a
great torment... Then, verily your Lord - to those who migrated after being persecuted, then they
strived hard and endured patiently - verily, your Lord, after that, is Oft-Forgiving, Most
Merciful (16:106, 110).

As for those who base their lives on materialistic enjoyment, then try to justify the rejection of its
opposite religious factors by saying that it does not agree with prevalent customs of the present
world, they merely follow the materialistic logic, and not the religious one.
There is a discourse related to this chapter that emanates from some people's claim that swearing
by other than Allah's name is a sort of polytheism, ascribing a partner to Allah. It is necessary to
ask this speaker what does he mean by polytheism, which he claims in this context?

Does he mean that: Swearing by other than Allah (aggrandizement of the one sworn by and
showing greatness to his affairs, as the meaning of oath is based on it) contains a sort of
humbleness and worship to him, and it is polytheism? But not every aggrandizement is
polytheism. It can be polytheistic only when grandeur of independent Lordship is ascribed to
someone other than Allah, with the idea that he is self-sufficient and does not require anyone's
help.

Allah has sworn (in His Book) by a lot of His creations, like the
sky, the earth, the sun, the moon, the disappearing orbiting stars, and the star when it goes down;
He has sworn by the mountain, the river, the fig, the olive, and the horse. Also, He has taken oath
by night and day, by morning, by evening glow, by afternoon and forenoon; by the Day of
Resurrection and the soul; He has sworn by the Book and the Great Qur'an, by the life of the
Prophet (s.a.w.) and the angels, and many such things in numerous verses - while no oath can be
valid without some aggrandizement.

So, what is there to prevent us from proceeding on the way Allah has used in His speech? Why
should not we show greatness of some things, which Allah has bestowed on them, and stop at
that? If such expressions were polytheistic, the divine speech should have avoided it in the first
place!

Also, Allah has shown the greatness of many things in His Book, like the Qur'an, the Throne,
and the manners of the Prophet (s.a.w.). He has said: ...and the mighty Qur'an (15:87); ...And He
is the Lord of the Mighty Throne (9:129); ...and surely you are on a mighty morality (68:4). He
has prescribed for His prophets and messengers and for the believers rights on Himself, and has
shown their greatness and dignity, as He has said: And certainly Our word has already gone
forth about Our servants, the messengers, that verily they shall be helped (37:171-172); ...and it
was incumbent on Us to help the believers (30:47). Why should not we show their grandeur and
follow the divine way in swearing in general? What is there to stop us from adjuring Him by
something He Himself has sworn by? Or by one of the rights He has prescribed for His friends
on Himself?

Of course, the jurisprudential oath that has legal effects in the fields of oath or judgment is not
valid by name of other than Allah, as is explained in fiqh, but we are not talking about that.

If the objector means to say that general aggrandizement, in any way, is not allowed for anyone
other than Allah - even if it is done through what Allah has shown its grandeur with - then it is a
claim for which there is no proof at all; rather definite proof is found against it.

Sometimes it is said that swearing by the right of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and Allah's friends, seeking
nearness to them and hoping for their intercession in any way, is a worship and bestowal of an
unseen authority on them. The same comments as above apply to this claim too: What do they
mean by this "unseen authority"? Does it denote the independent authority, which is reserved for
Allah? If so, then no Muslim (who believes in the Book of Allah) assigns it to other than Allah.
And if it denotes non-material authority in general (even if it is by permission of Allah), then
where is the proof that it is impossible for some chosen servants of Allah, like His friends, to
have such authority by divine permission? The noble Qur'an has clearly mentioned many unseen
authorities, as Allah says: ...until, when death comes to one of you, Our messengers (angels)
cause him to die,... (6:61); Say: "The angel of death will cause you to die ..." (32:11); By those
(angels) who drag forth violently, and those who undo (the bonds) gently, and those who glide
along (swiftly); and those who go ahead with foremost speed, and those who manage the affairs
(79:1-5); Say: "Whoever is the enemy of Jibril, verily it is he who has brought it to your heart by
Allah's command..." (2:97); and there are numerous verses of this theme.

And He says about Iblis and his hosts: for he and his tribe watch you from a position where you
cannot see them. Verily We have made the Satans to be the guardians of those who do not
believe (7:27). Likewise, innumerable verses have been revealed about the prophets' and others'
intercession in the next world, and their miraculous signs in this world.

Would that I knew what is the difference between material effects, which these people assert in
these subjects without any aversion, and non-material effects, which they call unseen authority.
If assertion of effect to other than Allah were forbidden, then there should not be any difference
between a material and a non-material effect, and if it is allowed by permission of Allah, then all
are equal in this respect.

Traditions
'Ali ibn Ibrahim narrates through his people a marfu' hadith: He says: "Tamim ad-Dari, Ibn
Bandi and Ibn Abi Mariyah went forth on a journey. Tamim ad-Dari was a Muslim and the other
two were Christians. Tamim ad-Dari had a box, which contained his merchandise together with a
pot with golden design and a necklace; he had taken to sell it in an Arabian market.

"Then Tamim ad-Dari became very sick. With the approach of death he gave all that he had to
Ibn Band and Ibn Abi Mariyah, ordering them to convey it to his heirs. When they returned to
Medina, they took out from the merchandise the pot and the necklace, handing over the rest to
his heirs. The heirs found the two items missing. So, the family of Tamim said to the two, 'Was
our man sick for a long time in which he spent a lot of money?' They said, "No. He was not sick
but for a few days.' (The family) said, Then was he robbed of something in this journey?' They
said, ‘No.’ (The family) said, Then did he do some trade in which he suffered a loss?' They said,
‘No' Then, the family said, 'But (here) we find missing the best things which he had, 'A pot with
golden design ornamented with gems and a necklace.' They said, 'Whatever he gave to us we
have given to you.'

"The family brought the two to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) asked them to take oath; they swore and the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) let them go free.
Thereafter, that pot and necklace appeared with them, so the heirs of Tamim came to the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and said, 'O Messenger of Allah! Indeed, has appeared with Ibn
Bandi and Ibn Abi Mariyah what we had claimed against them.' So, the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) waited for an order from Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty, about it.

"Then Allah, the Blessed, the Sublime, revealed: O you who believe! Call to witness between you
when death draws nigh to one of you, at the time of making the will, two just persons from
among you, or two others from among others than you, if you are travelling in the land - Thus,
Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty, allowed witnessing of the People of the Book in will
only when one is on journey and does not find Muslims; then He said: - and the calamity of
death befalls you; the two witnesses you should detain after the prayer; then if you doubt (them),
they shall both swear by Allah (saying): 'We will not take for it a price, though there be a
relative, and we will not hide the testimony of Allah, for then certainly we should be among the
sinners,' - This is the first witnessing, which the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had administered. -
Then if it becomes known that they both have been guilty of a sin, - i.e. they have perjured
themselves; - two others shall stand up in their place (i.e. from among the heirs of the deceased;
-from among those who have a claim against them, - i.e. against the first two; - the two nearest
in kin; so they two should swear by Allah: - i.e. they should swear in the name of Allah, that they
(the two) have more right to this claim than them, and that they have perjured themselves in
swearing by Allah; -'Certainly our testimony is truer than the testimony of those two, and we
have not exceeded the limit, for then most surely we should be of the unjust.'

"So, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) ordered the heirs of Tamim ad-Dari to swear by Allah as he
directed them; they did swear and the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) took the necklace and the pot
from Ibn Bandi and Ibn Abi Mariyah, and returned them to the heirs of Tamim ad-Dari. - This is
more proper in order that they should give testimony truly or fear that other oaths be given after
their oaths." (al-Kafi)

The author says: al-Qummi has likewise narrated it in his at-Tafsir; but there is in it after the
clause: the two witnesses you should detain after the prayer, the word, "i.e. the afternoon
prayer."

The word of the Imam (a.s.): "who have a claim against them, against the first two": Apparently,
it is in dual form, and if means the first two witnesses; it explains the Qur'anic word, "the first
two." We have stated in the preceding commentary that it is the clearest of all probable
meanings, according to this recital.

at-Tirmidhi (who has said that it was a weak tradition), Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, an-Nahhas (in
his Nasikh), Abu 'sh-Shaykh, Ibn Marduwayh and Abu Nu'aym (in al-Ma'rifah) have narrated,
through the chain of Abu 'n-Nadr (and he is al-Kalbi), from Badhan (mawla of Umm Ham), from
Ibn 'Abbas, from Tamim ad-Dari, that he said about this verse: "The people became clear of the
two, except me and 'Udayy ibn Bada'; and they were Christians frequenting to Syria before
Islam. So, they came to Syria for their trade, and there came to them for trade mawla of Banu
Sahm, Badil ibn Abi Maryam by name. He had a silver bowl, and it was his main merchandise.
Then he became sick, and he appointed them as his executor of the will and enjoined them to
convey what he had left to his family."

Tamim said, "When he died, we took that bowl and sold it at a thousand dirham; then 'Udayy ibn
Bada' and I divided it among ourselves. When we came to his family, we gave to them what was
with us; but they missed the bowl and they asked us about it; we said: 'He did not leave anything
else nor did he give to us any other thing.'"

Tamim said, "Thereafter, when I accepted Islam after arrival of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)
at Medina, I felt guilty about it; so I came to his family, gave them the information and paid to
them five hundred dirham, and told them that a similar amount was with my companion. So, they
brought him to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.); he asked them for proof which they did not find;
then he ordered them to adjure him by what is held sacred by his co-religionists, and he took
oath. Then Allah revealed: O you who believe! Call to witness between you, ...or fear that other
oaths be given after their oaths. Then 'Amr ibn al-'Asi and another man stood, up and swore (to
it); so five hundred dirhams were extracted from 'Udayy ibn Bada'." (ad-Durru'l-manthur)

'The author says: Apart from its weakness, the tradition does not conform fully to the verse, and
this non-conformity is clear, as-Suyuti has narrated from Ibn 'Abbas and 'Ikrimah what is near
the preceding tradition of al-Qummi.

al-Fariyabi, 'Abd ibn Hamid, Abu 'Ubayd, Ibn Jarir, Ibnu'l-Mundhir and Abu 'sh-Shaykh have
narrated from 'Ali ibn Abi Talib that he recited mina 'l-ladhl stahaqqa (with vowel a after t), (as
is the common recitation.)

Ibn Marduwayh and al-Hakim (who has said it is correct) have narrated from 'Ali ibn Abi Talib
that the Prophet (s.a.w.) recited: al-ladhina stahaqqa 'alayhimu'l-awlayan (with a after t). (ibid.)

Ibn Jarir has narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "This verse is abrogated." (ibid.)

The author says: There is no proof of abrogation as claimed here.

Muhammad ibn Isma'il has narrated from al-Fadl ibn Shadhan, and 'All ibn Ibrahim has narrated
from his father, from Ibn Abi 'Umayr, from Hisham ibn al-Hakam, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that
he said about the word of Allah: or two others from among others than you: If the man is in a
town where there is no Muslim, the witness of a non-Muslim is allowed in will. (al-Kafi)

The author says: The tradition's meaning is inferred from the verse.
(al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Yahya ibn Muhammad that he said, "I asked Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.), about the word of Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty: O you who
believe! Call to witness between you when death draws nigh to one of you, at the time of making
the will, two just persons from among you, or two others from among others than you. He said,
The two from among you means two Muslims; and those from among others than you, means
(from) the People of the Book; and if they did not get from the People of the Book, then from the
Magians, because the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had followed about the Magians the system of
the People of the Book regarding jizyah.

'"And it is (like this:) When a man dies in a place away from home and does not find two
Muslims, he will call to witnness two men from among the People of the Book; they will be
detained after the afternoon prayer, and they both shall swear by Allah, to Whom belong Might
and Majesty, (saying:) "We will not take for it a price, though there be a relative, and we will not
hide the testimony of Allah, for then certainly we should be among the sinners.'" The (Imam)
said: 'And it is when the heir of the deceased feels doubt about their (the two's) testimony, then it
becomes known that they both have testified falsely, he has no right to refute their testimony
until he brings two other witnesses; so they shall stand up in the place of the first two witnesses,
so they two should swear by Allah: "Certainly our testimony is truer than the testimony of those
two, and we have not exceeded the limit, for then most surely we should be of the unjust." If he
did so, the testimony of the first two would be set aside and that of these two would be allowed
(i.e. accepted). Allah says: This is more proper in order that they should give testimony truly or
fear that other oaths be given after their oaths.'" (ibid.)

The author says: As you see, the tradition fits the earlier given explanation of the verse. There
are other traditions of the same meaning in al-Kafi and at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi narrated from
Abu 'Abdillah and Abu'l-Hasan (peace be upon both.)

And in some traditions, the Divine Words: or two others from among others than you, have been
interpreted as, 'the unbelievers'; and it is more general than 'the People of the Book', as is
narrated in al-Kafi from Abu 's-Sabah al-Kinani, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), and in at-Tafsir of
al-'Ayyashi from Abu Usamah from the same Imam (a.s.) about this verse: (I asked him:) "What
(means): or two others from among others than you?" He said, "They are two unbelievers." "I
said, '(What means) two just persons from among you?' He said They are two Muslims.'"

Although the preceding tradition which confines it to the People of the Book is not capable of
putting any restriction on this generality, according to the rules of generality and restriction
because both are in positive case, yet the first tradition's context may explain the generality of the
second one in a way that conforms with restriction.

as-Saduq has narrated through his chain to Abu Zayd 'Ayyash ibn Yazid ibn al-Hasan from his
father, Yazid ibn al-Hasan that he said: "Narrated to me Musa ibn Ja'far (peace be upon both), he
said, 'as-Sadiq (a.s.), said about the words of Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty: On the
day when Allah will assemble the messengers, then say: "What answer were you given?" They
shall say: "We have no knowledge, ..."' He said, 'as-Sadiq (a.s.), said, "They shall say, 'We have
no knowledge through other than Thee."" He also said, 'as-Sadiq (a.s.), said, "The Qur'an, all of
it, is rebuke, and its interior is approximation." ' " (Tafsiru'l-Burhan)

The author of al-Burhan says: "Ibn Babawayh has said, The Imam (a.s.) means that behind the
verses of rebuke and threat there are verses of mercy and forgiveness.'"

The author says: What he has quoted from as-Saduq (may Allah have mercy upon him)
regarding the meaning of the Imam's saying: The Qur'an, all of it, is rebuke, and its interior is
approximation,1 does not fit on it: Neither in view of the beginning of the tradition, because the
interpretation of the messengers' word, 'We have no knowledge,' as, 'We have no knowledge
through other than Thee', has no relation with the Qur'an containing two types of verses, those of
promise and those of threat; nor in view of the context of the sentence itself, i.e. The Qur'an, all
of it, is rebuke, and its interior is approximation;' because this speech apparently means that the
whole Qur'an is rebuke and the whole of it is approximation, and the matter differs from the
point of view of interior and exterior; it does not mean that the Qur'an is divided into two
categories, one is of the verses of rebuke, and another besides it is the verses of approximation.

Pondering on the Imam (a.s.)'s talk, we come to understand that 'rebuke', inasmuch as it stands
parallel to 'approximation' means its concomitant, i.e., to remove far as opposed to bring near;
the Qur'an, all of it, is cognizance and reality; its exterior separates realities from one another and
categorizes its parts, and its interior brings them nearer to each other, perfects them and unifies
them. In short, it means that the Qur'an, in its exterior shows various realities of cognizance,
which are separate one from the other, yet in spite of its multitudeness and separateness of its
components, in its interior its ingredients are quite near to each other, and its various meanings
are interconnected, until it is unified and becomes one single reality, pervading the whole body
like spirit - and it is nothing but the reality of oneness, monotheism. Allah says: A Book whose
verses are firmly arranged then separated, from the All-Wise, All-Aware (11:1).

At this juncture, it becomes clear how it fits on what the Imam (a.s.) has said at the beginning of
the tradition that the messengers' reply, We have no knowledge,' means: 'We have no knowledge
through other than Thee.' It is because man, or any knower we suppose, knows whatever he
knows, he knows it through Allah; Allah is known through Himself, and all other things are
known through Him. In other words, when knowledge connects with anything, it connects first
of all with Allah, as deserves His sublime status and majesty, and then it connects through Him
with that thing; because with Him is the knowledge of everything, He gives out of it to
whomsoever He wishes from among His servants, as much as He wishes. Allah says:... while
they cannot comprehend anything out of His knowledge except that which He wills; His throne
extends over the heavens and the earth... (2:255). We have quoted earlier the narration of
'Abdu'l-A'la mawla Al Sam from as-Sadiq (a.s.) and some other traditions in this regard.

Accordingly, the messengers' reply: 'We have no knowledge, surely Thou art the great Knower
of the unseen things, -would mean in the light of the Imam's explanation, as follows: We have no
knowledge of anything leaving Thee aside; we know whatever we know because of our
knowledge about Thee; it is because all the knowledge belongs to Thee; and as such Thou
knowest it better than us; after all, whatever we know comes out of Thine knowledge and Thou
hast given us a part of it by Thine will and Thine sustenance.

Accordingly, another meaning is understood of the words: 'surely Thou art the great Knower of
the unseen things'; and it is more sublime than the previously given explanation: Everything in
this creation has an existence separate from the others' being. As such it is 'unseen' visa-vis the
others, because its existence is limited and foreordained, it does not comprehend except what
Allah wills it to comprehend; and Allah comprehends everything, and knows every unseen; thus
nothing knows anything except through Allah, Sublime and Glorified is He from every short-
coming.

Now, we understand that division of the things into unseen and seen, actually means their
division into an unseen which Allah wills that we should comprehend it and an unseen which He
has kept hidden from us. Probably, this meaning is supported by the apparent meaning of the
divine words: He is the Knower of the unseen, and He does not reveal His unseen (secrets) to
anyone except to the messenger whom He chooses (72:26-27), as is implied by relating the
'unseen' to the pronoun. You should deeply ponder on this matter.

Yazid al-Kanasi narrates from Abu Ja'far (a.s.), that he said about the verse: On the day when
Allah will assemble the messengers ..." He will say, 'What answer were you given about your
awsiya' (successors) whom you left behind in your ummah? They will say: 'We have no
knowledge of what they (the ummah) did after us.'" (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

The author says: al-Qummi has narrated it in his at-Tafsir, from Muhammad ibn Muslim from
the same Imam (a.s.).

(al-Kulayni) has narrated in al-Kafi a tradition of similar theme, from Yazid, from Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.), and it is based on the principle of the flow of meaning, or gives its interior explanation.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses

110-111
 
َ‫اس فِي ْال َم ْه ِد َو َك ْهالً َوإِ ْذ َعلَّ ْمتُك‬
َ َّ‫ُس تُ َكلِّ ُم الن‬ِ ‫ُوح ْالقُد‬ ِ ‫ك بِر‬ َ ُّ‫ك إِ ْذ أَيَّدت‬َ ِ‫ك َو َعلَى َوالِ َدت‬َ ‫ال هّللا ُ يَا ِعيسى ا ْبنَ َمرْ يَ َم ْاذ ُكرْ نِ ْع َمتِي َعلَ ْي‬ َ َ‫إِ ْذ ق‬
َ‫ئ األَ ْك َمه‬ ُ ‫ق ِمنَ الطِّي ِن َكهَ ْيئَ ِة الطَّي ِْر بِإ ِ ْذنِي فَتَنفُ ُخ فِيهَا فَتَ ُكونُ طَ ْيرًا بِإ ِ ْذنِي َوتُب ِْر‬ ُ ُ‫َاب َو ْال ِح ْك َمةَ َوالتَّوْ َراةَ َوا ِإلن ِجي َل َوإِ ْذ ت َْخل‬
َ ‫ْال ِكت‬
َّ َ ْ ْ ْ َ
‫ال ال ِذينَ َكفرُوا ِمنهُ ْم إِن هَـذا إِال ِسحْ ٌر‬ َّ َ
َ ‫ت فق‬ َ ْ ْ
ِ ‫ك إِذ ِجئتَهُ ْم بِالبَيِّنَا‬ْ َ ‫ص بِإ ِ ْذنِي َوإِذ تخ ِر ُج ال َموتَى بِإِذنِي َوإِذ َكففت بَنِي إِ ْس َرائِي َل عَن‬
ُ ْ َ ْ ْ ْ ْ ُ ْ َ ‫َواألَ ْب َر‬
َ ْ
}111{ َ‫اريِّينَ أ ْن آ ِمنُوا بِي َوبِ َرسُولِي قَالُ َوا آ َمنَّا َوا ْشهَ ْد بِأنَّنَا ُم ْسلِ ُمون‬ ْ َ ْ
ِ ‫ْت إِلَى ال َح َو‬ َ ْ
ُ ‫} َوإِذ أوْ َحي‬110{ ‫ين‬ ٌ ِ‫ُّمب‬
{110} When Allah shall say: "O 'Isa, son of Maryam! Remember My favor on you and on your
mother, when I strengthened you with the Holy Spirit, (so that) you spoke to the people in the
cradle, and when grown up; and when I taught you the Book and the Wisdom and the Tawrat and
the Injil; and when you made out of clay the figure of a bird by My leave, you breathed into it
and it became a bird by My leave; and you healed those born blind and the lepers by My leave;
and when you raised the dead by My leave; and when I held back the Children of Israel from you
when you had come to them with clear signs, but then those of them who disbelieved said: 'This
is nothing but clear sorcery'. {111} And (recall) when I revealed to the disciples: 'Believe in Me
and My messenger'; they said: 'We believe and bear witness that we are Muslims'".
 

Commentary
These two and the subsequent verses (which narrate the story of the coming down of the Table
and those which describe what Allah shall ask 'Isa, son of Maryam (a.s.) regarding the people's
taking them as two gods besides Allah, and the reply which he will offer), all are related with the
theme of the Chapter with which it had begun: It began with the call to fulfill the covenant and
give thanks for favors, and cautioning against breaking the contract and being ungrateful to
divine bounties. In this way, the end of the chapter fully returns to its beginning, and unity of
intended theme is preserved.

QUR'AN: When Allah shall say: "O 'Isa, son of Maryam!... and when you raised the dead by
My leave: The verse counts many of the clear signs which had appeared on his hand, but it is
counted in a way that shows Allah's grace on him and his mother together. These favors are
mentioned in almost similar words in the chapter of "The House of 'Imran", where Allah narrates
the angels' talk with Maryam when they came to give her the good news of 'Isa's birth. Allah
says: When the angels said: "O Maryam! Surely Allah gives you good tidings of a Word from
Him whose name is the Masih, 'Isa son of Maryam, ...And he shall speak to the people when in
the cradle and when of mature age, ...And He will teach him the Book and the Wisdom, and the
Tawrat and the Injil. And (make him) a messenger to the Children of Israel: 'That I have come to
you with a sign from your Lord, that I create for you out of clay the likeness of a bird; then I
breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave; and I heal the blind and the leper, and
bring to life the dead, by Allah's leave... (3:45-49).

Meditation on the context of the verses makes it clear why the signs which apparently were
exclusively connected with the Christ, have been counted as bounties bestowed on him and on
his mother together, as the verses of the third chapter indicate; because good tiding is given
concerning a bounty, and here the case is the same. Whatever signs and bounties were connected
with Jesus, e.g. being born without a father, being strengthened by the Holy Ghost, creating
flying birds, healing the blind and the leper and raising the dead to life by Allah's permission,
were miraculous signs of Maryam to the same degree as they were related to 'Isa (peace be upon
both). They both together were bestowed the divine favors, as Allah says: "remember My favor
on you and your mother".

Also, the same is indicated by the divine words: ...and We made her and her son a sign for all
peoples (21:91), as He has counted both of them together as one sign, not two.

The words: "when I strengthened you with the Holy Spirit (so that) you spoke to the people",
apparently show that the strengthening with the Holy Spirit was the cause that enabled him to
talk to the people. That is why the clause: "you spoke to the people", is attached to the preceding
sentence without any intervening conjunction; it indicates that the strengthening and the speaking
together constitute one action, made up of a cause and its effect. Allah on occasions has only
mentioned one of the two - either cause or its effect as is seen in the preceding verses: ...you
spoke to the people in the cradle, and when grown up... (5:110); ... and We gave to 'Isa, son of
Maryam, clear evidence, and aided him with the Holy Spirit... (2:253)

Apart from that, if the strengthening with the Holy Spirit is taken to mean sending revelation
through the Spirit, it was not reserved for 'Isa, son of Maryam (a.s.) and all the messengers
shared it with him; moreover, the verse's context rejects this meaning.

The words: "and when I taught you the Book and the Wisdom and the Tawrat and the Injil". It
may be inferred from it that 'Isa (a.s.) received this knowledge at one go, through a single divine
command, without any graduality. Also, it may be understood from the facts that all actions have
been combine together and are governed by only one adverb of time, 'when'.

The clauses: "and when you made out of clay the figure of a bird by My leave, ...and you healed
those born blind and the lepers by My leave;" The context, because the word 'when1 is not
repeated, shows that creating of the bird and healing of the blind and the lepers had happened at
the same time; and mention of creation of bird contains the proviso: "by My leave", as the matter
of creation is very important because it entails bestowal of life; that is why the Qur'an has paid
special attention to this clause and mentions its being done by divine leave, although the divine
leave is also mentioned at the end of the sentence. But the divine Book did not like keeping the
hearers in suspense even for a few moments, lest they think for a few seconds that someone
besides Allah can independently bestow life. And Allah knows better.

The words: "and when you raised the dead by My leave". Raising the dead alludes to making
them alive. It clearly indicates that this miracle that had appeared on his hand, had involved those
dead bodies, which were buried in graves, and he (a.s.) has put life into them and brought them
out of the graves to this worldly life. The sentence shows that this miracle had taken place many
times. Other themes connected with this verse were explained under the verses of the third
chapter, and may be referred to if necessary.

QUR'AN: and when I held back the children of Israel from you... 'This is nothing but clear
sorcery': It shows that the Israelites wanted to harm him, but Allah held them back from it. It
tallies with what Allah has mentioned in the chapter of "The House of 'Imran", in his stories:
And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners (3:54)
QUR'AN: And (recall) when I revealed to the disciples: 'Believe in Me and... that we are
Muslims', It agrees with the third chapter's verse 52: And when 'Isa perceived their disbelief, he
said: "Who will be my helpers unto Allah?" The disciples said: "We will be Allah's helpers: We
believe in Allah; and bear, witness that we are Muslims."

It is clear from the above that the belief of the disciples, mentioned in this verse (And when I
revealed to the disciples: "Believe in Me and My messenger", they said: "We believe...") is other
than their first belief in 'Isa (a.s.); because the above verse 3:52 apparently shows that it had
happened in later days of his Call, while the disciples (who answered it) were the foremost and
the first in believing in him and had remained adhered to him.

Moreover, the verse 3:52 (... he said: "Who will be my helpers unto Allah?" The disciples said:
"We will be Allah's helpers: We believe in Allah; and bear witness that we are submitting
ones."), apparently shows that this Call was given to obtain their commitment for helping the
divine religion, not for initial belief in Allah. That is why the verse ends on the words: "and bear
witness that we are Muslims." The word, "Muslims", here indicates that they were ready to
submit to the divine order by establishing Allah's Call and enduring the affliction in His cause.
Obviously, this stage comes after the basic belief in Allah.

Now, it is clear that this verse relates the story of taking the covenant from the disciples.

There are some other themes related to this verse, which were given in the chapter of "The
House of 'Imran".

Traditions
(as-Saduq) narrates through his chain from Abu Ya'qub al-Baghdadi that he said, "Ibn as-Sikkit
said to Abu'l-Hasan ar-Rida (a.s.), 'Why did Allah send Musa ibn 'Imran with his shining hand,
staff and magical implements, and 'Isa with medical implements, and Muhammad (s.a.w.), with
speech and sermons?'

"Abu'l-Hasan (a.s.) said, 'Verily, when Allah, the Sublime, sent Musa (a.s.) magic was prevalent
among the people of his time; so Musa (a.s.) brought to them from Allah, the Sublime, what they
did not have and was beyond their power to (bring) its like; with it he nullified their witchcraft
and established through it the proof against them. And verily Allah, the Sublime, sent 'Isa at a
time when chronic diseases had spread and the people were in (dire) need of medicine; so he
brought to them from Allah, the Sublime, like of which they did not have, and with which he
gave life to the dead and healed the blind and the lepers by Allah's permission and established
through it the proof against them. And verily Allah, the Sublime, sent Muhammad (s.a.w.) at a
time when lectures, talks and poetry were prevalent among the people of his time; so he brought
to them the Book of Allah, sermons and wisdom with which he nullified their talk and
established through it the proof against them.'
"Ibnu 's-Sikkit said, 'I have not ever seen as you (are) today. Now, who is today the proof against
the creatures?" He said, '(It is) reason, with it is recognized he who speaks the truth about Allah
and it confirms him, and the liar against Allah, and it refutes him.' Ibnu 's-Sikkit said, This is, by
Allah, the reply.'" (Ma 'ani 'l-akhbar)

Muhammad ibn Yahya narrates from Ahmad ibn Muhammad, from al-Hasan ibn Mahbub, from
Abu Jamilah, from Aban ibn Taghlib and others, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), that he was asked,
"Had 'Isa ibn Maryam raised anyone after his death (so that) he ate, got sustenance for a time and
begot?" He said, "Yes. Verily, he had a friend, his brother in Allah, the Blessed, the Sublime; and
'Isa (a.s.) used to pass by him and be his guest; and verily 'Isa lost contact with him for some
time, then came to him to greet him; so his mother came out and he ('Isa) asked her about him;
she said, "He is dead, O Messenger of Allah!' So he said, 'Do you like to see him?' She said,
'Yes.' And he said, 'Tomorrow I shall come to you so that I raise him to life by the permission of
Allah, the Sublime.'

"When the morning came, he came to her and said, 'Come with me to his grave.' They both
proceeded until they reached his grave. So, 'Isa (a.s.) stood there, then prayed to Allah, to Whom
belong Might and Majesty. Then the grave opened wide and her son came out alive. When his
mother saw him and he saw her, they both wept. 'Isa (a.s.) had mercy on them, and told him (the
son), 'Do you like to remain with your mother in the world?' He said, 'O Messenger of Allah!
(Will it be) with eating, sustenance and a (fixed) period? Or without eating, sustenance and a
period?' 'Isa (a.s.) said to him, 'With eating, sustenance and a period; you will live twenty years,
will marry and beget.' He said, Then, yes.'"

(The Imam) said, "So 'Isa (a.s.), gave him to his mother; and he lived for twenty years and begot
off-spring." (al-Kafi)

Muhammad ibn Yusuf as-San'ani narrates from his father that he said, "I asked Abu Ja'far (a.s,),
about (the verse): And when I revealed to the disciples. He said, They were inspired.'" (at-Tafsir,
al-'Ayyashi)

The author says: The word, revelation, has been used in the meaning of inspiration, in many
places in the Qur'an. For example: And We revealed to the mother of Musa: "Suckle him... (28:7);
And your Lord revealed to the bee, saying: "Make hives in mountains... (16:68); that your Lord
revealed to her (i.e. the Earth), (99:5).

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses

112-115
 
}112{ َ‫وا هّللا َ إِن ُكنتُم ُّم ْؤ ِمنِين‬ ْ ُ‫ك أَن يُنَ ِّز َل َعلَ ْينَا َمآئِ َدةً ِّمنَ ال َّس َماء قَا َل اتَّق‬
َ ُّ‫اريُّونَ يَا ِعي َسى ا ْبنَ َمرْ يَ َم هَلْ يَ ْستَ ِطي ُع َرب‬ ِ ‫إِ ْذ قَا َل ْال َح َو‬
‫} قَا َل ِعي َسى ابْنُ َمرْ يَ َم اللَّهُ َّم َربَّنَا‬113{ َ‫ص َد ْقتَنَا َونَ ُكونَ َعلَ ْيهَا ِمنَ ال َّشا ِه ِدين‬ َ ‫َط َمئِ َّن قُلُوبُنَا َونَ ْعلَ َم أَن قَ ْد‬ ْ
ْ ‫وا نُ ِري ُد أَن نَّأ ُك َل ِم ْنهَا َوت‬
ْ ُ‫قَال‬
ُ ِّ
‫ال ُ إِني ُمنَزلهَا‬ ِّ ‫هّللا‬ َ
َ ‫} ق‬114{ َ‫َّازقِين‬ َ ْ ُ
ِ ‫ك َوارْ زقنَا َوأنتَ خَ ْي ُر الر‬ ً َ ‫أِّل‬ ً َ ُ ً
َ ‫نزلْ َعل ْينَا َمآئِ َدة ِّمنَ ال َّس َماء تَكونُ لنَا ِعيدا َّولِنَا َوآ ِخ ِرنَا َوآيَة ِّمن‬ َ ِ َ‫أ‬
ْ َ ُ ُ
}115{ َ‫َعلَ ْي ُك ْم فَ َمن يَ ْكفُرْ بَ ْع ُد ِمن ُك ْم فَإِنِّي أ َع ِّذبُهُ َع َذابًا الَّ أ َع ِّذبُهُ أ َحدًا ِّمنَ ال َعالَ ِمين‬
{112} When the disciples said: "O 'Isa son of Maryam! Is your Lord able to send down to us
food from heaven?" He said: "Fear Allah if you are believers.". {113} They said: "We desire that
we should eat of it and that our hearts should be at rest, and that we may know that you have
indeed spoken the truth to us and that we may be of the witnesses to it". {114} 'Isa the son of
Maryam said: "O Allah, our Lord! Send down to us food from heaven which should be to us an
ever-recurring happiness, to the first of us and to the last of us, and a sign from Thee, and grant
us sustenance, and Thou art the best of providers.". {115} Allah said: "Surely I will send it down
to you, but whoever shall disbelieve afterwards from among you, surely I will chastise him with
a chastisement with which I will not chastise any one among the nations".
 

Commentary
The verses describe the story of coming down of the table on Christ (a.s.) and his companions.
Although they do not say clearly that Allah sent it down to them, yet the last verse contains the
unconditional divine promise of sending it down to them; and He has mentioned His attribute
that He does not break His promise.

Some people's opinion, that they sought pardon from 'Isa (a.s.) when they heard the threat of
unprecedented chastisement for those who would disbelieve after coming of the table, is an
opinion without any proof from the Book or trustworthy hadith.

This view has been narrated from a group of the exegetes, among them being al-Mujahid and al-
Hasan; and their or others' views are no proof at all. Even if their views were supposed to be
traditions, they would be of incomplete chains of narrators, and such items are not fit as proof
because of their weakness.

Moreover, they are opposed by other traditions, which show that the table was sent down. Even
if they were correct they would be only 'solitary' traditions, which are not relied upon except in
matters of jurisprudence.

Sometimes proof is offered of not coming down of the table by the fact that the Christians do not
know about it and their holy books do not mention it; had it been sent down to them there were
many reasons to describe it in their books and to keep it alive in their society as they have
preserved the memory of the Last Super - the Euchrist.

However, a man,who knows the history of Christianity - as how it spread and how the gospels
appeared on the scene - would not care about such utterances; because neither their books were
written and preserved with tawatur since the time of 'Isa (a.s.), nor the present Christianity
reaches up to him, so that it might be useful in what they have received generation after
generation, or in that which they do not know from what is attributed to the Christ's Call.
Of course, in some Gospels there is the story of his feeding his disciples and some other people
with a little bread and fish. But that story does not agree with the Qur'anic statement in any of its
particulars. The Gospel According to St. John, chapter 6 says:

1. After these thing Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberias.
2. And a great multitude followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did on them that
were diseased.
3. And Jesus went up into a mountain, and there he sat with his disciples.
4. And the Passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh.
5. When Jesus then lifted up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him, he saith unto
Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?
6. And this he said to prove him: for he himself knew what he would do.
7. Philip answered him, Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every
one of them may take a little.
8. One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, saith unto him.
9. There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes: but what are they
among so many?
10. And Jesus said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. So the men
sat down, in number about five thousand.
11. And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and
the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would.
12. When they were filled, he said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain, that
nothing be lost.
13. Therefore they gathered them together, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the
five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto them that had eaten.
14. Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that
prophet that should come into the world.
15. When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a
king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone. (John, 6:1-15)

Moreover, if we ponder on this story as given in the Divine Book, Qur'an, we find in it other
aspects that require contemplation. The initial question in the beginning of the story totally lacks
the manners, which must be maintained vis-a-vis Allah. And it ends at the threat which Allah has
threatened those who shall disbelieve afterwards that He would chastise them with a
chastisement with which He would not chastise anyone among the nations. It’s like is not found
in any sign given by Allah to His prophets, nor in any that were suggested by their people, like
the suggestions of the nations of Null, Hud, Salih, Shu'ayb, Musa and Muhammad (s.a.w.).

Was it because the disciples, who had asked it, had shown lack of manners in their questioning,
because they had used words, which show their doubt about the divine power? However, we find
in the demands of the preceding nations insults to the majesty of their Lord, and mockery against
their prophets, as well as what we see in the Qur'an of the stories of the arrogance of the people
of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and of the Jews who lived at that time, is more impertinent and more
disgusting than it.
Or was it because they, being believers before this question and coming down of the table,
became disbelievers after its coming down and observation of clear signs, and therefore invited
such severe threatening. However, although disbelief after seeing clear signs is a great
haughtiness and over-stepping the limits, but it was not confined to them, as such examples are
found in every nation and they were not threatened in such a harsh manner - not even those who
apostatized after being placed nearer to the divine proximity, like the one whom Allah mentions
in these words: And recite to them the narrative of him to whom We gave Our signs, but he
withdrew himself from them, so the Satan overtook him, so he became of those who go astray
(7:175).

What may be said at this juncture is that this story, which began with a question, is distinguished
with a theme that is unique among all miracles of the prophets, which they had brought because
of their people's suggestion, or some other necessary requirements.

The miraculous signs narrated by the Divine Book were of various types: There were the
miracles which Allah gave to the prophets when He sent them to the peoples, in order that it
should serve as the proof to support their claims of prophethood or messengership, as Musa (a.s.)
was given the bright hand and staff; and 'Isa (a.s.) was enabled to raise the dead to life, create the
bird and heal the blind and the lepers; and Muhammad (s.a.w.) was given the Qur'an. These signs
were given, as they were needed for the Call to the true belief and for completing the proof
against the disbelievers, so that he who would perish might perish by clear proof, and he who
would live might live by clear proof;... (8:42).

There were the miracles brought by the prophets and the messengers as a result of the
disbelievers' suggestions, like the she-camel of Salih; in the same category come the dreadful
happenings and tormenting chastisements which appeared in the course of the prophetic Calls,
like the signs of Musa (a.s.) against the people of Pharash (locust, lice, frogs, etc. totaling seven
signs), flood of Nuh, earthquake of Thamud, storm of 'Ad and similar things. These too were the
signs connected to the disbelieving enemies.

There were the signs shown by Allah to the believers for fulfilling their needs, like gushing forth
of streams from rocks, coming down of manna and quails for the Israelites in the wilderness,
raising of the mountain over their heads and opening up the river to save them from Pharaoh and
his deeds. These were the signs, which appeared either to frighten the sinners and the arrogant or
to show the dignity of the believers in order that the word of the Beneficent Lord is completed
about them - without any suggestion put by them.

Of the same category are the promises given by Allah in His Book to the believers for
manifesting the honor of His Messenger (s.a.w.), e.g. the promise of the conquest of Mecca, and
of victory of the Romans in a few years, etc.

These are the categories of the signs narrated in the Qur'an and described in divine teachings. But
as for suggesting a sign after coming down of a sign, it is a fantasy which the divine teaching
counts as nonsense that should not be paid attention to: For example, the proposal of the People
of the Book that the Prophet (s.a.w.) should bring for them a book from the heavens, while the
Qur'an was present before their eyes. Allah says: The People of the Book ask you to bring down
to them a book from heaven; so indeed they had demanded of Musa a greater thing than that, for
they said: "Show us Allah manifestly";... But Allah bears witness by what He has revealed to you
that He has revealed it with His knowledge; and the angels bear witness (also); and sufficient is
Allah for a witness (4:153; 166).

Likewise, the polytheists had asked the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he should bring down the angels or
should show Allah to them. Allah says: And those who do not hope for Our meeting say: "Why
not have angels been sent down upon us, or (why) do we not see our Lord? " Now certainly they
are too proud of themselves and have revolted in great revolt (25:21). Also, He says: And they
say: "What is the matter with this Messenger that he eats food and goes about in the markets?
Why has not an angel been sent down to him, so that he should have been a warner with him?
Or (why is not) a treasure sent down to him, or he is made to have a garden from which he
should eat?" And the unjust say: "You do not follow any but a man enchanted," See what
likeness do they apply to you, so they have gone astray; therefore they shall not be able to find a
way (25:7-9). There are many verses of the same theme.

It is only because the purpose of coming down of a sign or verse is manifestation of truth and
completion of proof; when it came down then indeed the truth became manifest and the proof
was complete. Now, there is no sense in asking for coming down of a sign as it has already
happened and the purpose achieved, and therefore such asking would only mean mockery of
divine signs, play with the Lord's majesty and wavering in acceptance of reality; and it is the
greatest arrogance and haughtiness.

Such behavior, if shown by believers, would entail cruder offence and greater sin. Why should a
believer ask for coming down of a heavenly sign while he is already a believer and especially so
if he is one of those who have seen the divine signs and believed after that observation? Would it
not be similar to the suggestions, which the people of pleasure, surrounded with luxury, in
gatherings of entertainments and assemblies of amusements, offer to the magicians and
practitioners of legerdemain, in order that they should show to them the most astonishing
jugglery and the most wondrous activity that they can perform?

What appears from the words: When the disciples said: "O 'Isa son of Maryam! Is your Lord
able to send down to us food from heaven?" that they had asked the Christ (a.s.) to show them a
sign which would be reserved for them; they were his disciples, attached to him; and they had
seen those clear signs and manifest miracles; because he (a.s.) was not sent to his people except
with miraculous signs, as is seen from the divine words: "And a messenger to the Children of
'Israel: 'That I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, that I create for you out of clay the
likeness of a bird; then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird with Allah's leave; and I heal the
blind and the leper, and bring to life the dead, by Allah's leave...'" (3:49).

And how can it be imagined about him who believed in Christ (a.s.) that he would not have seen
any sign from him, while he (a.s.) in his own existence was a sign: Allah created him without a
father, and strengthened him with the Holy Ghost, and he talked with the people in the cradle as
well as in matured age; and he continued to be honoured by one sign after another until Allah
raised him to Himself and ended his affairs with a wonderful sign.
When they asked to be shown a sign which they had chosen for themselves - even after seeing all
those numerous sign - it was tantamount to suggesting a sign after a sign; thus they committed a
great offence, and that is why 'Isa (a.s.) admonished them, saying: "Fear Allah if you are
believers."

And it was because of the same reason that they reinterpreted their suggestion and explained it
again in such a way as to tone down the vehemence of their speech and blunt its edge; so they
said: "We desire that we should eat of it and that our hearts should be at rest, and that we may
know that you have indeed spoken the truth to us and that we may be of the witnesses to it." Thus
they added to eating from it other reasons to explain their suggestion. They wanted to show that
this suggestion was not like amusement with wonderous activities or playing with divine signs;
rather there are some benefits intended, like perfection of their knowledge and removal of wrong
ideas from their hearts and their being the witnesses to it.

Yet they did not omit mentioning the intention of eating from it, and that was the main offence.
If they had said: 'We desire that we should eat of it so that our hearts should be at rest,' there
would not have been any blame on them; but they said: "... eat of it and that our hearts should be
at rest," The former sentence cuts at the roots of all fantasy and foolhardiness, but not the latter
(i.e. present construction).

When they insisted, 'Isa (a.s.) agreed to their demand and asked his Lord to honour them in this
way; and it was the only sign sent down to them on their suggestion in an apparently
unimperative matter, and that is the believers' partaking of it. That is why he (a.s.) presented it in
a manner suitable to be addressed to the Divine Majesty, so he said: "O Allah, our Lord! Send
down to us food from heaven which should be an ever-recurring happiness, to the first of us and
to the last of us." Thus he dressed it in the robe of festivity; feast for a people is the day in which
they get a gift or an item of pride, which is exclusively reserved, to them from among the people,
and the coming down of the table has this particular attribute.

When 'Isa (a.s.) asked of his Lord what he asked - and far be it from him to ask for anything
except what he hoped that it would be accepted, and that his Lord would not disgrace him by
rejecting it; and far be it from his Lord to turn him away without accepting his invocainvocation
- his Lord accepted his prayer, but with one proviso, that whoever among his people would
disbelieve afterwards, Allah would chastise him with a chastisement that would be exclusively
reserved to them, as the sign that would be given to them would be exclusively reserved to them;
that is why He said: "Surely I will send it down to you, but whoever shall disbelieve afterwards
from among you, surely I will chastise him with a chastisement with which I will not chastise any
one among the nations." Ponder on it.

QUR'AN: When the disciples said: "O 'Isa son of Maryam! Is your Lord able to send down to
us food from heaven?": 'When' is an adverb, related to an implied verb, Remember, or some
similar word.

Someone has said that it is related to the words in the preceding verse, they said: "We believe in
Allah; and bear witness that we are submitting ones." It means: The disciples said: 'We believe
and bear witness that we submit,' at the time when they said to 'Isa: '"Is your Lord able to send
down to us food from heaven?'" It shows that they were not truthful in their claim, nor were they
serious in asking 'Isa (a.s.), to bear witness that they were submitters.

COMMENT: This interpretation goes against the context. How could their belief be impure,
when Allah Himself had revealed to them to believe in Him and His Messenger? And when
Allah counts it as His favour to 'Isa (a.s.). Apart from that, if this verse was joined to the
preceding one, it should have brought pronoun and not said: "When the disciples said."

al-Maidah (plate when it contains food). ar-Raghib has said: "al-Maidah is the plate that contains
food; and both (plate and food) are separately called maidah; and it is said: 'Madani yumiduni’,
i.e.'He fed me.'"

The wording of their question, i.e., "Is your Lord able to send down to us food from heaven?"
according to its apparent meaning that comes to the mind, is such that the reason thinks it
difficult that it could have been uttered by the disciples, who were companions of the Christ, and
his confidants who adhered to him, were illuminated by the light of his knowledge and
cognizance, and followed in his footsteps; and belief and faith - even in its lowest rank, makes
man aware that Allah has power over everything, He cannot be overcome and no disability
reaches Him. So, how was it possible for them to ask their messenger whether his Lord was able
to send down to them food from heaven?

That is why al-Kasa'i, one of the seven reciters, has recited this verse as: hal tastati'u (second
person singular) rabbaka (as an object); i.e. 'Are you able (to ask) your Lord?' Thus, implying
the verb, which we have put in parenthesis.

The exegetes have given different interpretations of this question, while most of them agree that
it means other than what comes to the mind — that they entertained doubt about the power of
Allah — because they were far above such absurd ignorance.

The best possible interpretation is to say that ability in this verse is an allusion to demand of the
underlying reason and occurrence of permission; in the same way as possibility, power and
ability are used metaphorically in this very meaning. For example, it is said: The King cannot
listen to every needy person;' it means that the King's underlying reason prevents him from it;
otherwise, listening to is within his ability. Or as it is said: 'A rich man cannot give to everyone
who asks,' i.e. the reason of protecting the wealth does not demand it. Or as it is said: 'A
knowledgeable person cannot disseminate all that he knows,' i.e. stops him from it the welfare of
religion, or welfare of the people, or the system that is prevalent among them. Or as one says to
his companion: 'Can you come with me to visit Mr. X?' The question implies: 'Does it agree with
your welfare and wisdom?' It does not imply his ability to go there. Think over it.

There are some other explanations given by the exegetes:

One: The disciples had asked this question in order to acquire tranquility through the belief
resulting from observation; it was not because they were having any doubt regarding Allah's
power. In a way, it is the same mode as Allah quotes in the story of Ibrahim (a.s.) that he said:
"My Lord! Show me how Thou givest life to the dead." He said: "What! And do you not believe?"
He said: "Yes, but that my heart may be at ease."... (2:260).

COMMENT: Although there is nothing wrong in asking for a sign for increase in belief and
tranquility of heart, but there is no reason to take their question in this meaning; and their
sinlessness is not proved, like Ibrahim (a.s.) so that it could be an independent proof for
interpreting their talk in a way free from rancor. Rather the proof is against it, because they had
not said: 'We desire that we should eat of it in order that our hearts should be at ease' (as Ibrahim
(a.s.) had said, 'Yes, but that my heart may be at ease’). Rather they had said, 'We desire that we
should eat of it and that our hearts may be at ease;' thus they had counted the eating, per se, a
purpose.

Moreover, this interpretation takes it for granted that their hearts were clean of any shade of
doubt regarding the divine power. And the ugliness of the apparent meaning of their talk remains
in its place.

Apart from that, it had been explained under the verse 2:260: And when Ibrahim said: "My Lord!
Show me how Thou givest life to the dead."..., that he (a.s.) did not want to see the dead getting
life after death. (The interpretation under Comment is based on this idea.) Because that would
have meant asking for a sign after clear observation, as he (a.s.) was at that time talking with his
Lord "face to face." What he had asked for was to see 'how' the dead would be raised - in the
aforementioned meaning.

Two: They actually wanted to ask about the action, not about Allah's power to do so; they
expressed the idea metaphorically through its concomitant.

COMMENT: There is no proof for this explanation. Even if we accept it, it would negate the
idea that they were ignorant of all-encompassing divine power; but the unsuitability of their talk
to manners of servitude still remains in place.

Three: There is in this speech an implied word, which is omitted. The complete sentence is as
follows: 'Are you able to ask your Lord to send down to us food from heaven?’ This meaning is
supported by the recital: 'Are you able (to ask) your Lord,' i.e. 'Are you able to ask Him without
there being anyone to dissuade you from it.'

COMMENT: This supposed omission and implication cannot turn the word: 'Is your Lord able
to ..." into, 'Are you able to ask your Lord;' because the verbs differ in the two recitals - in the
verse it is third person singular, while in the implied one it is second person singular; and
omission or implication does not change the third person to the second ' person at all.

However, if such change-over be necessary, then it would be said as follows: It ascribes the
action of 'Isa (a.s.) to his Lord, because his action is in reality Allah's action, or because
everything attributed to him belongs to Allah. But to begin with this explanation is wrong
because only those actions of prophets and messengers are attributed to Allah which do not bring
any defect or short-coming to His majesty, e.g. guidance, knowledge and things like that. On the
other hand, when it comes to the concomitants of their humility and humanity, like lack of power
and neediness or eating and drinking, etc., their attribution to Him cannot be justified at all.
Apart from that, the difficulty of the apparent meaning of the words remains in its place.

Four: al-Istita'ah (ability) is used here in the meaning of al-ita'ah (obedience); and the question
means: 'Will your Lord obey you and accept your prayer if you asked Him for it.'

COMMENT: It is like jumping out from the frying pan into the fire. Obviously, the question
whether Allah would obey His messenger is more hideous and repulsive than the query about
His capability.

Someone has supported this explanation as follows: al-Istita'ah and al-ita'ah both are derived
from the root taw-' (obedience) which is opposite of kurh (dislike); thus obeying an order means
doing it with pleasure and free will; the paradigm of al-istif'al from this stem is like that of this
paradigm from the stem (jawb). In other words, as istijabah gives the meaning of ijabah (to
accept prayer), likewise 'istita'ah indicates ita'ah; thus istata'ahu means afa'ahu ('he obeyed
him'). And 's’ and 't' in both verbal nouns denote their most well known theme, and that is 'to
want something'; however it is related to an implied verb which is indicated by the described
verb that emanates from the omitted one; 'he is capable of doing this thing" means as follows:
'He wanted it and intended that this thing should obey him, and so it obeyed him and followed
his order'; likewise he answered Zayd means: 'Zayd asked for something and wanted it to accept
his call, so it answered it'.

He further says: With this fine explanation we may understand the correctness of those exegetes'
opinion who have said that "Is your Lord able" here means "Will your Lord obey", i.e. Will He
do this work by His own free will and pleasure, without any compulsion? In short, it means that:
Will your Lord be pleased to send down to us food from heaven, when we ask Him, or when you
ask it from Him on our behalf?

COMMENT:

First: All that he has done is to correlate istata'a with istajabah, and give to the former the later's
meaning. But using analogy in language is not allowed.

Second: That both istita'ah and ita'ah are derived from taw' which is opposite of kurh (dislike),
does not necessarily mean that the stem's meaning will be preserved in all conjugational changes;
because there are many basic words which have left their original meaning as a result of the
changes in conjugation, for example: dharaba (he hit) and adhraba (he went on strike); qabila
(he accepted), aqbala (he came forward), qabbala (he kissed), qabala (he encountered)
istaqbala (he welcomed).

When the grammarians look at the basic stem of the verb while seeing its conjugational changes,
their only aim is to find out how much of the basic meaning is sustained in all these changes; or
does that meaning give way to another new one; they do not think that the original meaning
should be preserved, even with all those changes. Understand it.

A word indicates the meaning that is understood from it by the live and prevalent usage, not by
the literal connotation of its root-word. The word: istita'ah has been used in more than forty
places in the Divine Book, and everywhere it gives the meaning of ability. And the word: ata'ah
is used in nearly seventy places, and everywhere it gives the meaning of obedience. Also,
wherever the word: taw' has been used it denotes 'opposite of dislike’. Now, how can the word:
istita'a be taken to mean ifa 'a, and this in its turn be taken to mean taw'? And how can it be then
claimed that ability here means pleasure or liking?

As for ajaba and istajaba, both have been used in the Qur'an in the same meaning; and istajabah
has been used several times more than ajabah - the former is found in about thirty places while
the latter is not seen in more than ten. How can ata'a and istata'a  be analogized with it?

As for the both words having the same meaning, it only means that two aspects of theses words
fit on one place: Ajaba means that the answer went over from the answerable to the questioner,
and istajaba means that the one who is answerable asked for the reply from himself and passed it
on to the questioner.

It is now clear that what that exegete has explained istajabah with, is not correct; lie has said:
"Istajaba means that he asked for something and wanted it to give him the reply and it replied."
But the paradigm of istif'al indicates demand of fa'ala, and not demand of af'ala. And it is clear.

Third: The context does not agree with this interpretation. If we accept that their question, "Is
your Lord, able to send down to us food from heaven?" only meant: 'Will your Lord be pleased
that we ask Him (or you ask Him) to send down to us food from heaven?' and that their only aim
from this question or from this coming down was that their faith be strengthened and their hearts
be at ease, then why 'Isa (a.s.) should admonish them and say: "Fear Allah if you are believers?"
And why should Allah threaten him who would disbelieve afterwards from among them with a
chastisement with which He would not chastise anyone in the worlds? While the fact remains
that they had not spoken except truth and had not put except a proper request; and Allah Himself
has said: ...and ask Allah of His grace;... (4:32)

QUR'AN: He said: "Fear Allah if you are believers.": 'Isa (a.s.) admonished them because
apparently they had questioned the ability of his (a.s.)'s Lord to send down food from heaven;
this speech creates doubt in any case. However, in view of the interpretation given by us, that the
actual reason of this censure which ended with the severe threatening, was that they had asked
for a sign when there was no need of it, and suggested what was tantamount to playing with
divine signs; add to it their ugly style of the question which apparently showed that their hearts
had not firmly believed in the power of Allah; in this backdrop, the reason of 'Isa (a.s.)'s
admonition becomes more manifest.

QUR'AN: They said: "We desire that we should eat of it and that our hearts should be at rest,
and that we may know that you have indeed spoken the truth to us and that we may be of the
witnesses to it.": It appears from the context that they offered this excuse in order to save
themselves from his censure. This talk apparently is related to their demand for a sign by sending
down the food; it does not refer to any imagined doubt that they would have entertained
regarding Allah's unrestricted power. This is another evidence that they were so admonished
because they had asked for a sign when it was not needed at all.
As for their words: "We desire that we should eat of it... we may be of the witnesses to it." The
disciples have given four reasons for demanding this particular sign: -

First: Eating of it: They wanted to point out that they had not intended playing with the signs of
Allah; they wanted to eat of it, and it was a reasonable objective. We have said earlier that this
explanation of the disciples was tantamount to their acceptance that they deserved the
admonition by 'Isa (a.s.) and the severe threatening by Allah to him who would disbelieve in the
sign of the food.

Someone has said that they had mentioned eating in order to show their utmost need of food and
that they could not find anything to satisfy their hunger.

Yet others have said that they meant to say: that we should be blessed by eating it.

However, you are aware that neither of the above reasons can be inferred from merely the word,
eating. Had they intended either of the two reasons, which would really remove the censure, it
was necessary for them to mention it clearly. As they did not mention any such thing in spite of
its necessity in this context, obviously they had used eating in its general sense, inasmuch as it
was a reasonable purpose, and it was one part of their objective in suggesting the coming down
of the food.

Second: Tranquility of hearts, such that their hearts should be at rest, by the removal of notions,
which were inconsistent with sincerity and presence.

Third: To know that 'Isa (a.s.) had indeed spoken the truth in conveying the divine message to
them. Knowledge here means that certainty which comes into the heart when devilish notions
and insinuations are removed from it.

Or, as someone has said, the knowledge that he (a.s.) had spoken to them the truth in what he
(a.s.) had promised them as the fruits of faith, like acceptance of invocations.

However, this interpretation looks unlikely because the disciples had not asked for coming down
of the food except through 'Isa (a.s.)'s invocation, i.e. as a miracle from him (a.s.), and they had
already seen numerous signs and miracles on his (a.s.)'s hand; because he (a.s.) was always
accompanied by great divine signs; he was not sent to his community, nor had he (a.s.) put a call
to them except with the signs of his Lord; so they were always seeing the fruits of his faith in the
form of the acceptance of his invocation - if the fruit means acceptance of his (a.s.)'s invocation.
But if the fruit is taken to mean acceptance of their own invocation, then (it would be against the
context, because) they had not demanded coming down of the sign through their own invocation,
and it did not come down but by 'Isa (a.s.)'s invocation.

Fourth: That they might be of the witnesses thereof, wherever witnessing would be needed, like
giving witness before the disbelievers and on the Day of Resurrection before Allah. So,
witnessing here is unrestricted. Also, possibly it may refer only to the witnessing before Allah, as
appears in their talk quoted by Allah, inter alia: "Our Lord! We believe in what Thou hast
revealed and we follow the Messenger, so write us down with those who bear witness." (3:53)
In short, while pleading in their defense, they added some beautiful and likeable factors to their
other objective, i.e. partaking from heavenly food. They did so in order to remove the ugliness
from their demanding a sign after already seeing sufficient signs; then ‘Isa (a.s.) agreed to their
demand after their persistence.

QUR'AN: 'Isa the son of Mary am said: "O Allah, our Lord! Send down to us food from heaven
which should be to us an ever-recurring happiness, to the first of us and to the last of us, and a
sign from Thee, and grant us sustenance, and Thou art the best of providers.": He (a.s.) joined
his own self with them in asking for the food; and began by calling to his Lord with a
comprehensive word: "O Allah, our Lord!" They had said: "Is your Lord able...", but he changed
it so that the address would agree with the prayer.

This prayer is unique amongst all the prayers and invocations of the prophets (peace be upon
them), quoted in the Qur'an. While all others begin with the word: 'My Lord' or 'Our Lord'; this
alone begins with: "O Allah, our Lord!" It is only because of the delicacy of the situation and the
fright of appraisal. On the other hand, similar opening addresses are found in the various types of
praises quoted in the Qur'an: Say: "Praise be to Allah..." (27:59); Say: "O Allah, Master of
Kingdom!..." (3:26); Say: "O Allah! Originator of the heavens and the earth, ..."(39:46).

Then he (a.s.) mentioned a heading for this sent down food, which would serve as a reason for
his and his companions' request that it be sent down, and it is that it should be to them an ever-
recurring happiness, to him and his people. The disciples had not mentioned in their demand that
they wanted it to be an exclusive festival to them. But he (a.s.) asked for it in a general style and
molded it into a good mould, in order that it would not be thought as a demand for a sign while
there already were so many great divine signs before their eyes and within their observation. In
this way, it would become a demand likeable by Allah, and not in clash with His majesty and
greatness; because a festival by its very nature unites the word, revives the community, enlivens
the celebrants and is announced whenever the grandeur of religion returns.

That is why he said: "an ever-recurring happiness, to the first of us and to the last of us," i.e. the
first group of our nation and the other ones who would join them later - as the context shows.
Because 'id (festival) is derived from 'awd (return); so it would be 'id only if it returns time and
again, in descendants after ancestors without any limit.

This festival exclusively belonged to the ummah of 'Isa (a.s.), and as explained earlier, this type
of sign too was reserved for them.

"and a sign from Thee": First he puts up the question of 'id, and it was a good and beautiful thing
free from all blemish; then he followed it by its being a sign from Allah. It was an extra benefit
added to the main objective; it was not intended to be the only objective. Had it been the only
purpose, i.e. its being a sign asking for, it would have led to an unwanted result; because all good
advantages which could be intended from it, were easily obtainable through the signs which the
disciples and others were seeing from him (a.s.) every day.

"and grant us sustenance, and Thou art the best of providers": It is another benefit which he
counted as resulting from that invocation of 'id, although it is not the intended purpose. The
disciples had asked for it as the main intended purpose in itself, as they had said: "We desire that
we should eat of it..." Thus, they had mentioned it as the thing intended for itself, and mentioned
it before other items. But 'Isa (a.s.) counted it as unintended for itself and put it at the end; also,
he changed the word, eating, with that of sustenance, and added after it the phrase: " 'and Thou
art the best of providers.'"

What they had treated as the main purpose has been relegated by 'Isa (a.s.) as a resulting benefit,
only. Its proof may be seen in the fact that he (a.s.) first prayed for himself and his whole ummah
the granting of 'id, which he had added to their suggestion. In this way, its becoming a sign of
Allah and a sustenance, became two attributes which were reserved to some of them excluding
the others, like a resulting benefit which is not all-encompassing.

When you will look at his (a.s.)'s fine and brilliant good manners vis-a-vis his Lord, you will be
astonished. See how he (a.s.) took the wording of their demand, then added to it, omitted from it,
altered the sequence and changed and preserved, until their original talk which was totally unfit
to be presented before Allah, turned into a beautiful speech containing the good manners of
servitude. Just meditate on the proviso of his (a.s.)'s speech, you will be amazed.

QUR'AN: Allah said: "Surely I will send it down to you, but whoever shall disbelieve
afterwards from among you, surely I will chastise him with a chastisement with which I will not
chastise any one among the nations.": The people of Medina and Syria as well as 'Asim have
recited it, munazziluha  with intensified pronunciation, and the others have recited munziluha
without intensification - as has been described in Majma'u'l-bayan. And the latter is more
appropriate, because inzal - from which munziluha is derived - denotes being sent down all at-
once, and the food was sent down in this very manner. As for tanzil - from which munazziluha is
derived - it is generally used for gradual coming down, as described earlier repeatedly.

The phrase: "Surely I will send it down to you" is an unambiguous promise to send the food
down, especially when we see its structure: the original phrase literally means: I am its sender
down, i.e. it uses the paradigm of nomen agentis, and not of a verb; and it inevitably means that
the food was indeed sent down to them.

Some exegetes have said that it was not sent down, as is quoted in ad-Durru'l-manthur and
Majma 'u'l-bayan, from al-Hasan and Mujahid that they said: "It did not come down; because
when they heard of the condition they abandoned their request and said: 'We do not want it nor
do we need it'; so it did not come down."

But the fact is that the verse clearly shows that it was sent down, as it contains clear promise of
its coming down, and far be it from Allah that He should magnanimously give a clear promise
when He knew that they would give up their demand so it would not be sent down; the promise
given in the verse is quite clear, and the condition mentioned in it says that those who would
disbelieve after its coming down would be given unparalleled chastisement. In other words, the
verse contains unconditional promise of sending the food down, and then it attaches the
chastisement to disbelief. It does not say that it would be sent down provided they accepted the
chastisement for disbelief, so that the promise would be cancelled if they did not accept the said
condition, and then the food would not be sent if they gave up their demand. Understand it.

In any case, the divine promise to send the food conjoined with severe threat of disbelievers'
chastisement was not a rejection of 'Isa (a.s.)'s prayer, rather it apparently accepts his invocation.
However, as this acceptance of the prayer, in this context, would have apparently shown that that
sign would be an unrestricted mercy which would be enjoyed by the first of them and the last of
them, Allah restricted it with the attached proviso. In short, it shows that this festival, which is
exclusively reserved to them, would not benefit all of them, it would be beneficial only to the
believers among them who would continue in their belief, but as for the disbelievers they would
be harmed by it, extreme harm.

Thus, these two verses in their style are like the verses 2:124 and 7:155-6. All these verses
contain a general and unrestricted prayer and a restricted acceptance. (Those verses are as
follows.)

And (remember) when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, and he fulfilled them. He said:
"Surely I am going to make you an Imam for men." He (Ibrahim) said: "And of my offspring?"
He said: "My covenant shall not include the unjust." (2:124). "... Thou art our Guardian,
therefore forgive us and have mercy on us, and Thou art the best of the forgivers. And ordain for
us good in this world and in the hereafter, for surely we proceed to Thee." He said: "(As for) My
chastisement, I will afflict with it whom I please, and My mercy encompasses all things; so I will
ordain it for those who fear Allah and pay the zakat, and those who believe in Our signs."
(7:155-6).

You have understood from the above that the actual reason for this threatened chastisement
(which would be restricted to them) is that they had demanded a sign of a type that would be
reserved to them and no other nation would share in it with them. So, when that demand was
granted they were threatened on disbelieving in it a chastisement that no one else would share
with them, just like the distinction granted to them.

It is apparent from it that al- 'alamin (worlds, nations) refers to all nations, not only those who
were present at that time, because it is related to those whom they distinguished among the
people; and it covers all nations, not only those who were in the days of 'Isa (a.s.) from among
the nations of the earth.
Also, it is clear that although the sentence: "surely I will chastise him with a chastisement with
which I will not chastise any one among the nations", is a very tough threat of a miserable
punishment, yet the talk does not say that the chastisement would be above all punishment and
retributions in hardship and agony; it rather says that the punishment would be unique which
they alone would be afflicted with among the nations.

Traditions
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) explained the phrase: "Is your Lord able" in these words, "Are you able to
pray to your Lord?" (Majma 'u'l-bayan)
The author says: This meaning has been narrated through Sunni chains from some companions
and their followers, like 'Aishah and Sa'id ibn Jubayr. It returns to the meaning which we have
shown earlier, because the query about 'Isa (a.s.)'s power can only be correct if it refers to his
ability from the view of reason and welfare, not about his actual power.

'Isa al-'Alawi narrates from his father from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said, "The table (of food) that
was sent to the Children of Israel was suspended by golden chains; there were nine fish and nine
loaves of bread on it." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

The author says: In another version there is nine anwan (plural of nun) in place of ahwatah
(plural of hut); both have the same meaning, fish.

'Ammar ibn Yasir narrates from the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he said, "The table came (with) bread
and meat. It was because they had asked 'Isa (a.s.) for an inexhaustible food which they would
eat. He (The Prophet) said, 'It was said to them, "Surely it will stay with you as long as you do
not act treacherously, do not hide it and do not lift from it; but if you did so you will be
punished.'" He (The Prophet) said, 'But the day did not come to its end until they hid it, lifted
from it and acted treacherously.'" (Majma'u'l-bayan)

The author says: (as-Suyuti) has narrated it in ad-Durru'l-manthur from at-Tirmidhi, Ibn Jarir,
Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibnu'l-Anbari, Abu 'sh-Shaykh and Ibn Marduwayh, from 'Ammar ibn Yasir
from the Prophet (s.a.w.), and there is at its end the phrase: "so they were transformed into apes
and swine."
Also, he writes in the same ad-Durru'l-manthur: Ibn Jarir, Ibnu'l-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Hatim
have narrated a similar tradition in another way from 'Ammar ibn Yasir as a mawquf tradition, at-
Tirmidhi has said that the waqf ismore correct.

What this report says that they had asked for an inexhaustible food which they would eat, does
not fully agree with the verse, as appears from their words quoted herein, and that we may be of
the witnesses to it, because a food that is never exhausted does not need any witness to testify for
it - except if it means testifying before Allah on the Day of Resurrection.

Also, the report of their transformation into apes and swines, as what is apparent from the
context, is the punishment with which they were threatened. But here it leaves open another door
of argument. Because the divine words: "surely I will chastise him with a chastisement with
which I will not chastise any one among the nations", apparently show that they would be meted
out with an exclusive punishment, not shared by any others; while the Qur'an clearly mentions
that other people too were transformed into apes. Allah says: "Be apes, despised and hated."
(2:65). And it is narrated in this connection through some chains of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.), that they
were transformed into swine.
al-Fudayl ibn Yasar narrates from Abu'l-Hasan (a.s.) that he heard him saying, "Swine were from
the people of 'Isa, they had asked for coming down of the table and then did not believe, so Allah
transformed them into swine." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

'Abdu 's-Samad ibn Bandar said, "I heard Abu'l-Hasan (a.s.) saying, 'Swine were a community of
bleachers, they denied the table, so they were transformed into swine."' (ibid.)

The author says: It is narrated in al-Kafi from Muhammad ibn Yahya, from Ahmad ibn
Muhammad, from Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Ash'ari from Abu'l-Hasan ar-Rida (a.s.) that he
said, "Elephant is transformed, it was a fornicating king; wolf is transformed, it was a cuckold
Bedouin; rabbit is transformed, it was a woman who was disloyal to her husband and did not take
bath after her menstruation; bat is transformed, it used to steal dates of the people; apes and
swine are groups of the Children of Israel who had exceeded the limits of the Sabbath; eel and
lizard were a group of the Children of Israel who did not believe when the table was sent down
to 'Isa son of Maryam, so they became disoriented, one group fell in the sea and another in the
land; mouse is a debaucherer; scorpion was a slanderer; and bear, lizard and wasp were meat-
sellers who defrauded in measure."

This tradition does not go against the preceding two traditions, because it is possible that some of
them were changed into swine, while some others were changed into eel and lizard. However, it
is not free from another difficulty, as it mentions that the people of the Sabbath were changed
into apes and swine, while this verse as well as a similar one in the chapter seven, mention, only
their transformation into apes, and their context rejects their transformation into any other shape.

Chapter 5 - Al-Maida (The Table), Verses

116-120
 
‫ْس لِي‬ َ ‫ول َما لَي‬ َ ُ‫ك َما يَ ُكونُ لِي أَ ْن أَق‬ َ َ‫اس اتَّ ِخ ُذونِي َوأُ ِّم َي إِلَـهَ ْي ِن ِمن دُو ِن هّللا ِ قَا َل ُس ْب َحان‬ ِ َّ‫َوإِ ْذ قَا َل هّللا ُ يَا ِعي َسى ا ْبنَ َمرْ يَ َم أَأَنتَ قُلتَ لِلن‬
‫ت لَهُ ْم إِالَّ َما أَ َمرْ تَنِي بِ ِه‬ ُ ‫} َما قُ ْل‬116{ ‫ب‬ ِ ‫ك أَنتَ َعالَّ ُم ْال ُغيُو‬ َ َّ‫ك إِن‬َ ‫نت قُ ْلتُهُ فَقَ ْد َعلِ ْمتَهُ تَ ْعلَ ُم َما فِي نَ ْف ِسي َوالَ أَ ْعلَ ُم َما فِي نَ ْف ِس‬ ُ ‫ق إِن ُك‬ٍّ ‫بِ َح‬
ٌ َ َ ُ َ
{ ‫يب َعل ْي ِه ْم َوأنتَ َعلى ك ِّل ش ْي ٍء ش ِهيد‬َ َ َ ِ‫أَ ِن اعبُدُوا َ َربِّي َو َربَّك ْم َوكنت َعل ْي ِه ْم ش ِهيدًا َّما د ْمت فِي ِه ْم فل َّما تَ َوف ْيتَنِي كنتَ أنتَ ال َّرق‬
َ ُ َّ َ َ ُ ُ َ َ ُ ُ ُ ‫هّللا‬ ْ ْ
‫ات‬ ٌ َّ‫ص ْدقُهُ ْم لَهُ ْم َجن‬ ِ َ‫ال هّللا ُ هَ َذا يَوْ ُم يَنفَ ُع الصَّا ِدقِين‬
َ َ‫} ق‬118{ ‫ك أَنتَ ْال َع ِزي ُز ْال َح ِكي ُم‬ َ ‫} إِن تُ َع ِّذ ْبهُ ْـم فَإِنَّهُ ْم ِعبَا ُد‬117
َ َّ‫ك َوإِن تَ ْغفِرْ لَهُ ْم فَإِن‬
‫ض‬ ِ ْ‫ر‬ َ ‫ت َواأل‬
ِ ‫اوا‬ َّ ُ ْ ‫هّلِل‬
َ ‫} ِ ُملك الس َم‬119{ ‫ك الفوْ ز ال َع ِظي ُم‬ ْ ُ َ ْ َ ْ ْ ْ
َ ِ‫ض َي ُ َعنهُ ْم َو َرضُوا َعنهُ ذل‬ ‫هّللا‬ ِ ‫تَجْ ِري ِمن تَحْ تِهَا األَ ْنهَا ُر خَ الِ ِدينَ فِيهَا أبَدًا ر‬
َّ َ
}120{ ‫َو َما فِي ِه َّن َوهُ َو َعلَى ُكلِّ َش ْي ٍء قَ ِدي ٌر‬
{116} And when Allah will say: "O 'Isa son of Maryam! Did you say to the people: 'Take me
and my mother for two gods besides Allah'? "He will say: "Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me
that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it;
Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the
great Knower of the unseen things. {117} I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst
enjoin me with: 'That worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord', and I was a witness of them so
long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take me up, Thou wert the watcher over them,
and Thou art witness of all things. {118} If Thou shouldst chastise them, then surely they are
Thy servants; and if Thou shouldst forgive them, then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise.".
{119) Allah will say: "This is the day when their truth shall benefit the truthful ones; they shall
have gardens beneath which rivers flow to abide in them forever; Allah is well pleased with them
and they are well pleased with Him; this is the mighty achievement.". {120} Allah's is the
Kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is in them; and He has power over all things.
 

Commentary
It is a sort of a dialogue between Allah and His messenger 'Isa son of Maryam, about what the
Christians say regarding 'Isa (a.s.). It appears that the purpose of these verses is to affirm what he
(a.s.) had confessed and described about himself in his life of this world: That he had no right to
claim for himself what was not 'his' anyhow; that he indeed was in the sight of Allah, which does
not sleep, nor does it turn aside; that he had never crossed the limits laid down by Allah. He had
not said except that which Allah had enjoined him to say, and he had remained engaged in the
task, which Allah had given him f it was the subject of 'witnessing'. And Allah has affirmed his
truthfulness in what he said regarding the right of Lordship and servitude.

In this way, the verses fit the aim and objective for which this chapter was revealed; that is the
description of the right laid down by Allah over His servants, that they should fulfill the
covenant they have made, and should not break it; it is not proper for them to wander around as
they want, and to graze pleasantly wherever they wish. Because they have not been given such
right by their Lord, nor do they have such power on their own. Allah's is the Kingdom of the
heavens and the earth and what is in them; and He has power over all things. And on this note
the chapter comes to its end.

QUR'AN: And when Allah will say: "O 'Isa son of Maryam! Did you say to the people: 'Take me
and my mother for two gods besides Allah'?": "When" is an adverb of time related to an omitted
but implied verb which is understood from the context  and it indicates the Day of Resurrection;
as Allah describes: Allah will say; "This is the day when their truth shall benefit the truthful
ones;" and 'Isa himself shall say: "and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but
when Thou didst take me up, Thou wert the watcher over them".

The verse mentions Maryam with the attribute of motherhood; it says: "Take me and my mother
for two gods", instead of saying: Take me and Maryam for two gods'. It points to their most
important proof for 'Isa's divinity, i.e. his being born of her without a father; thus the sonship and
motherhood are the basic ingredients in this matter; therefore mentioning him and his mother
was more effective than the mention of 'Isa and Maryam.

"Dun" (low, inadequate) is used ultimately in the sense of 'besides'. ar-Raghib says: "Dun is used
to indicate one who is unable to do something; someone has said that it is the reversed form of
dunuw (proximity) adwan means daniy (near); Allah says: Do not take for intimate friends from
among others than your own people;... (3:118), i.e. he who does not attain your position in
religiosity; or, in kinship; the word of Allah: ...and forgives what is besides that... (4:48), i.e.
lesser than that; or apart from that; and the two meanings are concomitant. And the divine words:
'Did you say to the people: "Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah"?', i.e. other
than Allah."

The phrase: "besides Allah", has been used in the Qur'an mostly in the sense of partnership, and
not for independent divinity. When it condemns taking one, two or more gods besides Allah, it
means taking someone other than Allah a partner of Allah in divinity - it does not mean taking
someone else for a god and denying the divinity of Allah: Surely it would be a foolish talk
without any sense, because the one taken as god would be the true God and other than Him
would be negated. Thus, it would turn into a verbal dispute about some attributes. For example,
if someone says that God is the Christ, and negated God for Christ, it would mean that he affirms
the existence of God but attaches to Him human characteristics of the Christ. Or, if he said that
the idols or lords of the idols are gods and negated the existence of Allah, then he admits that
there is a god for the universe; thus he affirms the existence of Allah, but has ascribed to Him the
attributes of plurality and multitude; thus he makes partner for Allah. Or says as the Christians
say that Allah is the third of the three, i.e., one who is three and three who is one.

Likewise, whoever says that the beginning of the world is time or nature and denies that there is
a god for it, he indeed affirms that there is a Maker for the world and he is Allah, but he has
ascribed to Him the attributes of defect and transience.

And whoever denies any beginning for this wonderful system and rejects any causality and
effectiveness, in spite of the clear decision of his nature, he indeed affirms that there is a world
firmly fixed which is not subject of denial or non-existence at all; in other words, the world has
an essential existence. Now, the protector of its existence and permanence is either the world
itself - which cannot be, because its parts are subject to change and cessation - or another one -
and He is Allah who has His attributes of perfection.

It is thus clear that Allah does not admit negation in any way, except in apparent wording that is
devoid of any understandable meaning.

The basic factor in all this is that man proves the existence of Allah because of the general need
felt in the world for the One who should furnish his existence's requirements and manage the
affairs of his system, and then he would affirm the particulars of his existence. Whatever he
would affirm for fulfilling this need, he is Allah. Then if he affirms another god or more gods
than one, it will be seen that either he has erred in specification of His attributes and apostatized
in His names, or has affirmed for Him a partner or several partners. But to deny His being and
affirm someone other than Him, would be a senseless exercise.

Now, it becomes clear that the phrase, two gods besides Allah, means two partners of Allah
beside Himself. Even if it is accepted that the phrase does not indicate partnership in any way,
we shall say that its meaning does not go beyond believing in two gods who in quiddity are other
than Allah; but it is silent about its being joined with denial of Allah's divinity or its affirmation;
no word of the verse speaks about it, it is understood from outside. The Christians do not deny
His divinity although they take the Christ and his mother as two gods besides Allah.

Some people have found it hard to explain the verse because the Christians do not believe in the
divinity of the virgin Maryam; and they have mentioned several points for explaining it.

But it should be kept in mind that the verse mentions their taking her as a goddess, and not that
they believe in her as a goddess. Taking someone as a god is quite different from believing in his
divinity - except as a concomitant. Taking someone as a god is applicable to submitting to him
with humility. Allah says: Have you then considered him who takes his base desire for his god?
(45:23). And this theme is narrated from the ancients of Christians, and observed in their
descendants.

al-Alusi has written in Ruhu'l-ma'ani: Verily Abu Ja'far al-Imami has narrated from some
Christians that in the past there was a sect called Maryamiyyah; they believed about Maryam that
she was a goddess.

(Rashid Rida) has said in Tafsiru'l-Manar. As for their taking the Christ as a god, it has already
been mentioned in several places in explanation of this chapter; and as for his mother, her
worship was agreed upon in the Eastern and the Western Churches after Constantine; then the
Protestant denomination (which appeared many centuries after the advent of Islam) rejected her
worship.

This worship offered to Maryam, mother of Christ, by Christians, is of various modes: There is a
salat which contains prayer, praise, call for help and intercession; there is also a fast ascribed to
her and named after her; and all this is joined with humility to her remembrance, and to her
pictures and images, combined with the belief of her authority emanating from the unseen world.
That authority, according to their belief, enables her to bring benefit and harm in this world and
the next, either by herself or through her son. They have clearly declared that it is incumbent to
worship her. However, we know not of any of their sects which would use the word, goddess, for
her; of course they name her, 'Mother of god'; and some sects make it clear that it is used in its
real, not metaphorical, sense,

The Qur'an says here that they had taken 'Isa and his mother for two gods, and the taking is other
than naming; taking them for gods occurs when they worship them, and this certainly happens in
their case. Allah has said in another verse that they say: Surely Allah, He is the Masih son of
Maryam;... (5:72). But that is something else. And the Prophet (s.a.w.) has explained the divine
words: They have taken their doctors of law and their monks for Lords besides Allah,... (9:31),
that they followed them in what they allowed or forbade, not that they called them Lords.

The first clear declaration that I saw about the Christians really worshipping Maryam, was in the
book, as-Sawa'i, from among the books of the Greek Orthodox, and I had seen this book in a
monastery called Dayru't-Talmid, when I was first admitted in the educational Institute; and the
Catholic declare openly and take pride of it.

al-Jazwit had decorated in Beirut their magazine, al-Mashriq (no.9, year 7) with Maryam's
picture and colored designs, it was done as a souvenir to celebrate the Golden Jubilee at the end
of fifty years since the announcement of the Pope Pius IX that the virgin Maryam had become
pregnant without pollution of sin; and in that very issue they confirmed that the Eastern as well
as the Western Churches worshipped Maryam.
Of the same theme is the word of father Luis Shaykhu, in an article of his regarding the Eastern
Churches: "Verily the worship by Armenian Church of the chaste virgin, the Mother of Allah, is
certainly a well-known affair." He also writes: "The Coptic Church is distinguished by its
worship of the Blessed Virgin, the Mother of Allah."

Then he quotes a part of an essay by father Inistas al-Karamli published in the Catholic magazine
al-Mashriq (no. 14, year 5) of Beirut. He writes under the heading, "Antiquity of the Virgin's
worship", after mentioning the wording of Genesis, regarding the enmity of the serpent with the
woman and her offspring, and interpreting the woman as the Virgin: "Don't you see that you do
not find in this text anything clearly pointing to the Virgin until there came that great prophet,
Elia the living, and he brought forth the worship of the Virgin from the corner of symbolism and
ambiguity to the world of clarity and explanation."

Then he interprets this clarity and explanation by what is written in the Kings E (according to the
Catholic arrangement) that when Elia was with his servant at the summit of Karami, he ordered
him seven times to look towards the sea. After the seventh observation, the servant informed him
that he saw a cloud about the size of a man's palm rising from the sea.

The essay-writer says: "From that rising (the first rising of the cloud) I say: 'Is it anything except
the picture of Maryam, according to what the exegetes have established, rather it is the picture of
the fetus without the original sin'." Then he says: "This is the origin of the Virgin's worship in the
esteemed orient; and it goes back to the tenth century B.C.; and the excellence in this matter goes
to this great prophet Elia." Again he says: "That is why the ancestors of the Karmalites were the
first to believe in the Lord Jesus after the apostles and the disciples, and they were the first to
establish a place of worship for the Virgin after her being taken away to the heaven with soul and
body."

QUR'AN: He will say: "Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no
right to (say); ...Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things: This and the next verse contain
reply of 'Isa son of Maryam (a.s.) of the question he was asked; and he (a.s.) has adopted in it an
amazing manner and etiquette:

He began by glorifying God, when he (a.s.) suddenly and unexpectedly was confronted with
what was not proper to be ascribed to that Great and Sublime Being - i.e. the people taking them
two gods besides Allah, as His partners. It is a good manner of servitude that the servant should
glorify his Lord whenever he hears what is not proper to be ascribed to God or what does not
enter into mind in this connection. It is this factor that Allah has trained His servants in the
Qur'an: And they say: "The Beneficent God has taken to Himself a son." Glory be to Him...
(21:26); And they ascribe daughters to Allah, glory beta Him;... (16:57).

Then he turned to refute what was implied in the question that it could be ascribed to him. That
he would have told the people to take him and his mother for two gods besides Allah. He did not
only reject it in itself, but refuted its cause to put emphasis on de-anthropomorphism. Had he
said: 'I did not say (or do) it', it would have implied that although such an action or talk was
possible but he did not do it; but when he refuted its cause and said: 'It did not befit me that I
should say what I had no right to (say)', it refuted the basis of such talk; this refutation of such a
right also more intensely refutes what depends on it. Let us suppose that a master says to his
servant: 'Why did you do what I had not told you to do?' Now, if the servant says: 'I did not do it',
it would refute what was expected to happen; but if he said, 'I am rather unable to do it', it would
refute it by refuting its cause; it would be rejection of its basic possibility, let alone its actual
occurrence.

"it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say)": If the verb, ma yakun (it does
not happen) is a defective verb, then its subject is "that I should say", and the predicate is "what I
had no right to (say)", and "li" denotes possession. The meaning then will be: 'I do not possess
what I was not given possession of, and it does not befit me to speak without any right.' On the
other hand, if this verb is 'complete', then the word, 'me', is related to it, and the phrase: "that I
should say...", is its subject; and then the meaning will be: 'It does not occur to me to speak
without any right.' And the former is nearer interpretation. In any case, it negates the action by
negating its cause.

"if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it": It is second rejection of the question asked
- not on its own but through rejection of its concomitant; because if such words were uttered,
Allah would certainly know it, because He it is from whom nothing is hidden, neither in the earth
nor in the heavens, and He watches every soul as to what it earns, and He encompasses
everything.

This speech of 'Isa (a.s.), to begin with, presents the talk with its proof, and does not offer mere
claim; and then indicates that in all his talks and actions he always kept regard of Allah's
knowledge, not caring whether other creatures of Him knew it or not, as he had nothing to do
with them.

In other words, asking questions is in order in a matter in which there is a possibility of being
ignorant; so it is intended for removal of ignorance and imparting of knowledge - either for the
asker himself, if he is ignorant of the reality, or to some other person, if the asker is
knowledgeable but he intends that others too should become aware of the reality. It is this latter
reason to which the type of the question found in the divine speech is attributed. 'Isa (a.s.)'s reply
at this juncture: "if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it", turns the affair to His
knowledge and indicates that he does not refer anything of his words and deeds except to the
divine knowledge.

Then he said: "Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind": This
indicates the purity of the divine knowledge from mixing with ignorance. Although the sentence,
in itself, denotes praise; but praise is not intended here, because it is not the place of praise;
rather it is the place of getting rid of the attributions that were ascribed to Him.

His words: "Thou knowest what is in my mind," elaborates the comprehensiveness of the
knowledge mentioned in the phrase: "if I had said it, Thou wouldst have known it." It shows that
Allah's knowledge of our deeds - and He is the King, the Truth on that day - is not like the
knowledge of our kings about the condition of their subjects; as they receive reports from various
parts of their kingdom, and consequently they know things in part and remain ignorant of other
parts. Allah is the Knower of subtleties, Aware of all things, including the soul of 'Isa son of
Maryam in particular.

Even then, he could not fully elaborate the attributes of His knowledge. Allah knows everything,
not as one of us knows about someone else, and someone else knows about one of us. He knows
what He knows by encompassing the object; while nothing encompasses Him, and they cannot
comprehend anything of His knowledge. Thus He, the Sublime, is God, without any limit, and
everyone beside Him is limited, determined, which cannot transcend the boundary of his limited
soul. That is why he (a.s.) added to it another sentence: "Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I
do not know what is in Thy mind."

As for his words: "surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things," it gives the reason of
his words: "Thou knowest what is in my mind..." It removes the possible misunderstanding that
the matter of knowledge in the sentence: "Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know
what is in Thy mind," is confined to what is between him and his Lord, and does not encompass
all things. So, by saying: "surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things," he made it
clear that the complete knowledge of all unseen things is reserved for Allah. Whatever
knowledge is held by anything and is unseen by other things, it is indeed known by Allah and He
encompasses it.

It follows that nothing is aware of the unseen thing of Allah or of other than Allah's - which
Allah knows - because everything is created and limited and does not transcend its own phases.
Thus, Allah is the great Knower of all unseen things, and nothing besides Him knows any of the
unseen things, neither whole or in part.

Moreover, if any of the unseen things of Allah was encompassed by a thing; now if Allah
encompasses it, then that encompassing thing would not be encompassing in reality, but it would
be encompassed by Allah: Allah in His pleasure has given it the power to encompass some of the
things owned by Him, without this latter thing going out of His possession, as Allah says: ...and
they cannot comprehend anything out of His knowledge except what He pleases;... (2:255)

If Allah were not to comprehend what He comprehends, He would become subject to a limit, and
thus would become a created thing; far exalted is He from such things!

QUR'AN: "I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: 'That worship
Allah, my Lord and your Lord': After first refuting the talk in question by rejecting its cause, he
now refutes it by explaining his responsibility which he had not transgressed. So, he said: "I did
not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with..." He used restricted mode of speech
through negative followed by positive, in order to give reply to the question asked, by rebutting
it, i.e. the speech: 'Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah.' Then he elaborated what
he was enjoined with by Allah: "'That worship Allah'"; than described Allah saying: "'my Lord
and your Lord'." It was done so that there should not remain any shade of misunderstanding and
it should be clearly known that he is a servant and a messenger who calls to Allah, his Lord and
the Lord of all the people, alone who has no partner.

In such a clear style 'Isa son of Maryam (a.s.) used to call the people to monotheism, as the
Qur'an quotes him as saying in other places too: Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord,
therefore worship Him; this is the right path. (43:64); And surely Allah is my Lord and your
Lord, therefore worship Him; this is the right path. (19:36).

QUR'AN: "and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take
me up, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things: Now, he (a.s.)
mentioned the second responsibility entrusted to him by Allah, and that was to be a witness of
his people's deeds, as Allah says: ...and on the Day of Resurrection he ('Isa) shall be a witness
over them. (4:159).

He (a.s.) declares: 'I had only two responsibilities towards them, to convey the message to them
and to be a witness of their deeds; as for the messengership, I performed it in clearest possible
terms; and as for the witnessing, I did not transgress the task You had enjoined me with; so I am
free from the blame that I might have told them to take me and my mother for two gods besides
Allah.'

"but when Thou didst take me up, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all
things": ar-Raqub and ar-riqabah (protection, preservation); in this context, it denotes
preservation of deeds. The word, witness, has been changed to 'watcher', to avoid repetition
because the next phrase contains this word: "and Thou art witness of all things," and there was
no reason why this word especially should be used second time.

The clause: "Thou wert the watcher over them," denotes restriction. It follows that Allah was the
witness as long as 'Isa (a.s.) was the witness, and He continued to be witness after him. So his
(a.s.)'s witnessing was a mediation in witnessing, not an independent witnessing; it is like all
other divine arrangements by which He has given some servants agency of some functions, while
He is the real manager of everything, like sustenance, giving life and death, preservation, call
and guidance, etc. There are numerous noble verses showing this aspect, which need not be
quoted here.

That is why 'Isa (a.s.), after saying: "but when Thou didst take me up, Thou wert the watcher
over them," added the next clause: "and Thou art witness of all things." This style was used to
denote that his being a witness over his people's deeds, which he continued to perform as long as
he was among them, was a small part of the general, comprehensive witnessing, i.e. the
witnessing of Allah over a thing; because Allah is the witness over the individual things and their
activities, including the deeds of His servants together with the deeds of the people of 'Isa (a.s.)
as long as he was among them and after his ascension, and He is the witness together with other
witnesses and the witness without other witnesses.

It is clear from the above that the restriction is true concerning Allah even when other witnesses
offer their testimonies, because 'Isa (a.s.) has restricted the testimony after his ascension to Allah,
although Allah had His other witnesses after 'Isa (a.s.)'s ascension among His servants and
messengers, and he (a.s.) was well aware of it.

And its proof may be seen in the good news he (a.s.) gave of the advent of the Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.), as quoted in the Qur'an: And when 'Isa son of Maryam said: "O Children of Israel!
Surely I am the messenger of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Tawrat, and
giving the good news of a messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmad;"... (61:6);
and the Qur'an has clearly mentioned the Prophet (s.a.w.) being a witness, as Allah says: ...and
bring you as a witness over these? (4:41).

Moreover, Allah has quoted him (a.s.) as describing this restriction: "but when Thou didst take
me up, Thou wert the watcher over them," and has not refuted it. So, Allah is the witness, and no
one else, in spite of there being witnesses. It means that the reality of witnessing belongs to
Allah, in the same way as all perfection and goodness belongs to Allah; whatever perfection,
goodness or beauty He gives to others, it emanates from His bestowal of possession, without this
bestowal making Him divested of possession or causing negation of His ownership. You should
meditate on various aspects what we have said.

It is clear from 'Isa (a.s.)'s condition described in these two verses, that he is innocent of what
had been said about him, and that he has no responsibility at all regarding their deeds. That is
why he (a.s.) has ended his speech on the words: "If Thou shouldst chastise them... surely Thou
art the Mighty, the Wise."

QUR'AN: "If Thou shouldst chastise them, then surely they are Thy servants; and if Thou
shouldst forgive them, then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise.": When it became clear,
through his proofs, that he had no responsibility towards the people except conveyance of the
message and delivery of the testimony, and that he did not do except that and did not cross the
limit to what he had no right to, and thus he was not liable to what they uttered of the words of
disbelief, then it is obvious that he has nothing to do with the divine judgment concerning them
and their Lord. That is why he has started this new topic without any conjunctive or any
indication that it branches from the preceding speech.

Thus, the verse is almost capable of being put in place of foregoing explanation. Its meaning: 'I
am not responsible for the ugly polytheism in which they fell down, and I did not interfere in any
of their affairs, so that I should take part with them in the judgment between Thee and them in
whatever Thou pleasest, and in Thy decree about them as Thou wishest. They alone should face
whatever Thou doest about them. If Thou shouldst chastise them, as Thou hast decided about
those who ascribe a partner to Thee, by sending them into the Fire, then surely they are Thy
servants, and in Thy hand alone is the management of their affairs, and Thou hast the right to be
angry with them, because Thou art the Master in reality, and to the master belong his servants'
affairs. And if Thou shouldst forgive them, by erasing the trace of this great injustice, then surely
Thou art the Mighty, the Wise, to Thee belongs the right of power and wisdom, and a mighty one
(the one who owns the seriousness and power, not found in others), especially if he is wise (who
does not take any step except when it is proper) has the authority to forgive the great injustice;
obviously when power and wisdom are joined together in anyone, do not allow any other power
to stand against him, nor any obscurity in whatever he decides.'

The foregoing explanation makes it clear that:

First: the word of 'Isa (a.s.): "then surely they are Thy servants," has the force of saying: 'then
surely Thou art their true Master', as we see in the Qur'anic style that it brings the names of Allah
after describing His actions, as is seen in the end of this verse.

Second: The clause: "then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise," is not meant for restriction; the
detached personal pronoun of second person singular, and addition of al to the predicate are
brought for emphasis. The meaning then will be as follows: 'Surely Thy Power and Wisdom
cannot be doubted about, and nobody has any right to object if Thou wert to forgive them.

Third: The backdrop of this speech, where 'Isa son of Maryam (a.s.) was talking with his Lord,
let us say, face to face, was the situation where the divine Majesty was manifest, the Majesty that
nothing can stand to it; and it demanded that it should be faced with utmost humility of servitude,
and the servant must avoid interference in any affair with invocation or question. That is why he
(a.s.) said: "and if Thou shouldst forgive them, then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise." Mark
that he did not say: Thou art the Forgiving, the Merciful.' It was because the radiance of the
overpowering sign of the divine Majesty and authority, which subdues everything, does not leave
any way for the servant except to seek refuge in Him with all the humility of his servitude, and
misery of total slavery; and to act affably in this situation is a great sin.

As for the words of Ibrahim addressed to his Lord: then whoever follows me, he is surely of me,
and whoever disobeys me, Thou surely art Forgiving, Merciful; it is an invocation; and a servant
has full right to incite the divine mercy in any way possible.

QUR'AN: Allah will say: "This is the day when their truth shall benefit the truthful ones: This is
the confirmation of the truth of 'Isa son of Maryam (a.s.) in an elusive way; Allah has not
declared his name, but it is known from the context.

This truth of the truthful ones refers to their truth in this world; because Allah says after this
sentence: they shall have gardens beneath which rivers flow to abide in them forever. Obviously,
it elaborates the reward of their truth near Allah - it is the benefit of the truth which will return to
them; while the next world's deeds and conditions - including the truth of the people of the next
world - will not bring any benefit as reward. In other words, no reward is given on the deeds and
conditions of the next world, as it is given on this world's deeds and conditions, because there is
no taklif (religious responsibility) in the next world, and reward is a branch of the taklif.
Obviously, the next world is a house of reckoning, reward and punishment, in the same way as
this world is a house of action and responsibility. Allah says: ...on the day when the reckoning
shall come to pass! (14:41); ...today you shall be rewarded for what you did. (45:28); ...This life
of the world is only a (passing) enjoyment, and surely the hereafter is the abode to settle. (40:39).

What 'Isa (a.s.) spoke about his condition in this world, contains of words and deeds, and Allah
has confirmed his truthfulness; thus the truth mentioned in this verse contains truth in deeds as it
includes truth in words. Therefore, those who were truthful in this world in their words and
deeds, shall benefit from their truthfulness on the Day of Resurrections, they shall have the
promised gardens, and they shall be pleased (with Allah) and pleasing (to Him), and they shall
achieve the great success.

Apart from that; truth in words necessitates truth in deeds - i.e. clarity and purity of deeds from
stigma of hypocrisy - and leads it to goodness. It is reported that a Bedouin asked the Prophet
(s.a.w.) for an advice; so he admonished him not to tell a lie. Thereafter, the man narrated that
adherence to what he was advised to, prevented him from all sins; because whenever a sin
tempted him, he remembered that if he did it and then was asked about it, he would be obliged to
confess its commission and inform the people about it; so he did not do it because of that fear.

QUR'AN: "they shall have gardens beneath which rivers flow to abide in them forever; Allah is
well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Allah; this is the mighty achievement.":
Allah shall be well pleased with them because of the truth which they had sent before them, and
they shall be well pleased with Allah because of the reward which He will bestow on them.

The verse has attached the pleasure with their selves, and not with their deeds, unlike the divine
words: ...and whose words He is pleased with. (20:109); ...and if you are grateful, He shall be
pleased with it in you;... (39:7). There is a difference between these two pleasures: Your pleasure
with a thing means that you do not push it away with dislike; it is possible for your enemy to
bring up an action which you like, although you are angry with him; and for a friend whom you
love to do a deed which you do not like.

Thus, the words: "Allah is well pleased with them", denote that Allah likes their selves; and it is
known that this pleasure cannot take place unless there appears the purpose for which Allah has
created them; and He has said: And I have not created the jinn and the men except that they
should worship Me (51:56). So, this servitude and worship is the divine object for which man has
been created. Allah shall be pleased with a servant's soul only when he shall become an
exemplary worshipper. In other words, when his soul will be the soul of a servant of Allah Who
is the Lord of everything; he does not see his own soul, nor anything else; but he is only a slave
of Allah who is submissive to His Lordship, who does not turn except to Him and does not return
but to Him, as He says about Ayyub: ...most excellent the servant! Surely he was frequent in
returning (to Allah), (38:44); and this is their being pleased with Him.

This is one of the stations of servitude. Its concomitant is the purity of the soul from disbelief (in
all its ranks) and from transgression, as Allah says: ...and He does not like ungratefulness in His
servants;... (39:7); ...yet surely Allah is not pleased with the transgressing people (9:96).

It is one of the signs of this position that when servitude takes hold of a servant's soul and he sees
that all that he perceives with his external eyes and internal insight is owned by Allah and is
submissive to His order, then he will be pleased with Allah, because he will realize that whatever
has Allah given him, has given it from His Grace, so it is His generosity and bounty, and
whatever He has stopped from him, He has done it for some reason.

Moreover, Allah says about them when they shall be in the Garden: They shall have in them
what they please. (16:31; 25:16). And it is known that when man gets all that he wishes, and then
naturally he will be pleased. This is the utmost human bliss and felicity in his servitude, and that
is why the talk ends on the clause: "this is the mighty achievement."

QUR'AN: Allah's is the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is in them; and He has
power over all things: al-Milk (ownership) is a special authority on individual things, and its
effect is permeation of the owner's will in the things he has the power to manage; and al-mulk
(kingdom) is the special authority over the system prevalent among the things, and its effect is
permeation of the owner's will in the things he has the power to manage; in simple words, al-
milk (ownership) relates to an individual and al-mulk (kingdom) to a group.

Inasmuch as the kingdom, in its actions, is restricted with, or formed by, the power, therefore
when the power is complete and unrestricted, the kingdom shall be all-comprehensive, not
restricted with one thing besides the other, nor confined to one condition, beside the other. To
draw attention to this fine point, the sentence: "Allah's is the Kingdom of the heavens and the
earth and what is in them;" is followed by the clause: "and He has power over all things."

The chapter ends on this verse, which denotes His all-encompassing Kingdom. Its correlation is
clear: The chapter's objective is to exhort the servants and attract them to fulfill the covenants
and agreements which have been taken from them by their Lord, and He is the absolute ruler.
Thus, their only title is that they are absolutely owned servants; they have no power in whatever
He orders them or forbid them except to hear and obey; nor about whatever agreement and
covenant He takes from them except to fulfill it without breaking it.

Traditions
Tha'labah ibn Maymun narrates through some of our companions from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he
said about the words of Allah, the Blessed, the Sublime, to 'Isa: "Did you say to the people:
'Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah'?" "He had not said it, but will soon say so;
surely when Allah knows that a thing is to happen (in future), He speaks about it as a done
thing." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

The author says: The same book narrates a similar tradition from Sulayman ibn Khalid from
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.). Its gist is that information of the future has been given in past tense because
it is known to take place certainly; and such usage is common in the language.

Jabir al-Ju'fi has narrated from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) in explanation of the sentences: Thou knowest
what is in my mind, I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the great Knower of the
unseen things, that he said, "Surely the great name of Allah is seventy three letters; and the Lord,
the Blessed, the Sublime, has kept hidden one of the letters; that is why nobody knows what is in
His mind, to Whom belong Might and Majesty. Adam was given seventy two letters, so, the
prophets inherited it from one another, until it reached 'Isa (a.s.); that is the (meaning of) the
word of 'Isa: 'Thou knowest what is in my mind', i.e. seventy two letters of the great name; he
means to say: Thou hast taught them to me, so Thou (certainly) knowest them; and I do not know
what is in Thy mind'; he wants to say: 'because Thou hast hidden that letter, so nobody knows
what is in Thy mind'." (ibid.)

The author says: We shall extensively explain about the good names of Allah and His great
name, under the verse: And Allah's are the best names, therefore call on Him thereby;... (7:180).
There it will become clear that the great name or the big name is not made up of alphabets; in
such places name actually means the named one, i.e. the person of Allah looked at with one of
His attributes or one of the aspects; accordingly the name in words would be the name of the
name, as will be explained later.
Accordingly, the Imam (a.s.)'s words, that the Great Name is made up of seventy-three letters,
and similar expressions which have come in numerous traditions of this topic, that the Great
Name is made up of so many letters, and that they are scattered in such and such chapter, or such
and such verse, all these are talks based on symbolism, they are parables to make the people
understand what is feasible to understand of the realities; for not every reality can be explained
clearly without allusion.

It will explain the meaning of the hadith to a certain extent if we say: There is no doubt that
Allah's good names are the mediums for manifestation of the universe in its species and
appearance of its innumerable occurrences. Also, we have no doubt that Allah created His
creatures, because He is the Creator, Magnanimous, and Originator, for example; not because He
is the Avenger and Hard-hitter. He gives sustenance to whom He sustains, because He is the
Sustainer and Bestower, for instance, not because He is the Holder and Forbidding. He bestows
life to the living, because He is the Living and Life giving, not because He is death giving, and
returning. The Qur'anic verses are the most truthful witnesses of this reality, because we see the
realities elaborated in a verse, are justified at the end with the divine name appropriate for that
theme. Often the verse ends with one such name, and sometimes it ends with two names, which
together illuminate its topic.

It appear from the above that if one of us is given the knowledge of the names, and if he knew
the connections between those names and the things and understood what the divine names,
individually and combined, demanded, he would know the system of the universe, with all the
general laws which govern it and which are applied to its individual parts one after another.

The noble Qur'an, as is understood from its apparent meanings, has described many general laws
regarding the genesis and the return, and what Allah has arranged concerning the felicity and
infelicity; and then it has told the Prophet (s.a.w.): ...and We have revealed the Book to you
explaining clearly everything,... (16:89).

However, all of them are general laws, which are necessary. But they are necessary not in
themselves, not by demand of their own selves; but through that necessity and inevitability
which Allah has bestowed on it. Now that this intellectual and definite authority comes from
Allah's side, and by His order and will, it is clear that Allah's action cannot compel Him at all in
this regard, nor would it overpower Him in His person; He, Glorified be He, is the Subduer and
Predominant; how can a thing subdue Him which returns to Him from every direction, and
depends on Him in its substance and effect. Understand it.
It is therefore impossible that the intellect (which decides whatever it does by Allah's bestowal
on it) or the realities (whose laws and effects do exist by His will) would have any authority over
Him or demand something from Him, by the same decision and demand that Allah Himself
keeps them active and subdues them. In other words, whatever demand or decision is found in
the things emanates from the transfers of ownership which Allah has given to it; thus He, the
High, is the absolute owner, and He cannot be owned in any way.

If Allah were to give good reward to a sinner, or to punish a good-doer, or did any type of deed,
which He wished, there was no harm in it, and there was nothing to prevent it - neither the reason
nor any extraneous matter. But Allah has promised us and threatened us, the felicity and
infelicity, and good reward and tough recompense; and He has informed us that He does not
break His promise; and He has informed us about some things by the way of revelation or
through our intellect, and He has mentioned that He does not speak except truth. Thus our souls
became tranquil with Him, and our hearts were at ease towards Him - without any doubt finding
a way to it. Allah says: ...surely Allah fails not in (His) promise. (3:9; 13:31); ...and the truth do I
speak. (38:84).

What Allah has explained it is the demand of His names, as we have known by His teaching. But
beyond that is the fact that He, the Sublime, is the absolute owner, He has the right and power to
do what He wishes and decides what He wants. Allah says: He is not questioned concerning
what He does and they shall be questioned. (21:23). This meaning itself is one of His names
which is of unknown essence; none of His creatures has any way of knowing it. It is because
whatever we know of His names is what one or other of the concepts shows, and then we
identify by its relationship its effects in existence. As for those effects that there is no way of
identifying them, they inviolably are the effects of a name that there is no way to know its
meaning. You may say that it is a name that cannot be hunted down by a concept; rather, it
somehow is pointed to by the attribute of His absolute ownership.

Thus it is clear that there are some of His names to which no creature has got a way - and it is the
name, which He has kept hidden. So understand it.

A Discussion on the Meaning of Good Manners

We shall discuss here in various chapters on the good manners, which Allah has taught His
prophets and messengers, peace be on them all.

1. al-Adab (the manners): is the good form on which the lawful action should take place, either
in religion or near intellectuals in their society, like the manner of prayer, the etiquette of visiting
the friends; or you may say gracefulness of intellect.

It does not appear except in lawful things, not forbidden ones. There is no manner in injustice,
treachery and falsehood; nor is there any manner in ignominious and ugly deeds. Also, it does
not take place except in voluntary actions, which may be performed in more than one way, so
that some would agree with manners, beside the others. For example, there is the manner of
eating in Islam that one begins it in the name of Allah and ends on the thanks for Allah and that
one should eat less than one's fill. Or there is the manner of sitting in salat that one sits on one
side of one's thigh, keeping the palms on thighs above the knees, and looking at the lap.

As the manners are the good form of voluntary actions and good deeds, and according to its
original meaning, it denotes agreement with the aim of life. Although there is no dispute among
the societies in this basic theme, yet when it comes to identification of its substance, there
appears a lot of discord, among various communities, nations, religions and denominations. It
appears even in very small societies like a family, in identification of good and evil, and in
manners of deeds.
Often a community observes some manners, which the others do not know about; sometimes an
action is considered good by a community while another group thinks it evil. For example,
greeting on meeting someone: In Islam it is by saying: as-Salamu 'alaykum, i.e. blessed, peace
and pure safety be to you from Allah; and in some nations it is by taking off the caps, in others it
is by raising the hand in front of the head, in some others it is done by prostration, or bowing
down or bending with bowed head; as there are among the westerners the manners of meeting
with women which Islam condemns and considers disgusting, and so on.

However, all these differences have cropped up at the stage of identification of manners; as for
the basic meaning of the manners, it is unanimously agreed by all sane persons - that it is the
good form in which the actions should take place. Also, there is no difference in that it is a good
thing.

2.  As the goodness and beauty are among the ingredients of the good manners, as described
above, and this differs from society to society according to their particular objectives, this
inevitably has given rise to differences in man's sociological manners. The manner in every
society is like a mirror, which reflects that general society's ethical characteristics - which have
been arranged in them by their lives' objectives; and have been concentrated in their souls by
their social factors and other natural or chancy agents.

Manners are not ethics, because ethics is the deeply ingrained psychological trait, which are
adopted by the souls, while manners are various good forms, which affect the actions, which are
done by man because of various psychological attributes - and there is a vast difference between
the two.

Thus, manners sprout from the ethics, and ethics is among the demands of society in particular
according to its especial objective. The objective, which man desires in his life, identifies his
manners in his actions, and draws for him a line which he does not cross, when he performs an
action in his life and acquires nearness from his destination.

3.  As the manner follows, in its particulars, the desired destination of the life, therefore, the
divine manners, which Allah, the Glorified, teaches His prophets and messengers (peace be upon
them), and trains them on, is the good form of religious actions which are in harmony with the
religion's aims and objectives - and it is the servitude with differences in the true religions,
according to abundance or shortage of its substance and depending on its ranks in perfection and
sublimity.

As the Islam deals with all the life-affairs of the human beings, in such a way that nothing of it,
big or little, great or small, goes out of its fold, therefore it has encompassed the life with
manners, and laid down for every deed a good form which is in harmony with its objective.

However, it has no general objective except the belief in one God in both stages of faith and
action together. It means that man should believe that there is a God, from Whom is the genesis
of everything and to Whom everything is to return; for Him are the good names and sublime
parables. Then this monotheism runs throughout the life and lives in the actions, it manifests in
itself the servitude of man and all that he has to Allah, Great is His name! In this way the
monotheism permeates in its esoteric and exoteric, and the pure servitude is manifested from his
words, deeds and all aspects of his existence, a manifestation where there is no veil over it, nor
any cover to hide it.

In short, the divine manner - or prophetic manner - is the form of monotheism in action.

4. The reason shows and definite experience supports that the practical knowledge - i.e. the
knowledge that is acquired in order to act upon it - does not fully succeed and does not bring
about its good effects if it is not put before a learner in practical way. It is because unless the
general academic principles are applied to its individual cases, human soul finds it difficult to
accept it and to believe in its correctness, because our soul throughout our life `remains engaged
with perceivable components, and it feels tired, as its second nature, from observation of
intellectual general principles, which are beyond our senses. A man who affirms the goodness of
bravery, per se, then he faces a dreadful situation in which the hearts tremble; now a dispute
starts between his intellect (which affirms the goodness of bravery) and his feeling which pulls
him towards caution against facing physical destruction and loss of fine material life; thus the
soul remains oscillating between this and that, and cannot decide which of the two opposing
sides to support, and strength is found in the side of the feeling because it accompanies senses.

Thus, it is incumbent during teaching that the student is taught intellectual realities accompanied
by practice, so that he gets training through action and is drilled on it, and it would erase the
opposing ideas which might be hidden in corners of his soul, and affirmation of what he learns
would be firmly rooted in mind, because occurrence is the best evidence of possibility.

That is why we see that an action whose real occurrence is not experienced by the soul, it
becomes difficult for the soul to submit to it. So, when it occurs for the first time it seems as it
has turned from impossibility to possibility, and it appears to be a great affair, and creates
agitation and perturbation in the mind. Then if it happens more than two or three times, it
becomes easier and its severity is broken, joining the fold of usual things, which become
unimportant. Surely the good is a habit as the evil is a habit.

Consideration of this style in religious teachings, and especially in Islamic religious education, is
among the clearest affairs. The Lawgiver of religion, in teaching the believers, has not adopted to
teach intellectual generalities and overall legislations; rather he has started with deeds and then
has gone to words and verbal explanations; when a believer completes learning religious
cognition and its laws, he does so and he is equipped with good deeds and furnished with piety.

Likewise, it is incumbent that the teacher and trainer must be acting on his knowledge, because
knowledge has no effect if it is not joined by practice; the action shows the way exactly as the
words show the way. If the action opposes the words, then it shows that there is an opposite form
in the soul that opposes the words; thus it proves that the said word is a trick and a sort of
deception, which the speaker uses for cheating the people and preying on them.

That is why we see that the hearts of the people do not incline, and their souls do not lean,
towards a sermon and admonition when they find that the preacher or the advisor does not follow
his own admonition or advice; and does not have patience and steadfastness in its path. Often
they say: If his words were true, he would have acted on them. However they seem confused in
drawing this result. The result in the above case is as follows: These words are not true in the
eyes of the speaker, because if he believed them to be true he would have acted on them. But it
does not give the result that the words are not true at all - as they sometimes draw it.

It is one of the conditions of good bringing up that the teacher and trainer himself should have
the attributes which he wants the trainee to acquire; because it is impossible in practice that a
coward would train a courageous and brave person, or that a well-balanced scholar should come
up from the school of prejudice and stubbornness.

Allah says: Is He then Who guides to the truth more worthy to be followed, or he who himself
does not go aright unless he is guided? What then is the matter with you; how do you judge.
(10:35); What! Do you enjoin men to be good and forget your own selves... (2:44)? And He
quotes Shu'ayb telling his people: ...and I do not desire that in opposition to you I should betake
myself to that which I forbid you; I desire nothing but reform so far as I am able,... (11:88); and
there are many similar verses.

Because of all these factors it was incumbent that the teacher .and trainer must have full faith in
the substance of his teaching and training.

Apart from that, even a man who has no faith in what he says, even a hypocrite who covers
himself with good deeds, and pretends to have pure unalloyed faith, does not train on his hand
except a one who represents him in his unclean soul; even if it is possible to create separation
between tongue and heart by speaking what the soul is not pleased with and the inner idea does
not agree with; yet speaking is a sort of action, and action is an effect of the soul, and how can an
action go against the nature of its doer?

Thus the speech, apart from its denoting the meaning for which it is made, carries the nature of
the speaker's soul, like belief or disbelief and so on. Its maker, and its conveyer to the simple
soul of the student does not differentiate the aspect of its goodness - i.e. the aspect of its laid
down meaning - from the aspect of its ugliness - and it is all other aspects - except the one who
has the insight of the reality. Allah says to His Prophet (s.a.w.) regarding the hypocrites: ...and
most certainly you may recognize them by the intent of (their) speech;... (47:30) So, the training
which brings good effect in its wake is that one in which the teacher and trainer has faith in what
he presents before his students, accompanied by good deeds that agree with his knowledge, but
as for the one who does not believe in what he says, or who does not act according to his
knowledge, no good can be expected from such a person.

There are many and innumerable examples for this reality in the conduct of us, the Orientals and
especially the Islamists, in teaching and training in our official and unofficial institutes, that no
effort seems to succeed, and no planning to be of any benefit.

5. To this chapter returns what we see in the divine speech that it contains pieces of divine
manners which are reflected in actions of the prophets and the messengers (peace be on them)
which are connected with Allah, Glorified be He - including various facets of their worship,
invocations and urgings, also those which are related to the people in their dealings and
addresses; it is because bringing in the examples in education are a sort of practical teaching with
evidence in practice.

Allah says, after narrating the story of Ibrahim with his people, regarding the Oneness of God:
And this was Our argument that We gave to Ibrahim against his people; We exalt in dignity
whom We please; surely your Lord is Wise, Knowing. And We gave to him Ishaq and Ya 'qub;
each did We guide, and Nuh did We guide before, and of his descendants, Dawud and Sulayman
and Ayyub and Yusuf and Harm; and thus do We reward those who do good (to others). And
Zakariyya and Yahya and 'Isa and Ilyas; everyone was of the good; and Isma'il and al-Yasa' and
Yunus and Lut; and every one We made to excel the worlds: And from among their fathers and
their descendants and their brethren, and We chose them and guided them into the right way.
This is Allah's guidance, He guides thereby whom He pleases of His servants; and if they had set
up others (with Him), certainly what they did would have become forfeited for them. These are
they to whom We gave the Book and the Wisdom and the Prophecy, therefore if these disbelieve
in it We have already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it. These are they
whom Allah guided; therefore follow their guidance... (6:84-91)

Allah mentions here His noble prophets (peace be on them) comprehensively, and then says that
He exalted them with divine guidance; and it was the guidance to monotheism only; its proof is
found in the clause: and if they had set up others (with Him), certainly what they did would have
become forfeited for them', mark that He in this place contrasts His bounty of guidance which He
had bestowed on them with polytheism only; thus He had guided them to the monotheism only.

However, the order of monotheism flowed into their actions, gaining ground in it. Its proof is
seen in the clause: certainly what they did would have been forfeited for them; if polytheism
were not flowing in the actions, infiltrating in them, it would not have caused their forfeiture.
The same would apply to its opposite, the monotheism.

What is the meaning of flowing of monotheism in actions? It means that the actions' forms
represent monotheism, and reflect them as a mirror reflects the image of the looker in. It is such
that if monotheism were supposed to be imagined, it would be exactly those actions; and if those
actions were abstracted into pure beliefs, it would be exactly those.

This meaning has many examples in psychological attributes. For example, you find that the
actions of a proud person exemplify the pride and haughtiness that are hidden in his soul.
Likewise, all movements and stillness of a wretched poor man expose what is hidden in his inner
self of humiliation and submissiveness, and so on.

Thereafter, Allah taught good manners to His Prophet (s.a.w.), and commanded him to follow
the guidance of the prophets who had preceded him; he was not supposed to follow (their
persons, but their guidance). One follows someone else in action; and not in belief, because
belief is outside one's option, per se, i.e. he should choose their good actions, which were based
on monotheism, and performed by them through practical divine training.

We mean by this practical training what is pointed out by the divine words: And We made them
Imams who guided (people) by Our command, and We revealed to them the doing of good and
the keeping up of prayer and the giving of the zakat, and Us (alone) did they worship. (21:73).
The genitive construction using the masdars as the first constructs in: doing of good, Keeping up
of prayer and giving of the zakat denotes that they refer to the actual good they did, prayers they
kept up and the zakat they gave, and not only to performing the supposed deeds. Thus this
revelation, which was sent to them when they were engaged in this performance, was the
revelation to show the right way and to teach the manners; it was not the revelation of prophecy
and legislation. Had it meant the revelation of prophecy, the sentence would have been as
follows: 'And We revealed to them that you should do good deeds, keep up prayer and give the
zakat - as we see in the verse: Then We revealed to you: Follow the faith of Ibrahim,... (16:123);
And We revealed to Musa and his brother, saying: "Take for your people houses to abide in
Egypt and make you houses places of worship and keep up prayer..." (10:87), and many similar
verses. The revelation to show the right way means that Allah bestows on one of His servants a
holy spirit which supports and strengthens him in good deeds and in remaining cautious against
evil; in the same way as the human spirit supports us in thinking about good and evil, and the
animalistic spirit in choosing what we desire through willful attraction and repulsion. A detailed
talk on this topic will be given later on, God willing.

In short, the clause: therefore follow their guidance, is a general divine ethical teaching to the
Prophet (s.a.w.) with the manner of monotheism, which is spread over the prophets' actions and
free from polytheism.

Allah has likewise mentioned several of His prophets (peace be on them) in the chapter of
"Mary", and then said: These are they on whom Allah bestowed favors, from among the prophets
of the seed of Adam, and of those whom We carried with Nuh, and of the seed of Ibrahim and
Isra'il, and of those whom We guided and chose; when the signs of the Beneficent God were
recited to them, they fell down making obeisance and weeping. But there came after them an evil
generation, who neglected prayers and followed the sensual desires, so they will meet perdition,
except such as repent and believe and do good, these shall enter the garden, and they shall not
be dealt with unjustly in any way. (19:58-60).

In this way, Allah mentioned their general manners in their life, that they live with submission to
Allah in activities and humility towards Him in heart; their prostration and recital of Allah's sign
is the example of submission, and their weeping which emanates from softness of heart and
humbleness of soul is the sign of humility; and both together allude to the domination of the
attribute of servitude over their souls, inasmuch as whenever they are reminded of a sign of
Allah, its effect appears on their exterior as well as it dominates their inner self. Thus they are on
their divine manner, and it is the mark of the servitude when they are alone with their Lord and
its mark when they mix with the people. They live on the divine manner with their Lord and with
the people.

The proof that it means general manners may be found in the next verse: But there came after
them an evil generation, who neglected prayers and followed the sensual desires. Prayer is
paying attention to Allah and its neglecting shows their condition with their Lord and following
the sensual desires points to their condition with the people. As these people stand parallel to the
preceding group, it indicates that the prophets' general manner is that they turn to their Lord with
the mark of servitude and deal with the people with the mark of servitude. It means that the
structure of their lives is founded on the foundation that they do have a Lord who owns them and
manages their affairs, from Him is their genesis and to Him is their return. So this is the basis of
all their conditions and actions.

The exception mentioned of those who repented among them is another divine manner. It begins
with Adam (a.s.), the first of the prophets, as He says: ...and Adam disobeyed his Lord, so his life
became evil (to him). Then his Lord chose him, so He turned to him and guided (him). (20:121-
2). God willing, some talk on it will follow.

Allah says: There is no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has ordained for him; such
has been the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before; and the command of
Allah is a decree that is made absolute: Those who deliver the messages of Allah and fear Him,
and do not fear anyone but Allah; and Allah is sufficient to take account. (33:38-39).

It is a general manner which Allah trained His prophets on (peace be upon them), and His
continuously running course about them: That they should not be distressed by the life destined
for them and should not be affected in any affair; they are on the nature, and the nature does not
guide except to what Allah has equipped it to acquire, which agrees to it; it does not affect to
dominate what Allah has not made it easy for it to rise to it. Allah quotes His Prophet (s.a.w.) as
saying: "...nor am I of those who affect:" (38:86); Allah does not impose upon any soul a duty
but to the extent of its ability;... (2:286); ...Allah does not lay on any soul a burden except to the
extent to which He has granted it;... (65:7). As affectation is going beyond nature, it is a kind of
following the sensuous desires, and the prophets are protected from it.

Allah says - and this too is training for comprehensive manner: O Messengers! Eat of the good
things and do good; surely I know what you do. And surely this religion is one religion and I am
your Lord, therefore fear Me (23:51-52). Allah taught and trained them to eat of the good things.
In other words, they should use the good things from the provisions of life, and should not cross
the boundary to the repulsive things towards which the healthy nature feels aversion. They
should do the good deeds - those which are good for man to perform, to which the nature is
inclined according to the powers with which Allah has equipped him, and through them his life
continues to an appointed time and destination. Or they should do the deeds, which may be
presented at the divine presence. Both these meanings are nearer to each other. So this is the
manner relating to an individual.

Then Allah has joined it to group manner. He mentioned that the people were but a single nation
- those who were sent and those to whom they were sent; they do not have except the one Lord,
so they should join together in piety; in this way they should cut off the roots of grouping and
divisiveness. When these two types of manners, i.e., of individual and of group, join together,
they constitute a human society, protected from discord, which worships one Lord; its
individuals carry on divine manner, and they refrain from evil deeds and bad actions; thus they
are firmly settled on the pedestal of felicity.

This is what is gathered from another verse: He has laid down for you of the religion what He
enjoined upon Nuh and that which We have revealed to you, and that which We enjoined upon
Ibrahim and Musa and 'Isa, that keep up the religion and be not divided therein; ...(42:13).
And Allah has differentiated between the two types of manners in another place and has said:
And We did not send before you any messenger but We revealed to him that there is no god but
Me, therefore worship Me (21:25). In this way, he taught them His monotheism and trained them
to base His worship on it. This was their manner visa-vis the Lord. Also, He has said: And they
say: "What is the matter with this Messenger that he eats food and goes about in the markets;
why has not an angel been sent down to him, so that he should have been a warner with him? Or
(why is not) a treasure sent down to him, or he is made to have a garden from which he should
eat?... (25:7-8). Then Allah replies to it: And We have not sent before you any messengers but
they most surely ate food and went about in the markets (25: 20). Thus, Allah described that it is
the conduct of all prophets - and it is their divine manner - to mix with the people, and avoid
seclusion, reservation and discrimination between people; because all behavior is repulsed by the
nature. This was their manner with the people.

6. ADAM: An example of prophetic manners as they turn their faces to their Lord and pray to
Him, is the prayer of Adam (a.s.) and his wife quoted by Allah: "Our Lord! We have been unjust
to ourselves, and if Thou forgive us not, and have (not) mercy on us, we shall certainly be of the
losers." (7:23). This they said after they had eaten from the tree which Allah had forbidden them
not to go near; of course, this prohibition was of advisory nature, not an order of a master to his
servants; and their disobedience was not of a legislative command, they only went against an
advice which was given to them in order to preserve the goodness of their condition; to maintain
the felicity of their lives in the garden, safe from every type of infelicity and trouble. Allah had
told them while cautioning them against following the Iblis: ...therefore let. him not drive you
both from the garden so that you should be unhappy: Surely it is (ordained) for you that you
shall not be hungry therein nor bare of clothing; and that you shall not be thirsty therein nor
shall you feel the heat of the sun (20:117-9).

However, when they fell in the tribulation, and were overwhelmed by misfortune and the
happiness of life departed from them, they were not occupied with themselves like someone who
is despaired and hopeless, nor did pessimism cut off the rope that tied them to their Lord. Rather,
they at once sought refuge with Allah Who owned all their affairs, and in Whose hand was every
good that they hoped for themselves. So, they adhered to the attribute of His Divinity and
Lordship - which contains all with which evil is repulsed and good attracted; the Lordship is the
noble attribute, which joins the servant with Allah, the Glorified.

Then they both mentioned the evil which was threatening them with appearance of its signs, and
it was the loss in life - It was as though they had bought the taste of eating for obedience to
divine advice, and it became clear to them that their happiness was indeed about to fall down -
and they described that they needed what would avert that evil from them. So they said: "...and if
Thou forgive us not, and have (not) mercy on us, we shall certainly be of the losers." That is: loss
in life is threatening us and towers over us, and nothing can avert it except Your forgiving the
dhanb (in this context, dhanb here means disobedience to the advisory command, editor's note)
committed by us, and then Your covering us with Your mercy and it is the happiness and felicity;
because man, rather every being who is made, perceives by its created nature that the tings which
are found in the station of existence and on the path of abiding are bound to seek perfection by
removal of any defect or shortcoming attached to it, and the cause to complete that defect is
Allah alone, so it is of the habit of divinity.

And for this reason, it was enough to only describe their condition and to display the need and
poverty that had afflicted the servant; and there was no need to ask for its remedy in words;
rather, describing only their need was a most eloquent imploration and most fluent proposition.

And that is why Adam (a.s.) and his wife did not say clearly what they wanted; they did not say,
'so forgive us and have mercy on us'. As they had placed themselves in station of abasement and
wretchedness because of the disobedience they had done, and now they felt that they had neither
face nor any prestige, as a result of which their only course was the total and pure submission to
whatever order was issued from the arena of divine power. Therefore, they stopped from all
pleading and request - they just said that He was their Lord. In this way they pointed to what they
hoped for and (before that, they) confessed to their injustice.

In this backdrop, the words: "Our Lord! We have been unjust to ourselves, and if Thou forgive us
not, and have (not) mercy on us, we shall certainly be of the losers." mean as follows: 'We did
wrong by being unjust to ourselves; thus we were on the brink of the loss which was threatening
our general felicity and bliss of life; now abasement and wretchedness have covered us from all
sides and we are in intense need of erasing the brand of injustice so that we may be overwhelmed
by divine mercy; and this has not left us with any face and dignity with which we could ask You;
so here we are submitting to Your decision, O Mighty King! In Your hand are the command and
the judgment; (our only salvation lies in the fact) that You are our Lord and we are under Your
lordship, we hope from You what a ward hopes from his Guardian.'

NUH: Another example of their manners is what Allah quotes Nuh (a.s.) concerning his prayer
for his son: And it moved on with them amid waves like mountains; and Nuh called out to his
son, and he was aloof: "O my son! Embark with us and be not with the unbelievers." He said: "I
will betake myself for refuge to a mountain that shall protect me from the water."...And Nuh
cried out to his Lord and said: "My Lord! Surely my son is of my family, and Thy promise is
surely true, and Thou art the best of the judges." He said: "O Nuh! Sur.ely he is not of your
family; surely he is (the doer of) other than good deeds, therefore ask not of Me that of which
you have no knowledge; surely I admonish you lest you may be of the ignorant." He said: "My
Lord! I seek refuge in Thee from asking Thee that of which I have no knowledge; and if Thou
shouldst not forgive me and have mercy on me, I should be of the losers. "(11:42-47)

Doubtlessly, it appears from the above talk of Nuh (a.s.) that he wanted to pray for his son to be
saved; but meditation of the verses of the story removes the curtain from the reality in another
way:

On one side, Allah ordered him to embark on the ark with his family and the believers, saying:...
"Carry in it two of everything, a pair, and your own family - except those against whom the word
has already gone forth, and those who believe."... (11:40). Thus, Allah promised him to save his
family and excepted those against whom the word had already gone forth; and his wife was a
disbeliever, as Allah mentions in the verse 66:10. Allah sets forth an example of those who
disbelieve the wife of Nuh and the wife of Lut. But as for his son, there was not any
manifestation that he did not believe in the Call of Nuh; and the report given by Allah, of his
behavior with his father when he was aloof, shows only his disobedience to his father, rather than
clear disbelief. Therefore, it was possible to think about him that he would be of the saved ones,
because he was one of his sons and apparently was not a disbeliever; so he would be included in
the divine promise of safety.

On the other side, Allah had revealed to Nuh (a.s.) his decreed order about the people, as He
says: And it was revealed to Nuh: That none of your people will believe except those who have
already believed, therefore do not grieve at what they do; and make the ark before Our eyes and
(according to) Our revelation, and do not speak to Me in respect of those who are unjust; surely
they shall be drowned (11:36-37). Does the clause: those who are Unjust refer to those who
disbelieved in his Call? Does it include every type of injustice? Or is it vague and ambiguous and
needs explanation from the Speaker?

It appears that these were the factors, which put Nuh (a.s.) in doubt about his son. Otherwise, he
was not among those who would be oblivious of the position of his Lord; and he was one of the
five Ulu'l- 'Azm messengers who are chiefs of the prophets; he was not the one to forget the
divine revelation: "do not speak to Me in respect of those who are unjust; surely they shall be
drowned"; nor was he to be pleased with the safety of his son even if he was a disbeliever while
he (a.s.) had said clearly in his prayer against his people: ..."My Lord! Leave not upon the land
any dweller from among the unbelievers" (71:26). If he were to agree to it for his son, he would
have agreed to it for his wife too.

That is why he did not dare to beseech Allah in clear terms; rather he put it forth like an enquiry,
because he did not encompass all the factors that were there around his son. Therefore, he began
by calling Allah with name of Lord, as it is the prayer-key of the needy beseecher. Then he said:
"surely my son is of my family". He wanted to say that it decides in favor of the safety of my son:
"and Thou art the best of the judges"; there is no mistake in Thy command and no ambiguity in
Thy order; so I do not know what is to be the end result of his affair.

Thus, Nuh (a.s.) spoke with parental sentiment, as the word "cried out" indicates; yet he only
mentioned the divine promise and did not add anything to it nor did he put forth any request.

Then the divine protection caught him up and cut short his speech. And Allah explained to him
the true meaning of "your own family" in the promise, which it referred to only the doers of good
from among his family, and this son was not good-doer, and Allah had earlier admonished him
saying: and do not speak to Me in respect of those who are unjust; surely they shall be drowned.
Nuh (a.s.) had taken the apparent meaning of "family" and thought that the exception was of his
unbeliever wife only. Allah then stopped him from asking that of which he had no knowledge,
i.e., the request of his son's safety - as it appeared that he was about to ask for it.

Now, he refrained from asking because of that divine intervention, and started a new talk that
appears in the form of repentance but actually it is thank giving for bestowing on him this
manner, which is certainly a favor. So he said: "My Lord! I seek refuge in Thee from asking Thee
that of which I have no knowledge." Thus he sought refuge in his Lord from what he was on
verge of speaking, i.e., the prayer for safety of his son when he did not know the reality of his
condition.
The proof that till then he had not prayed any such thing may be found in his words: "I seek
refuge in Thee from asking". It should be noted that he had not said: I seek refuge in Thee from
the question of what I had no knowledge of; as the masdar used as the first member of a genitive
construction proves that the deed has already been done.

"ask not of Me that of which you have no knowledge": Had he already asked for it, the prayer
should have been rebutted by clear rejection, or by such admonition as: "Do not do like it again";
as we find similar modes in the Divine Book; for example:... he said: "My Lord! Show me
(Thyself), so that I may look upon Thee. "He said: "You can never see Me, ..." (7:143). When
you received it with your tongues and spoke with your mouths what you had no knowledge
of, ...Allah admonishes you that you should not return to the like of it ever again... (24:15-17).

Another prayer of Nuh (a.s.) was the one quoted by Allah in these words: "My Lord! Forgive me
and my parents and he who enters my house believing, and the believing men and the believing
women; and do not increase the unjust in aught but destruction." (71:28). Allah quotes this
prayer of his after many verses describing his complaint in which he explains to his Lord his
endeavors in calling his people day and night for nearly a thousand years of his life, what he
endured of their hardships and what he suffered of the tribulations in the cause of Allah; he spent
himself to the utmost limit and sacrificed himself in the way of their guidance, but his call to
them did not cause them except fleeing, and his admonitions to them did not increase in them
except arrogance.

He continued spreading among them his admonition and good sermons, and making them hear
the truth and the reality; in the mean time, he was complaining to his Lord of their enmity and
persistence with which they confronted him, and of their deception and trickery with which they
opposed him. This continued until his feelings of sorrow were excited and the divine rage
overwhelmed him, and he prayed against them, saying: "My Lord! Leave not upon the land any
dweller from among the unbelievers; for surely if Thou leave them they will lead astray Thy
servants, 'and will not beget any but immoral, ungrateful." (71:26-27)

What he says about their leading astray the servants of Allah if He left them in the land is what
he had said in the preceding verse: And indeed they have led astray many. They had already led
astray many believers; so he was afraid that they would mislead the remaining ones. The words:
and will not beget any but immoral, ungrateful, declare that their loins and wombs have lost the
ability to beget any believer. He described this news of the unseen through prophetic foresight
and divine revelation.

When he cursed the disbelievers because of the divine rage which he felt, and he was the noble
prophet, the first to bring a book and a shari'ah, and he had stood up to rescue the world from
inundation of idolatry, but did not respond to him from the human society save a few - about
eighty persons, according to traditions - thus it was a manner of this situation that he should not
forget those who believed in his Lord and should pray for them of good up to the Day of
Resurrection.

So he said: "My Lord! Forgive me": He began with his own self, because the talk was of seeking
forgiveness for those who tread on His path, so he is in the forefront of them and is their Leader,
"and my parents": This is the proof that they were believers, "and him who enters my house
believing": They were those of his contemporaries who had believed in him. "and the believing
men and the believing women": It refers to all believers, the people of monotheism, because all
of them were his people, and were obliged to him up to the Day of Resurrection; he was the first
who raised the call of religion in the world with the book and the shari'ah, and kept the standard
of monotheism aloft 'among the people. That is why Allah has greeted him with his best greeting
when He says: Peace be upon Nuh among the nations (37:79). So peace and greetings be on him,
the noble prophet, whenever believed in Allah any believer or performed any good deed for Him,
and whenever any name was mentioned for Allah, honored be His name! and whenever there
was any trace of good and felicity among the people; because all this is from the blessings of his
call and the appendant of his rising. May Allah bless him and all the prophets and messengers
together!

IBRAHIM: Another example was shown by Ibrahim (a.s.) as quoted by Allah describing his
argumentation with his community: He said: "Have you then considered what you have been
worshipping, you and your ancient sires? Surely they are enemies to me, but not (so) the Lord of
the worlds, Who created me, then He has shown me the way, and He Who gives me to eat and
gives me to drink, and when I am sick, then He restores me to health, and He Who will cause me
to die, then give me life, and Who, I hope, will forgive me my mistakes on the Day of Judgment.
My Lord! Grant me wisdom, and join me with the good, and ordain for me a goodly mention
among posterity, and make me of the heirs of the garden of bliss, and forgive my father, for
surely he is of those who have gone astray, and disgrace me not on the day when they are
raised." (26:75-87)

It was an invocation, which he (a.s.) began by praying for himself and for his father because of a
promise that he had given him. It was in the beginning of his mission when he had not lost the
hope that his father would become a believer; but when it became clear that he was an enemy of
Allah, he washed his hand of him.

He began this prayer with praising his Lord beautifully, as the manner of servitude demands.
This is the first detailed praise that Allah has quoted from him (a.s.). What has been quoted
before is not of this kind, like his words: "O my people! Surely I am clear of what you set up
(with Allah). Surely I have turned myself, being upright, wholly to Him Who originated the
heavens and the earth,... (6:79-80). "...I will pray to my Lord to forgive you; surely He is ever
Affectionate to me." (19:47).

Ibrahim (a.s.) has used the best manner in Allah's praise, in that he has put forward a
comprehensive praise, which describes his Lord's care and attention to him from beginning of his
creation until he shall return to Him; and has set himself in the station of total neediness and
poverty; and has not mentioned for his Lord except absolute Self-sufficiency and pure
magnanimity. He has represented himself as an abased servant, who has no power over anything,
and the divine power turns him over from one condition to another; creation, then "giving food
and drink, then restoration of health, then causing to die, then giving life, then leading to the
recompense of the Day of Judgment; while he has nothing except simple obedience and hoping
for forgiveness of mistakes.
And look at the manner, which he has maintained in the above speech. He ascribes sickness to
himself in the sentence: "and when I am sick, then He restores me to health"; he did so because
its ascription to Allah in this place - and it is the place of praise - would not be free from
incongruity. Although sickness is an event, a happening, and as such it is not devoid of its
ascription to Allah; but the talk here is not about its happening (so that it would be ascribed to
Allah), but it aims at declaring that restoration to health after sickness is from His mercy and
care. That is why he (a.s.) attributed sickness to himself and restoration of health to his Lord,
claiming that nothing proceeds from Him except what is beautiful.

Then he used the same fine manner in the prayer, which he began with the name: Lord! and he
confined his request to the real and abiding blessings, without looking at the adornments of this
transient world; and selected from within that field what was the biggest and greatest. So, he
asked for wisdom (regulation) and it is shari'ah and for being joined with the good people, then
asked that Allah should ordain for him a goodly mention among posterity. It means that Allah
should send and raise after him time after time some prophets or messengers who will hold up
his call and propagate his shari'ah. Actually, it is a request that Allah should distinguish him
with a shari'ah that would abide up to the Day of Resurrection; thereafter he asked for
inheritance of the paradise, forgiveness for his father and not to disgrace him on the Day of
Resurrection.

Allah positively answered all his requests, as His speech shows, except his prayer for his father
(about which the divine speech is silent). But far be it from the Lord of the worlds to mention a
prayer of one of His honored servants which would have gone in vain and remained unanswered.
Allah says: ...the faith of your father Ibrahim;... (22: 78); And he made it a word to continue in
his posterity... (43:28); ...and most certainly We chose him in this world, and in the hereafter, he
is most surely among the righteous. (2:130); and He greeted him with a comprehensive greeting:
Peace be on Ibrahim. (37:109).

Study of the history after Ibrahim (a.s.) confirms all that the glorious Qur'an has mentioned of his
commendable acts and praised him for them. He (a.s.) was the noble prophet who stood alone
with the religion of monotheism to revive the natural religion and rose for demolition of the
pillars of idolatry and breaking of the idols; and this was at a time when the signs of monotheism
were obliterated, and the passage of time had effaced the sketches of prophethood; the world had
forgotten the names of Nuh and other honored prophets. So, he made the natural religion stand
up, and spread the religion of monotheism among the people. The monotheistic religion until
now - and about four thousand years have gone by since his time - is enduring in his progeny.
What the world knows of the religion of monotheism is the religion of the Jews and their prophet
is Musa, and the religion of the Christians and their prophet is 'Isa, and they both were from the
progeny of Isra'il Ya'qub, son of Ishaq, son of Ibrahim (peace be upon them); and the religion of
Islam which was brought by Muhammad (s.a.w.) and he was from the progeny of Isma'il son of
Ibrahim (peace be upon both).

And among his prayer mentioned by Allah is his speech: "My Lord! Grant me of the doers of
good deeds." (37:100). He asks Allah for a good offspring; in this affair he adheres to his Lord,
and regularizes his request (which is in a way of this world's benefit) by attaching to it the
attribute of good-doing, in order that it turns towards Allah and His pleasure.

Also, among his beseeching was what he prayed when he arrived at the land of Mecca and had
settled Isma'il and his mother therein. Allah says: And when Ibrahim said; "My Lord! Make it a
secure town and provide its people with fruits, such of them as believe in Allah and the Last
Day." He said: "And whoever disbelieves, I will grant him enjoyment for a short while, then I
will drive him to the chastisement of the Fire; and it is an evil destination." (2:126).

He asks his Lord to make the land of Mecca - and at that time it was a desolate tract, a valley
without any agriculture - a sanctuary for himself, in order to preserve through it the religion, and
it may be a sort of earthly and bodily connection between the people and their Lord, to which
they would proceed for worshipping their Lord, and turn towards it in their rituals; and would
maintain its sanctity among themselves. So it would be an enduring sigh of Allah on the earth,
whoever remembers it will remember Allah, whoever proceeds to it, will proceed to Him; with it
direction will be pinpointed, and the word united.

The proof that he (a.s.) intends with "security", a legislative security (which is the meaning of
making it a secure town), and not the physical peace and safety from the battles, wars and many
other events which disturb the peace and order, and destroy the people's well-being, may be
found in the divine words:... What! Have We not settled them in a safe, sacred territory to which
fruits of every kind are drawn?... (28:57). In this verse, Allah shows His great favor to them that
He has made the sacred territory a place of safety for them; it is a place which Allah has attached
to Himself; and it is described as a safe place because the people pay respect to it, not because of
any creative factor which would protect it from disturbance and murder. The verse was revealed
and before that Mecca had witnessed annihilative wars between the Quraysh and the Jurhum; and
likewise it had seen innumerable murders, tyranny and depravity. The same is the connotation of
the divine word: Do they not see that We have made a sacred territory secure, while men are
carried off by force from around them?... (29:67). That is, these people are not carried off from
this sacred territory as the people respect it because of the sanctity We gave to it.

In short, his (a.s.) aim was that there should be for Allah a sanctuary in the land, which his
offspring were to settle in; and this could not be achieved except by building a town which the
people would proceed to from every direction; so it would be a religious gathering place where
they would arrive for settlement, refuge and pilgrimage up to the Day of Resurrection. That is
why he prayed that Allah should make it a secure town; and it was without any greenery, so he
prayed that Allah should give them sustenance from the fruits, in order that it should become
inhabited by its residents and they should not go away from it.

Then, when he felt that his prayer for such honor includes believers and unbelievers both, he
attached to it the proviso of belief in Allah and the hereafter, and said: "...such of them as believe
in Allah and the Last Day." As for that: how will it be possible in a town inhabited by believers
and unbelievers together, and they are at variance; or if it is inhabited by unbelievers only; or
how will they be sustained with fruits while the land is plain and uncultivated, such questions did
not occur to his mind.

In fact, it was a good manner of Ibrahim (a.s.) in his position of a beseecher. It would be a waste
of word for a beseecher to teach his Lord as to how his request be fulfilled; or, what is the way to
comply with his request; while He is the Lord, All-Knowing, Wise, All-Powerful; His command,
when He intends anything, is only to say to it, 'Be', so it is.

However, Allah wanted to fulfill his need according to the usual system of normal causality, and
in this there is no differentiation between a believer and an unbeliever. Therefore, Allah
completed his prayer by adding a restriction in His speech: "And whoever disbelieves, I will
grant him enjoyment for a short while, then I will drive him to the chastisement of the Fire; and
it is an evil destination."

This prayer which led to the legislation of the divine sanctuary; also the construction of the holy
Ka'bah, which was the first house appointed for men, the one at Bakkah, blessed and a guidance
for the nations, was one of the fruits of his holy sublime endeavor, with which he has put all the
Muslims under his obligation up to the Day of Resurrection.

Another of his invocations was the one he prayed in the later part of his life and which Allah
describes in the following words: And when Ibrahim said: "My Lord! Make this city secure, and
save me and my sons from worshipping idols: My Lord! Surely they have led many people
astray; then whoever follows me, he is surely of me, and whoever disobeys me, Thou surely art
Forgiving, Merciful: O our Lord! Surely I have settled a part of my offspring in a valley devoid
of agriculture, near Thy Sacred House, our Lord! That they may keep up prayer; therefore make
the hearts of some people yearn towards them and provide them with fruits; haply they may be
grateful: O our Lord! Surely Thou knowest what we hide and what we make public, and nothing
in the earth nor anything in heaven is hidden from Allah; Praise be to Allah, Who has given me
in old age Isma'il and Ishaq; most surely my Lord is the Hearer of prayer; My Lord! Make me
keep up prayer and from my offspring (too), O our Lord! Grant me forgiveness and my parents
and the believers on the day when the reckoning shall come to pass!" (14:35-41).

This he had prayed in his later days when the town of Mecca was already built. See for proof, his
words: "Praise be to Allah, Who has given me in old age Isma'il and Ishaq"; and the word:
''make this city secure". (Note that he did not say as before: "make it a secure town" (2:126))

His decency is noticed by his adhering to the Divinity throughout his prayers. Whenever he asks
for something as reserved to his own self, he says: "My Lord!" and whenever he mentions a
thing which he shares with others, he says: "Our Lord!"

Another etiquette is reflected in these prayers, in that whenever he asks for something which
could be used for lawful as well as unlawful purpose, he clearly mentions his correct and lawful
purpose; this gives rise to the divine mercy, as is very clear. When he said: "save me and my
sons...", he followed it by saying: "Surely they have led many people astray"; and when he said:
"O our Lord! Surely I have settled a part of my offspring. . .," he said: "our Lord! That they may
keep up prayer"; and when he prayed: "...make the hearts of some people yearn towards them
and provide them with fruits; he ended it with the hope: haply they may be grateful."

Also, it was an example of his manner that he mentioned, at the end of every need, an
appropriate good name of Allah, like: the Forgiving, the Merciful, the Hearer of prayer; and
repeated the name: 'Lord', whenever he mentioned any of his needs, because the Lordship is the
rope which links the servant and the Lord, and it is the key of the door of every prayer.

His manner is also seen in his speech: "and whoever disobeys me, Thou surely art Forgiving,
Merciful", inasmuch as he did not curse them with any untoward thing; rather he mentioned
when speaking about them two of the divine names which are the means of conveying happiness
to every man, i.e. Forgiving, Merciful, in his desire for rescuing his people and spreading the
magnanimity of his Lord.

IBRAHIM & ISMA'IL: Another example is found in what Allah has quoted from him and his
son Isma'il - and they had jointly said it: And when Ibrahim and Isma'il raised the foundations of
the House: "Our Lord! Accept from us; surely Thou art the Hearing, the Knowing; Our Lord!
And make us both submissive to Thee and (raise) from our offspring a nation submitting to Thee,
and show us our ways of devotion and turn to us (mercifully), surely Thou art the Oft-returning
(to mercy), the Merciful. Our Lord! And raise up in them a Messenger from among them who
shall recite to them Thy signs and teach them the Book and the Wisdom, and purify them; surely
Thou art the Mighty, the Wise." (2:127-129)

It was their prayer when they were building the Ka'bah, and this too, like the preceding prayers,
contains beautiful manners.

Similar manners are seen in Isma'il (a.s.)'s talk during the story of the slaughter, which Allah
describes as follows: So We gave him the good news of a boy, possessing forbearance. And when
he attained to working with him, he said: "O my son! Surely I see in dream that I am sacrificing
you; consider then what you see." He said: "O my father! Do what you are commanded; if Allah
please, you will find me of the patient ones." (37:101-102)

At the beginning of this talk, shows Isma'il (a.s.)'s manner with his father, but later parts show
his attitude between him and his Lord. Moreover, showing respect to a messenger like Ibrahim,
'The Friend of Allah' (a.s.), is showing respect to Allah Himself, the Sublime.

In short, when his father told him of what he had seen in the dream (and it was a divine
command as is proved by Isma'il's words: "do what you are commanded"), he ordered him to
consider what his opinion was. This was his (a.s.)'s manner with his son. Isma'il said to him: "O
my father! Do what you are commanded; if Allah please, you will find me of the patient ones."
He did not say that it was his opinion, in order to show his humility vis-a-vis his father, as though
he has no opinion of his own in presence of his father's. That is why he began the talk addressing
him with the attribute of fatherhood; he did not say. Do it if you want it; he did so to please his
father; and he said during it that it was a divine command given to Ibrahim, and it is
unimaginable for the one like him to hesitate or think twice about such a command without
complying with it.
Also, his words: "if Allah please, you will find me of the patient ones." is another endeavor to
please his father. All this shows his good manners with his father.

And with his Lord he showed his manners, when he did not present his opinion or decision in a
definite way; rather he attached it to the pleasure of Allah; it is because definitely expressing a
view without attaching it to the pleasure of Allah indicates a claim of independent causality, and
far removed from it is the arena of prophethood. And Allah has condemned a group who decided
an affair without attaching it to the pleasure of Allah, as He has said in the story of the owners of
the garden: Surely We tried them as We had tried the owners of the garden, when they swore that
they would certainly cut off the produce in the morning, and they did not say, God willing
(68:17-18). Also, Allah had taught His prophet (s.a.w.) in His Book to say: 'God willing', with an
amazing allusion, when He said: And do not say of anything: 'Surely I will do it tomorrow,'
unless Allah pleases;... (18:23-24)

YA'QUB: Another example of this manner is seen in the narrative given by Allah of Ya'qub's
expression when his sons had returned from Egypt leaving there Benjamin and Yahuda. Allah
says: And he turned away from them, and said: "O my sorrow for Yusuf!" And his eyes became
white on account of grief, and he was a repressor (of grief). They said: "By Allah! You will not
cease to remember Yusuf until you are a prey to constant disease or (until) you are of those who
perish. "He said: "I only complain of my grief and sorrow to Allah, and I know from Allah what
you do not know." (12:84-86)

He says to his sons that my constant remembering of Yusuf means that I complain my wretched
condition to Allah; and I have not despaired of the mercy of my Lord that He will return him to
me unexpectedly; he said it because it is a manner of the prophets vis-a-vis their Lord that they
turn to Him in all their conditions, and direct all their movements and their stillness into His way,
for Allah has clearly said that He has guided them to it on a straight path. He says: These are
they whom Allah guided,... (6:90); and He says especially about Ya'qub: And We gave to him
(Ibrahim) Ishaq and Ya'qub; each did we guide,... (6:84). Then He has said that following desire
is going astray from the way of Allah: ...and do not follow desire, lest it should lead you astray
from the way of Allah;... (38:26).

Thus, the prophets - who are rightly guided by the guidance of Allah - do not follow desire at all.
Their psychological feelings and inner inclinations - desire or anger, love or hate, happiness or
sorrow for what is related to appearances of life, such as wealth, sons, marriage, food, dress,
abode and so on - all this occurs in the way of Allah; they do not intend from these except Allah,
Great is His Majesty! There are two ways, which are trodden, a way in which truth is followed,
and another in which desire is followed. Or you may say: The way of Allah's remembrance, and
the way of forgetting Him.

As the prophets (peace be upon them) were guided to Allah and did not follow desire, they
constantly remembered Allah, they did not intend with movement or stillness other than Allah,
the High; nor did they knock for any need of their life any door of any cause other than His door.
We mean to say that when they attached themselves to a cause, it did not make them forget their
Lord, nor were they oblivious of the fact that all affairs are in His hand. It does not mean that
they absolutely rebut the cause in such a way that it loses its existence in mind also, because this
cannot be done. Nor is it that they look at the things and remove from them their attribute of
causality, because it would cause going against the human nature. Rather it means that man does
not see any independence in anything other than Allah, and puts everything in its place where
Allah has placed it.
When the condition of the prophets was as we have described above that they totally adhere to
Him, then this divine manner enabled them to watch the position of their Lord and properly
attach themselves to His divinity; thus they aim at nothing except Allah, and do not leave
anything except for pleasure of Allah; they do not adhere with any cause without adhering with
their Lord before it and with it and after it; so He is their destination in all conditions.

Ya'qub (a.s.)'s speech: "I only complain of my grief and sorrow to Allah", aims at explaining that
'my constantly remembering Yusuf and my sorrow for him is not like you people that when one
of you is inflicted by a misfortune and loses one of the favors of Allah, he begins talking about it
before someone who owns neither benefit nor harm, all this because of his ignorance; rather I
address my complaint to Allah because of the grief I feel for disappearance of Yusuf; and it is
not a request from me for something which is not to be, for I know from Allah what you do not
know.'

YUSUF: Another example is that which Allah quotes Yusuf, The Truthful, as saying when the
wife of 'Aziz threatened him with imprisonment if he did not do what she was telling him to do:
He said: "My Lord! The prison is dearer to me than that to which they invite me; and if Thou
turn not away their device from me, I will yearn towards them and become (one) of the
ignorant." (12:33).

He (a.s.) describes to his Lord that he now has only two alternatives in facing these women,
prison or accepting what they were asking him to do; and he because of his knowledge which
Allah has honored him with - and it is mentioned in the divine words: And when he had attained
maturity, We gave him wisdom and knowledge;... (12:22) - chooses prison in preference to
accepting their demand; but the causes are pressing in favor of their desire and are threatening
him to ignore the position of his Lord and nullify the knowledge he has got from Allah; and there
is no decision in all this except for Allah; as he said to his fellow-prisoner: " ...judgment is only
Allah's;..." (12:40). That is why he (a.s.) maintained good manners and did not mention any need
of himself, because that is a sort of judgment. He rather alluded to the threat of ignorance by
nullification of the favor of knowledge with which his Lord had honored him. He (a.s.), also
mentioned that his safety from the danger of ignorance and repulsion of their devices depended
on its averting by Allah; thus he surrendered the whole affair to Allah and became silent.

Then his Lord accepted his (unspoken) prayer, and removed their device from him - and it was
either sensual passion or prison, and Allah protected him from both. It is understood from it that
their device refers to the desire and the prison together. As for his word: "My Lord! The prison is
dearer to me than that to which they invite me;" it shows his inclination in case the matter
remained suspended between the two; it is an allusion to his hate and hatred of indecency; it was
not a prayer for imprisonment, as (Imam Husayn, a.s.) had said: Death is better than boarding a
disgrace, And disgrace is better than entering the Fire.

It was not as some people think that Yusuf (a.s.) had prayed for imprisonment, so it was decided
accordingly. The proof of what we have said is found in the following divine words: Then it
occurred to them after they had seen the signs that they should imprison him till a time (12:35).
This verse clearly says that his imprisonment happened because of an opinion which occurred to
them afterwards, and Allah had already averted from him their device i.e., their temptation to
themselves and the threat of imprisonment.

One more example of Yusuf (a.s.)'s manner is seen in his praise of, and prayer from, Allah, as He
says: Then when they came in to Yusuf, he took his parents to lodge with him and said: "Enter
safe into Egypt, if Allah please." And he raised his parents upon the throne and they fell down in
prostration before him, and he said: "O my father! This is the interpretation of my vision of old;
my Lord has indeed made it to be true; and He was indeed kind to me when He brought me forth
from the prison and brought you from the desert after that the Satan had sown dissensions
between me and my brothers, surely my Lord is benignant to whom He pleases; surely He is the
Knowing, the Wise. My Lord! Thou hast given me of the kingdom and taught me of the
interpretation of sayings: Originator of the heavens and the earth! Thou art my guardian in this
world and the hereafter, make me die a Muslim and join me with the good. "(12:99-101).

A scholar should contemplate on the prophetic manner appearing from these verses. Just imagine
the kingdom and absolute authority which Yusuf was enjoying and how eagerly his parents
yearned to visit him, and how much humility his brothers felt towards him, and all of the parties
fully remembered his life history since they had lost him till they found him while he was the
overlord of Egypt, settled on the throne of power and authority.

And then see that he never opened his mouth for a talk but there was a part of it, or the full talk,
reserved for his Lord, except the opening clause when he told them to: "Enter safe into Egypt, if
Allah please." So he asked them to enter and declared their safety, but at once attached it to the
pleasure of Allah, lest somebody think that he was independent in this judgment, besides Allah;
while it was he who had earlier said: "judgment is only Allah's".

Then he began praising his Lord for all that had passed on him since he had separated from them
until he was gathered together with them. He started with the story of his vision and realization
of its interpretation; and he affirmed in it the truthfulness of his father, not in his interpretation
only, but even in what he had mentioned in the end of his talk regarding Allah's knowledge and
wisdom, penetrating deeply in the praise of his Lord, as his father had told him (in the
beginning). And thus will your Lord choose you and teach you the interpretation of sayings
and... surely your Lord is Knowing, Wise. (12:6), and Yusuf now tells his father: "O my father!
This is the interpretation of my vision of old;... surely my Lord is benignant to whom He pleases;
surely He is the Knowing, the Wise. "(12:100)

Then he pointed briefly to what had passed over him between his vision and appearance of its
interpretation, and ascribed it to his Lord describing it as good - and it was beneficence from
Allah. It was a very fine manner that he indicated to all that he suffered from his brothers from
the time they threw him in the pit till they sold him for a very low price of a few dirhams and
accused him of theft, in a short sentence: the Satan had sown dissensions between me and my
brothers (12:100). And he continued mentioning the bounties of his Lord and praising Him,
saying: "My Lord! My Lord!" until he was overwhelmed by the love and overcome by the divine
attraction, and he became totally occupied with his Lord and left them as if he did not recognize
them; and said: "My Lord! Thou has given me of the kingdom and taught me of the interpretation
of sayings." In this way, he praised his Lord for His bounties, which were with him, i.e.,
kingdom and knowledge of the interpretation of sayings. Then his noble self moved from the
remembrance of the bounties to the fact that his Lord who bestowed on him what He bestowed
did it all because He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth who has brought forth all
things from total non-existence to existence, without their being any novelty for anything on its
own with which it could possess any harm or benefit, felicity or infelicity or any ability to
manage any affair of itself in this world or in the hereafter.

And because He is the Originator of everything, He is the Guardian of everything. That is why
he (a.s.) said after the clause: "Originator of the heavens and the earth!" that he is a humble
servant, he does not own management of his self in the world or in the hereafter; rather he is
under the guardianship and control of Allah, Who chooses for him of the good what He pleases
and places him in any position He wishes. So he said: "Thou art my guardian in this world and
the hereafter," at this juncture he mentioned what he needed from his Lord, i.e., he should go
from this world to the hereafter while he is in the state of submission to his Lord to the extent
that Allah had bestowed it on his fathers, Ibrahim, Isma'il, Ishaq and Ya'qub. Allah says: ...and
most certainly We chose him in this world, and in the hereafter he is most surely among the
righteous. When his Lord said to him: "Submit (yourself)," he said: "I submit myself to the Lord
of the worlds. "And the same did Ibrahim enjoin on his sons and so (did) Ya 'qub. "O my sons!
Surely Allah has chosen for you (this) faith, therefore die not unless you are Muslims." (2:130-2).

To this refers Yusuf (a.s.) in his prayer: ...make me die a Muslim and join me with the good
(12:101). He prays for death on Islam and then to be joined with good servants. It was the same,
which his great-grandfather Ibrahim (a.s.) had asked for when he said: "My Lord! Grant me
wisdom, and join me with the good." (26:83). So, it was positively answered as seen in the
previously mentioned verses. And on this note Allah has ended his story; and most surely to
your Lord is the destination (53:42). This is an extremely delicate grace of the Qur'anic contexts.

MUSA: Among the prophetic manners is what Allah describes about His prophet Musa (a.s.)
during his early days in Egypt, when he struck a Coptic and killed him. He said: "My Lord!
Surely 1 have done harm to myself, so do forgive me." So He forgave him; surely He is the
Forgiving, the Merciful. (28:16).

Another example is his prayer when he fled from Egypt, reached Madyan and watered the sheep
of the daughters of Shu'ayb and retired to the shade: Then he said: "My Lord! Surely I stand in
need of whatever good Thou mayest send down to me." (28:24).

Musa (a.s.) in both his prayers has observed the manner, after taking refuge with Allah and
adherence to His divinity, in that he, in the first prayer, clearly mentioned what he needed,
because it was concerned with forgiveness, and Allah loves to be asked for forgiveness, as He
has said: ...and ask the forgiveness of Allah; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (2:199); and it
was the factor to which Nuh and the prophets coming after him had been calling the people. But
he did not pinpoint his need in the second prayer by which, as the context apparently shows, he
wanted to fulfill his needs of life like food, accommodation, for example; he showed his
neediness and then was silent; after all what respect has got this world in the eyes of Allah?

You should know that Musa's words: "My Lord! Surely I have done injustice to myself, so do
Thou forgive me", runs in confessing to have committed injustice and asking for forgiveness,
parallel to the prayer of Adam and his wife, when they said: "Our Lord! We have been unjust to
ourselves, and if Thou forgive us not, and have (not) mercy on us, we shall certainly be of the
losers." (7:23). The injustice here means injustice against his own self, because he had done a
deed that was against the welfare of his life, in the same way as it was in case of Adam and his
wife.

Certainly, Musa (a.s.) did what he did before Allah had sent him with His shari'ah which forbade
slaying a man; moreover, he had slain only an unbeliever whose life was not respectable; and
there is no proof that such a killing was forbidden before his shari'ah. And the same was the
situation regarding the disobedience of Adam and his wife; they had indeed done harm to their
own selves by eating from the tree, before Allah had laid down any shari'ah for human beings -
Allah had established shari'ah - whatever it might be - after they had come down from the
garden to the earth.

Mere prohibition of going near the tree does not prove that it was an authoritative order whose
disobedience entails sin (in terms of fiqh); rather there are associations to show that the
prohibition was of advisory nature, as appears from the verses of the chapter "Ta Ha", and we
have explained in the explanation of the story of Adam's garden, in the first volume of the book.

As for Musa (a.s.), the Divine Book clearly says that he was a purified servant; and that Iblis
cannot seduce the purified servants of Allah, the High; and it is evidently known that sin cannot
occur without misleading of Iblis. Allah says: And mention Musa in the Book; surely he was one
purified, and he was a messenger, a prophet. (19:51); He said: "Then by Thy might I will surely
seduce them all, except Thy servants from among them, the purified ones." (38:82-83).

It appears from the above that the forgiveness, for which he had prayed, like the prayer of Adam
and his wife, does not mean wiping off the chastisement which Allah writes for the sinners - as is
the case with disobedience of authoritative commands; rather it means erasure of evil
consequences which come in the wake of doing harm to oneself in the course of life. In fact,
Musa (a.s.) was afraid lest his affair be known to them and they recognize what they would
consider as his sin. So, he asked his Lord that He should cover for him and forgive him; and
"forgiveness" in the Qur'anic language is more general than wiping off the chastisement, it is
rather wiping off the evil consequences whatever they might be. And there is no doubt that the
authority of this all is in the hand of Allah.

In a way, similar to it is the earlier-mentioned prayer of Nuh (a.s.): "...and if Thou shouldst not
forgive me and have mercy on me, I should be of the losers." (11:47), i.e. if Thou didst not teach
me Thy manners, and didst not protect me by Thy protection and safety, and didst not have
mercy on me in this way, I should be of the losers. Understand it.

Another example is Musa (a.s.)'s prayer when revelation was sent to him for the first time and he
was given the message to convey to his people as Allah has quoted: He said: "O my Lord!
Expand my breast for me; and make my affair easy for me; and loose the knot from my tongue;
(that) they may understand my word; and give to me an aider from my family; Harun, my
brother; strengthen my back by him; and associate him (with me) in my affair; so that we should
glorify Thee much; and remember Thee oft; surely, Thou art seeing us." (20:25-35).
He seriously thinks over the religious mission of which he has been given responsibility, and
says to his Lord - as is inferred from the words with help of the context - "that surely Thou art
seeing mine and my brother's condition; that we, since our early life, love Thy glorification;
tonight Thou hast burdened me with the load of messengership, and I feel that I am hot-tempered
and that there is a knot in my tongue - the factors which Thou knowest better; and I fear that they
would accuse me of falsehood if I called them to Thee and conveyed Thy message to them; then
I shall be angry and my tongue will not work; therefore expand my breast for me and make my
affairs easy for me." This is the removal of harm which Allah mentions in His speech: There is
no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has ordained for him; (such has been) the course
of Allah with respect of those who have gone before;... (33:38); "and loose the knot from my
tongue (that) they may understand my word; and my brother Harun's tongue is more eloquent
than mine, and he is from my family, so associate him with me in this affair and make him my
helper, so that we should glorify Thee much, as we loved to do so, and should remember Thee
often before the gatherings of the people helping each other." This is the gist of what he (a.s.)
asked his Lord for, from among the equipments of the mission and conveying. The manner
which he has used here is that he clearly mentioned the aim and objective of his asking, lest it
might be thought that he was asking all this for his own self; so he said: "so that we should
glorify Thee much, and remember Thee oft." And he offered in proof of his claim's truth, the
knowledge of Allah Himself, by throwing their selves before Him and submitting themselves to
Him; so he said: "surely, Thou art seeing us." And when the needy beseecher throws himself in
his need before the wealthy and magnanimous beseeched one, it becomes the mightiest factor in
inciting the feeling of mercy, because it displays the need more clearly than its verbal description
could do - after all, it is not impossible for the tongue to tell lie.

Another example is when Musa (a.s.) prayed against Pharaoh and his chiefs, as he said: And
Musa said: "Our Lord! Surely Thou hast given to Pharaoh and his chiefs finery and riches in
this world's life, to this end, our Lord, that they lead (people) astray from Thy way: Our Lord!
Destroy their riches and harden their hearts so that they believe not until they see the painful
punishment." He said: "The prayer of you both has indeed been accepted, therefore continue in
the right way and do not follow the path of those who do not know." (10:88-89).

The prayer was jointly of Musa and Harun; that is why it began with the word: "Our Lord!" and
it is proved by the next verse, He said: "The prayer of you both has indeed been accepted." They
first cursed their riches that it should be destroyed; then they invoked Allah against them that He
should harden their hearts so that they would not believe until they saw the painful chastisement,
in order that their faith would not be accepted, as Allah says: On the day when some of the signs
of your Lord shall come, its faith shall not profit a soul which did not believe before, or earn
good through its faith... (6:158).

That is, take revenge from them by forbidding the faith to them through suddenly inflicting
punishment on them as they had deprived Thy servants of it by leading them astray. This was the
hardest possible curse, which could be inflicted on anyone, because it is the curse for everlasting
infelicity, and nothing is more evil than that for a man.

Curse, or prayer for evil, is different from prayer for good, because the divine mercy is ahead of
His wrath; Allah had revealed to Musa (a.s.): "(As for) My chastisement, I will afflict with it
whom I please, and My mercy encompasses all things;...'' (7:156). Thus, the all-encompassing
nature of the divine mercy dislikes inflicting harm or loss to any of His servants even if he is
unjust. Its proof is seen in the divine bounties on them, in His covering them with His
magnanimity; and in His ordering His servants for forbearance, and in His patience on their
ignorance and stupidity - except in establishing an important right or in emergency in inequity
when they are fully aware that a necessary underlying reason, like that of religion or people of
religion demands it.

Apart from that, the more delicate and subtle the aspects of good and bliss; the more adhering it
would be to the souls, by the nature on which Allah has created people - contrary to the aspects
of evil and infelicity; because man by his nature flees from knowing it, and tries not to pay
attention to its root, let alone its particulars. This factor causes difference in manner between the
two types of prayers, i.e. of good and of evil.

Thus, it is among the manners of prayer for evil that affairs leading to that prayer should be
mentioned obliquely, and particularly about the ugly and detestable matters, contrary to the
prayer for the good, because clearly mentioning such prayer factors is desirable. Musa (a.s.) has
kept it in mind when he said: "that they lead (people) astray from Thy way," and did not give the
details of the oppressions being inflicted by the people of Pharaoh.

Among its manners is augmentation of entreaty and supplication; and he (a.s.) did so by saying:
"Our Lord!" and repeating it several times in such a short prayer.

Another manner is that a man should not pray for evil about someone except when he knows that
it is in the interest of truth for religion or its people - without basing it on imagination or
accusation. And Musa (a,s.) had full knowledge of it, and Allah has said about Pharaoh: And
truly We showed him Our signs, all of them, but he rejected and refused. (20:56) Probably, it is
for this reason that Allah ordered Musa and his brother when He informed them of the
acceptance of their prayer: "therefore continue in the right way and do not follow the path of
those who do not know." (10:89). And Allah knows better.

Another prayer of Musa was the one quoted by Allah in the following verses: And Musa chose
out of his people seventy men for Our appointment; so when the earthquake overtook them, he
said: "My Lord! If Thou hadst pleased, Thou hadst destroyed them before and myself (too); wilt
Thou destroy us for what the fools among us have done? It is not but Thy trial, Thou makest err
with it whom Thou pleasest and guidest whom Thou pleasest; Thou art our Guardian, therefore
forgive us and have mercy on us, and Thou art the best of the forgivers. And ordain for us good
in this world's life and in the hereafter, for surely we turn to Thee." (7:155-6).

The actual prayer begins with the words: "therefore forgive us"; however it was an extremely
hard situation, as they were inflicted by divine wrath and violent attack which nothing can stand
against; and asking for forgiveness and mercy from an angry master whose mastership has been
debased and insulted, is not like asking for it from a master who is in normal condition. That is
why Musa (a.s.) offered before that what would calm down the flare up of the divine wrath, in
order that he could then proceed to the asking for forgiveness and mercy.
Thus he said: "My Lord! If Thou hadst pleased, Thou hadst destroyed them before and myself
(too)." He wants to say, as the context shows: 'My Lord! Surely my soul and their souls all
together are in Thy hand, and submissive to Thy pleasure; if Thou hast pleased, Thou wouldst
have destroyed them and myself too before today, as Thou hast destroyed them and kept me
alive today. Now, what shall I say to my people when I shall go back to them and they would
accuse me of murdering all of them, and Thou knowest the condition of my people better than I
do; this would nullify my mission and all my endeavors would be forfeited.'

Then he (a.s.) counted the destruction of the seventy as the destruction of himself and his people;
and mentioned that those were the fools of his community and no importance should be attached
to their deeds. Thus, he incited his Lord's mercy, as it was not His custom to destroy a
community because of the deeds of some fools among them. It was but an example of the general
test and trial which is always prevalent in human beings, and are led astray by it many, and are
guided aright by it many, and Thou hast not dealt with them except by forgiveness and covering.

As in Thy hand is the authority of my soul and our souls, Thou canst destroy us whenever Thou
pleasest; and this event is not something unique in the way of Thy general trial which results in
going astray of one group and being guided aright of another, and all this does not end except at
Thy pleasure; therefore Thou art our Guardian, by thine order and pleasure stands management
of our affairs, and we have nothing to do with it; so judge Thou about us with forgiveness and
mercy; among Thy attributes is that Thou art the best of forgivers; ordain for us in this world a
life secure from punishment, and it is the one that is liked by him who is overwhelmed by the
divine wrath, and in the life hereafter the good by forgiveness and the garden.

This was the style used by him (a.s.) in his prayer, when had taken up his people the earthquake
and covered them the misfortune. See how did he use the beautiful homage of servitude, and
sought, through it, his Lord's mercy. He continued beseeching the mercy and calming down with
his praises the outburst of divine wrath until he got the response which he had not mentioned in
words, at all, and it was their renaissance after the destruction, and the revelation came to him as
Allah says: He said: "(As for) My chastisement, I will afflict with it whom I please, and My
mercy encompasses all things; so I will ordain it for those who guard (against evil) and pay the
zakat, and those who believe in Our signs." (7:156). Now, what do you think about Him after He
said to Musa (a.s.) in answer to his prayer: and My mercy encompasses all things'!

Allah mentions that He had clearly forgiven them and accepted the prayer of Musa (a.s.) by
returning them to life when they had been destroyed; and bringing them back to this world, as He
says: And when you said: "O Musa! We will not believe in you until we see Allah manifestly," so
the punishment overtook you while you looked on. Then We raised you up after your death that
you may give thanks (2:55-56). The report in the chapter of "Women" (4:153) is nearer to it.

Musa (a.s.) had maintained manners in his talk when he said: "Thou makest err with it whom
Thou pleasest"; he did not mention that it occurred because of evil choice of those who went
astray, in order to show verbally God's de-anthropomorphism - as he did so in heart; thus it will
be like the divine words: He causes many to err by it and many He leads aright by it; but He
does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors (2:26). He used this style because the
place prevented him from paying attention except to the fact of Allah being the absolute
Guardian to Whom only ends every management.

And in all this talk he did not mention the main issue which was in his heart, i.e., the prayer that
Allah should give them back their lives after destroying them, because the situation with all its
fright and danger prevented him from elaboration; he merely pointed to it briefly by saying: "My
Lord! If Thou hadst pleased, Thou hadst destroyed them before and myself (too)..."

Also, among his invocations is that which he prayed when he returned to his people from the
meeting point and found that they had begun calf-worship after him; and Allah had informed him
of that misdeed, as He says: And he threw down the tablets and seized his brother by the head,
dragging him towards him. He said: "Son of my mother! Surely the people reckoned me weak
and had well-nigh slain me, therefore make not the enemies to rejoice over me and count me not
among the unjust people." (7:150). Then Musa (a.s.) became soft towards him and prayed for
him and for himself, so they should be distinguished from the unjust people. He said: "My Lord!
Forgive me and my brother, cause us to enter into Thy mercy, and Thou art the most Merciful of
the merciful ones." (7:151).

Why did he want to be distinguished from the other people, and that Allah should enter both of
them in His mercy? It was only because he knew that the divine wrath was surely to overtake
them because of their injustice, as Allah describes it after the above verse: (As for) those who
took the calf (for a god), surely wrath from their Lord and disgrace in this world's life shall
overtake them,... (7:52). The preceding explanation will show the way of good manners in his
talk.

Another of his (a.s.)'s prayers - and it is in effect a curse against his people who had said when he
ordered them to enter the holy land: They said: "O Musa! We shall never enter it at all so long
as they remain therein; go therefore you and your Lord then fight you both, surely we will here
sit down." (5:24); - is that which Allah narrates in his words: He said: "My Lord! Surely I have
no control (upon any) but my own self and my brother; therefore make a separation between us
and the nation of transgressors." (5:25).

He (a.s.) used fine manners when he alluded to his intention of stopping to tell them and to
convey to them the commands of their Lord again - after they rejected his first command in such
an ugly and rude way - by his saying: "My Lord! Surely I have no control (upon any) but my own
self and my brother;" i.e.: 'no one obeys my orders except I and my brother; these people have
rebutted my order in such a way that now there is no hope about them; so now I desist from
telling them Thy commands and guiding them to what contains their community's welfare.'

The verb translated here: "I have no control", actually means, 'I do not possess'. But the context
shows that here it means 'possession of obedience'. Had it meant creative possession, he (a.s.)
would not have attributed it to himself without making it clear that real possession belongs to
Allah only, and whatever he owns is only that which Allah has given into his possession; and
when he explained to his Lord his desistance and despair of their positive response to his call, he
left the judgment in Allah's hand and said: "therefore make a separation between us and the
nation of transgressors."
SHU'AYB: Of the same style is the curse, which Shu'ayb (a.s.) did against his people, when he
said: "Our Lord! Decide between us and our people with truth; and Thou art the best of
deciders." (7:89).

Thus, he asks for fulfillment of the divine promise after he lost all hope of his call being effective
among them; and requests Him to decide between him and them with truth, as Allah has said:
And every nation had a messenger; so when their messenger came, the matter was decided
between them with justice and they shall not be dealt with unjustly (WAT).

He used the pronoun: us, because he joined the believers to himself; and the unbelievers had
threatened him and the believers all together when they had said: "We will most certainly turn
you out, O Shu'ayb! And (also) those who believe with you, from our town, or you shall come
back to our faith."... (7:88). So, he joined them to himself and abandoned his people in their
misdeeds, and proceeded with the believers to his Lord, and said: "Our Lord! Decide between
us..."

He adhered in his prayer to the noble divine name: "the best of the deciders," because, as
mentioned earlier adherence to the attribute, which agrees with the text of the prayer, is an
intense support tantamount to adjuration. It is contrary to the talk of Musa (a.s.) quoted earlier:
"My Lord! Surely I have no control (upon any) but my own self and my brother; therefore make
a separation between us and the nation of transgressors;" because, as we had explained, his
(a.s.)'s words were not really a prayer; rather they were an allusion that he would desist from his
call and return all the matters to God. So there was no reason for adjuration, contrary to the talk
of Shu'ayb.

DAWUD & SULAYMAN: Another example is what Allah has quoted of the praise of Dawud
and Sulayman (peace be upon them). Allah says: And certainly We gave knowledge to Dawud
and Sulayman, and they both said: "Praise be to Allah, Who has made us to excel many of His
believing servants." (27:15)

The aspects of manner in their praise and thank, and their attribution of their knowledge to Allah,
are clear. They did not say tike what is quoted from some others, as Qarun said to his people
when they admonished him not to show arrogance in the land because of his wealth: He says: "I
have been given this only on account of the knowledge I have. "... (28:78); or as Allah describes
about some others: Then when their messengers came to them with clear proofs, they exulted in
what they had with them of knowledge, and there beset them that which they used to mock
(40:83).

There is no harm in the two prophets praising Allah for making them excel many of the
believers, because it manifests a particular blessing and describes a fact; it is not something like
showing arrogance against the servants of Allah, which would invite condemnation. Allah has
mentioned that a group of believers had asked for excellence and has praised them for their
sublime nature and high ambitions, as He says: And they who say: "O our Lord!... and make us
leaders for those who are pious." (25:74).
SULAYMAN: Another example is what has been reported from Sulayman in the story of the
ant, as He says: Until when they came to the valley of the ants, an ant said: "O ants! Enter your
abodes, (so that) Sulayman and his hosts may not crush you while they do not know." So he
smiled, wondering at her word, and said: "My Lord! Grant me that I should be grateful for Thy
favor which Thou hast bestowed on me and on my parents, and that I should do good such as
Thou art pleased with, and make me enter, by Thy mercy, into Thy servants, the good ones."
(27:18-19).

The ant by its talk reminded him of his great kingdom which was strengthened by subduing the
wind as it flew by his order, and the Jinn made for him what he wanted, and the knowledge of
the birds' speech, etc. But this kingdom did not come to his (a.s.)'s mind as the brightest wish to
which man arrives, as it happens in us; it did not make him forget his servitude and his poverty.
It rather came to his mind as a favor that his Lord had bestowed on him. So, he remembered his
Lord and His blessings, which He had bestowed especially on him and on his parents. And this
remembrance from a servant like him, and in such a condition, was the most excellent of
manners vis-a-vis his Lord.

He remembered favors of his Lord; although a multitude of favors and blessings were bestowed
upon him, yet what he was thinking about at that time and place was the great kingdom and the
over-powering authority; and that is why he mentioned good deed and asked his Lord to grant
him that he should do good deed; because good deed and good character are desirable from him
who sits on the throne of kingdom.

In view of all the above factors, he first asked his Lord to grant him that he should be grateful for
His favor; then that he should do good; and he was not content to ask merely for good deed, but
added the proviso: "as thou art pleased with"; it was because he was a servant who was not
concerned with other than his Lord, and he wanted to do good deed only to please his Lord; then
he completed the prayer of tawfiq for goodness of deed by the prayer for goodness of self, so he
said: "and make me enter, by Thy mercy, into Thy servants, the good ones."

YUNUS: Another example is in what Allah has reported from Yunus (a.s.). He had prayed in
these words when he was in the stomach of the fish that had swallowed him. Allah says: And
Yunus, when he went away in wrath, so he thought that We would not straiten him, so he called
out among afflictions: "There is no god but Thou, glory be to Thee; surely lam of those who
make themselves to suffer loss." (21:87).

Yunus (a.s.) had asked his Lord, as the Qur'an narrates, to send chastisement on his people, and
Allah had accepted it; then he informed his people of that. When the divine chastisement reached
almost over them, they repented to their Lord, and it was averted from them. When Yunus saw it,
he left his people and went away wandering, until he boarded a boat, and a fish blocked its way.
They decided to throw to it one of them, so that it might swallow him and leaves the others
alone; for this purpose they cast lot, and Yunus's name came out. He was thrown into the river
and the fish swallowed him. He was constantly glorifying his Lord in its belly until Allah
ordered it to throw him up on the bank of the river. However, it was only a divine disciplining,
through which He disciplines His prophets as required by their various situations. Allah says:
But had it not been that he was of those who glorify (Us), he would certainly have tarried in its
belly to the Day when they will be raised (37:143-4). His turning away from his people and
wandering along present the picture of a servant who was not pleased with a certain action of his
master, so becoming angry he fled away and left his service and neglected his own
responsibilities. Obviously, Allah did not like this behavior and disciplined him. He put him in
an incapacious prison in which he could not move even about a finger, in utter darkness, and in
that darkness he cried out: "There is no god but Thou, glory be to Thee, surely I am of those who
make themselves to suffer loss." (21:87).

All of this had one aim only: To make him realize, contrary to what his condition showed, that
Allah has the power to catch and hold him wherever He wishes, and to do with him whatever He
pleases, there is no escape from Him except to Him. That is why he learned in that condition in
the belly of the fish to acknowledge that only Allah is worthy of worship, there is no other like
Him and nothing can escape from His servitude; so he said: "There is no god but Thou". It
should be noted that he did not call Allah by attribute of Lordship; and it is the only prayer from
among the prophets' prayers, which has not begun with the name, 'Lord'.

Then he mentioned what had passed on him that he left his people when Allah did not destroy
them even after sending the punishment to them, and he affirmed injustice for himself and
glorified Allah from all that had any shade of injustice and defect, and said: "...glory be to Thee,
surely I am of those who make themselves to suffer loss."

But he did not mention his (actual) need - i.e. reinstatement to his previous position of servitude -
counting himself as undeserving to have any right of asking for any favor, because of intense
shame and remorse. The proof that he had in mind an unspoken of request is found in the divine
word coming after it: So We responded to him and delivered him from the grief... (21:83)

And the proof that his request consisted of his reinstatement to his previous position, is found in
the verses: Then We cast him on to the vacant surface of the earth while he was sick; and We
caused to grow up for him a gourd-plant; and We sent him to a hundred thousand, rather they
exceeded; and they believed, so We gave them provision till a time (37:145-8).

Another example is found in the story of Ayyub (a.s.) when he said after he became chronically
ill and lost all his properties and sons: And Ayyub, when he cried to his Lord, (saying): "Harm
has afflicted me, and Thou art the most Merciful of the merciful." (21:83).

The aspects of good manners are evident here as explained in earlier cases. Ayyub (a.s.) did not
clearly mention his need as was seen in the prayers of Adam, Nuh, Musa, and Yunus (peace be
upon them), thinking himself unworthy of attention and considering his affairs too trivial to be
mentioned. The prophets' prayers, as described earlier and as will be seen afterwards, had never
mentioned the requirements clearly, when they were related to worldly affairs, although they did
not want any such thing because of any base desires.

From another angle: His mentioning the reason which led him to beseech, like affliction of harm,
and describing the attribute found in Him Who is asked from, which incites the beseecher to ask,
like His being most Merciful of the merciful, and remaining silent about the actual need, present
the most eloquent allusion that it was not necessary to mention the need, because it would
suggest that the above factors were not sufficient to induce the mercy of the most Merciful of the
merciful, rather there was need to describe it in so many words!

Another example is of Zakariyya (a.s.) as Allah says: A mention of the mercy of your Lord to His
servant, Zakariyya, when he called upon his Lord in a low voice. He said: "My Lord! Surely my
bones are weakened and my head has flared with hoariness, and, my Lord! I have never been
unsuccessful in my prayer to Thee; and surely I fear my relatives after me, and my wife is
barren, therefore grant me from Thyself an heir, who should inherit me and inherit from the
progeny of Ya'qub, and make him, my Lord! One in whom Thou art well-pleased." (19:2-6).

What prompted him to offer this prayer and encouraged him to ask His Lord for a son was what
he had observed Maryam, daughter of 'Imran, in her abstinence and worship, and how Allah had
honored her with the manners of servitude and distinguished her with sustenance directly from
Himself, as Allah describes in the chapter of "The House of 'Imran": ...and gave her into the
charge of Zakariyya; whenever Zakariyya entered the sanctuary to (see) her, he found with her
food. He said: "O Maryam! Whence comes this to you?" She said: "It is from Allah." Surely
Allah gives sustenance to whom He pleases, without measure. There did Zakariyya pray to his
Lord; he said: "My Lord! Grant me from Thee good offspring; surely Thou art the Hearer of the
prayer." (3:37-38)

At that juncture, he was overwhelmed by intense longing for a good and pious offspring who
would inherit him and worship his Lord in a way that would please Him, in the same way as
Maryam inherited 'Imran and exerted herself to the utmost in worshipping her Lord, and thus got
honor from Him. At the same time, he looked at himself that old age had taken his hold and his
strength had gone down, and likewise his wife was old and weak, and to top all this, she was
barren even in her child-bearing age; so he was afflicted with grief of deprivation of a good and
pleasing child which only Allah could know. Yet he could not control himself and was
overwhelmed by divinely zeal and reliance on his Lord; he turned to his Lord and described his
condition in a way that would incite the divine mercy and affection on his situation that he had
remained uninterruptedly adhered to the door of servitude and (act of) beseeching since his early
age until now that his bones had weakened and his head had flared with hoariness; and he had
never been unsuccessful in his prayers; and has found the Lord the Hearer of the prayer;
therefore He should hear his prayer and grant him a pleasing heir.

The proof of what we have said that he had asked what he had done, under the influence of
intense emotion and sorrow, is seen in his response when Allah revealed to him that his prayer
was granted: He said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son, and my wife is barren, and I myself
have reached indeed the extreme degree of old age?" He said: "So shall it be; your Lord says: 'It
is easy to me, and indeed I created you before, when you were nothing.'" (19:8-9). It clearly
shows that when he heard about granting of his prayer, he recovered from his condition, and
began wondering because of the strangeness of the prayer and its acceptance, until he asked his
Lord about it in the form of a farfetched proposition and asked for a sign for himself which he
was given.

In any case, the manner which he (a.s.) has used in his prayer, was that to which he was led by
the feeling and sorrow which had overpowered him. That is why he preceded his prayer by
describing his extreme condition in the way of his Lord, for he had spent his life in treading on
the way of repentance and beseeching, until he stood at a situation in which every merciful
onlooker's heart would melt for him, then he prayed for a son and supported it with the reason
that He is the Hearer of the prayer.

This is the meaning of what he said as preamble of his prayer; it was not that he was trying to put
his Lord under his obligation by showing his extended servitude - far be it from the status of
prophethood. Therefore, the meaning of his prayer: "My Lord! Grant me from Thee good
offspring; surely Thou art the Hearer of prayer." (3:38), is as follows: 'Surely I ask Thee what I
have asked, not because there is any importance of my extended servitude and lengthy prayers to
Thee; or because it has put Thee under any obligation to me; rather, I asked Thee because Thou
art the Hearer of the prayer of Thy servants, and Thou acceptest the call of Thy destitute
beseechers; and the fear of my relatives after me has compelled me to put this request before
Thee and has strongly exhorted me to ask for a good offspring.'

It has been described earlier that as part of the good manner used in his prayer, he said after this
fear of the relatives: "...and make him, my Lord! One in whom Thou art well-pleased." (19:6).
Pleasantness, although by nature it denotes being pleasing to its subject, and being unrestricted it
contains pleasure of Allah and pleasure of Zakariyya, and pleasure of Yahya; but his words:
good offspring (3:37), show that it denotes his being good and pleasing to Zakariyya, because an
off-spring is good to its progenitor, not to others.

Another example of the good manners is seen from the Christ when he asked for the table, as
Allah quotes him: 'Isa the son of Maryam said: "O Allah, our Lord! Send down to us food from
heaven which should be to us an ever-recurring happiness, to the first of us and to the last of us,
and a sign from Thee, and grant us sustenance, and Thou art the best of providers. "(5:114).

The story described in the Divine Book about the question of the disciples to 'Isa (a.s.) for
sending down food from heaven, shows by its context that it was one of the hardest requests for
'Isa (a.s.); because their quoted wordings: "Is your Lord able to send down to us food from
heaven?" (5:112), first, put under question the power of Allah, and it does not agree with the
manner of servitude; even if they intended to ask about the underlying reason, not the power
itself, the ugliness of the wording remains in its place.

Second, it contained suggestion of a new sign, although his (a.s.)'s signs were covering them
from all sides - his noble personality was a sign in itself; his speaking in the cradle was another
sign, and so were his reviving dead body, his creating a bird, his restoring the blind and lepers to
health, his giving information of the unseen, as well as his knowledge of the Tawrat, the Injil, the
Book and the Wisdom were divine signs, which did not leave any room for any doubt and
suspicion to anyone. In this background, their choosing a sign for themselves and asking for it
was manifestly tantamount to playing with divine signs. That was why he admonished them by
saying: "Fear Allah if you are believers." (5:112). But they insisted on it and explained their
suggestion in these words: "We desire that we should eat of it and that our hearts should be at
rest, and that we may know that you have indeed spoken the truth to us and that we may be of the
witnesses to it." (5:113). So, they compelled him to ask for it, which he finally did.
'Isa (a.s.) mended by his divinely-gifted manner the demand which they had put forth, and
rephrased it in a way that it could be addressed to the arena of divine power and greatness.
Firstly, he gave it the title of 'id which would be reserved for him and his people, because it
would be a sign proposed by them and would be unique among the prophets' signs, as all their
signs were sent down for completing the proof against them or because the ummah needed them,
and this sign had neither attribute. Secondly, he summarized what the disciples had elaborated
regarding the benefits of its coining down, that their hearts should be at ease, and they might
know that he had indeed spoken the truth to them and they might be among the witnesses to it;
all this was included in a single phrase, and a sign from Thee. Then, thirdly, he mentioned what
they had said about eating of it; he described it at the end, although they had mentioned it before
all other purposes, and he put another garb on it which was more appropriate for the divine
audience and said, and grant us means of subsistence, then added to it: "and Thou art the best of
providers", in order that it would support the suggestion, on one hand, and be a praise for the
Sublime Authority on the other hand.

He began his prayer by calling on Allah with the phrase: "O Allah, our Lord!" Thus, he added on
what is generally found in the prophets' prayers, as they used to say: "My Lord" or "Our Lord";
he did so because the situation was very tough, as explained earlier.

Another example of this manner will be seen in his (a.s.)'s direct talk with his Lord which is
quoted in the Qur'an: And when Allah will say: "O 'Isa son of Maryam! Did you say to the
people: 'Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah'?" He will say: "Glory be to Thee, it
did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst
indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind,
surely Thou art the great Knower of unseen things. I did not say to them aught save what Thou
didst enjoin me with: 'That worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord', and I was a witness of them
as long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take me up, Thou wert the watcher over them,
and Thou art witness of all things. If Thou shouldst chastise them, then surely they are Thy
servants; and if Thou shouldst forgive them, then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise. "(5:116-
8)

He (a.s.) observed the manner in his speech, first by beginning his speech with declaring His
purity from what does not fit with the glory of His arena, following the style of His speech, as He
says: And they say: "The Beneficent God has taken to Himself a son. Glory be to Him." (21:26)

Second, he took his own self too humble to be imagined that he would say such a thing for
himself, so that it would need rebuttal. That is why he did not say in this speech from the
beginning to the end, "I did not say it" or "I did not do it." He only refuted it time and again by
way of allusion and under cover; and said: "It did not befit me that I should say what I had no
right to (say)." Thus he negated it through negation of its cause; i.e. 'I did not have any such right
so that I could utter such an untoward word.' Then he said: "If I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed
have known it;..." So, he refuted it through refutation of its concomitant, i.e. 'if I had said it, Thou
must surely hadst known it, because Thy knowledge encompasses me and all unseen things.'

Then he will say: "I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: 'That
worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.'" He refuted it by bringing forth its opposite, and
restricting it with "not" and "save". He says: 'I had told them something, but it was the same
which Thou hadst enjoined me to say,' i.e., 'worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord;' then how it
was possible that I should say to them, take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah.'

Then he will say: "and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou
didst take me up, Thou wert the watcher over them". It is further refutation of the above-
mentioned idea; in a way it further completes the above speech: "I did not say to them aught
save what Thou didst enjoin me with." Its meaning is as follows: 'I did not say to them anything
that is attributed to me; what I had told them was only by your order, and it was: "Worship Allah,
my Lord and your Lord;" no other commandment was ever sent to me, and I had no relation with
them except witnessing of and watching over them, so long as I was among them; and when
Thou didst take me up, my connection with them was cut off and Thou wert the watcher over
them by Thy everlasting and general witnessing, before Thou didst cause me to die and after that,
over them and over every other thing.'

Now, that the talk will reach thus stage, he (a.s.) will decide to repudiate this idea from himself
through another reason which would complement the above-mentioned cause, and which would
absolutely deny the idea. So, he will say: "If Thou shouldst chastise them, then surely they are
Thy servants; and if Thou shouldst forgive them, then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise." He
will want to say in this context as follows: 'If they had gone astray as Thou hast said, then I am
cut off from them and they are cut off from me. Now Thou art to deal with Thy servants alone; if
Thou shouldst chastise them, they are Thy servants; and the Master, the Lord, has the authority
to chastise his servants if they disobey him and associate others with him, and they deserve to be
punished; and if Thou shouldst forgive them, there is no reproof against Thee, because Thou art
the Mighty, not subdued, the Wise, who does not do any unwise and vain deed, and who always
does what is more suitable.'

What we have explained, shows fine aspects of the manners of servitude in his (a.s.)'s speech.
Also, ponder on the fact that whenever he uttered a sentence, he mixed it with the finest praise,
in the most eloquent description and in the truest tongue.

Another example of the divine manner is seen in the words of His Prophet (s.a.w.) which has
been quoted by Allah, and He has joined the believers of his ummah in it: The Messenger
believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers; they all
believe in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers: "We make no difference
between any of His messengers;" and they say: "We hear and obey; our Lord! Thy forgiveness
(do we crave), and to Thee is the eventual course." Allah does not impose upon any soul a duty
but to the extent of its ability; for it is (the benefit of) what it has earned, and upon it is (the evil
of) what it has wrought: "Our Lord! Do not punish us if we forget or make a mistake; Our Lord!
Do not lay on us a burden as Thou didst lay on those before us; Our Lord! Do not impose upon
us that which we have no strength to bear; and pardon us and grant us protection and have
mercy on us; Thou art our Patron, so help us against the unbelieving people." (2:285-6).

As you see, the divine words describe the Prophet's belief in the noble Qur'an in all that it
contains of fundamental beliefs and divine commandments; then it joins with him (s.a.w.) the
believers among his ummah, not only those who were present near him (s.a.w.), but also those
were to come later, as is manifest from the context.

It then follows that what the verses contain of acknowledgement, praise of prayer, related to
some of them would be the narration of the tongue of their condition although possibly their
tongues; or the Prophet (s.a.w.) himself could have said it directly talking with his Lord on his
own behalf and on behalf of the believers, because they by their faith were the branches of the
tree of his blessed soul.

The two verses contain a sort of comparison and equilibrium between the People of the Book and
the believers of this ummah in the manner of their acceptance of what was revealed to them in
the Book of Allah; or, in other words, with respect to their courteousness of servitude vis-a-vis
the Book sent to them. Apparently, Allah has praised these believers in these two verses and has
eased their burden exactly in those aspects in which He has admonished the People of the Book
and put them to shame in the verses of the chapter "The Cow". He has indeed criticized them
because they differentiated between the angels of Allah, as they hated Gabriel and loved the
others; and between the revealed Divine Books, as they disbelieved in the Qur'an and believed in
previous ones; and between the messengers of Allah, as they believed in Musa (or in Musa and
'Isa) and disbelieved in Muhammad (may Allah's blessings and peace be on him and them), and
between His commands, as they believed in some commands of the Book of Allah and
disbelieved in some others; but the believers of this ummah: believe in Allah, and His angels,
and His Books, and His messengers: "We make no difference between any of His messengers".

They indeed observed proper manners vis-a-vis their Lord by submitting to the cognizance sent
to them by Allah. Then they showed the manners by positively responding to the divine
commandments, when they said: "We hear and obey"; unlike the Jews who had said: "We hear
and we disobey." After that they showed proper manner when they counted their own selves, the
slaves possessed by their Lord, who do not own anything, and they do not try to put Allah under
their obligation because of their faith and obedience; so they said: "Thy forgiveness (do we
crave)"; they were not like the Jews who had said: "He soon will forgive us"; and said: "Surely
Allah is needy and we are self sufficient"; and said: "The Fire will not touch us except for
counted days", and other similar erroneous utterances.

Then Allah said: Allah does not impose upon any soul a duty but to the extent of its ability, for it
is (the benefit of) what it has earned, and upon it is (the evil of) what it has wrought. It is
because the divinely laid responsibility, by its disposition, follows the nature on which He has
created the people; and it is known that the nature, being a sort of creation, does not invite except
to what it has been equipped with; and certainly in it is found the felicity of life.

However, if the topic would be of importance which would demand more attention to itself, or if
the servant who was ordered went out of the fold of nature, beyond the appearance of servitude,
then it would be Ok as a secondary natural command for the master of the one having authority
in his hand to give him an order beyond the usual extent of its ability; for example, he may tell
him to observe precaution on mere doubt, or to avoid forgetfulness and mistake when utmost
attention is given to the topic, e.g. indispensability of precaution in connection with blood,
genital and property in Islamic; or to increase the inconvenience and tighten the screw the more
one increases in disputation and insists in questioning, as Allah has given us many such an
information concerning the Children of Israel.

In any case, the Qur'anic phrase: Allah does not impose upon any soul. . ., is either continuation
of the speech of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the believers: If so, then they must have said it as a
preamble to their prayer: "Our Lord! Do not punish us if we forget or make a mistake;" in order
that it may serve as His praise, to remove a possible misunderstanding that Allah might impose a
burden in the excess of one's ability, and might lay down a disconcerting order - such ideas
would be removed by asserting that Allah does not impose a responsibility upon a soul except to
the extent of its ability; and what they have asked by saying: "Our Lord! Do not punish us if we
forget or make a mistake;" refers to divine commands in their secondary aspects, resulting from
the order or from the side of the servants because of their enmity, not from the side of Allah, the
High.

Or, it is the divine speech, inserted between two phrases of their prayer, which are reported here,
i.e., "Thy forgiveness (do we crave)," and: "Our Lord! Do not punish us if we forget...," in order
to give the above-mentioned connotation, in addition to teaching and training them under divine
guidance; this too will be a sort of their speech, because they are the believers in what Allah has
sent down, and this too is from Him. In any case, this is what their speech relies on and their
prayer depends upon.

Then Allah mentions the remainder of their prayer; or you may say, the other group of their
problems: "Our Lord! Do not punish us...", "Our Lord! Do not lay on us a burden as Thou didst
lay on those before us"; "Our Lord! Do not impose upon us that which we have not the strength
to bear; and pardon us", it is as though they want pardon for what they might have committed in
forgetfulness or by mistake and all such reasons; "and grant us protection and have mercy on us
" for all our sins and mistakes. Forgiveness here does not entail repetition although they had
earlier said: "Thy forgiveness (do we crave)", because it quotes their speech in order to compare
their condition and their manner with their Lord with the. People of the Book in their dealing
with their Lord and regarding their Book that was sent to them; moreover, the context of prayer
does not reject repetition unlike other situations.

It is not necessary to explain how this prayer contains the manner of servitude, by adhering to the
attribute of Lordship time and again, and confessing to one's being possessed and under
guardianship of the owner, standing at the station of humbleness and wretchedness of servitude
vis-a-vis the Mighty Lord.

The noble Qur'an contains divine trainings and sublime teachings to the Prophet (s.a.w.) by
various types of praise he uses for his Lord, or the beseeching he offers before Him. For
example: Say: "O Allah, Master of the kingdom! Thou givest the kingdom to whomsoever Thou
pleasest,..." (3:26); Say: "O Allah! Originator of the heavens and the earth, Knower of the
unseen and the seen! Thou judgest between Thy servants..." (39:46); Say: "Praise be to Allah
and peace on His servants whom He has chosen:..." (27:59); Say: "Surely my prayer and my
sacrifice and my life and my death are (all) for Allah,..." (6:162); " ...and say: "O my Lord!
Increase me in knowledge" (20:114); And say: "O my Lord! I seek refuge in Thee from the evil
suggestions of the Satans, and I seek refuge in Thee! O my Lord! From their presence." (23:97-
98), in addition to numerous such verses.
All these collectively contain the fine manners, which Allah trained His messenger (s.a.w.) with,
and he in his turn exhorted his ummah to observe it.

7. Now, we should see how they preserved the manners towards their Lord while they talked
with their people: This too is a vast chapter and it is attached to the manners of praising Allah,
the glorified. From another angle, it is a sort of practical tabligh, which is not less, or rather is
more, effective than the verbal tabligh.

There are many such examples in the Qur'an. Allah quotes a talk between Nuh and his ummah:
They said: "O Nuh! Indeed you have disputed with us and lengthened dispute with us, therefore
bring to us what you threaten us with, if you are of the truthful ones." He said: "Allah only will
bring it to you if He please, and you will not make (Him) incapable. And if I intend to give you
good advice, my advice will not profit you if Allah intended that He should leave you to go
astray; He is your Lord, and to Him shall you be returned. "(11:32-34). He (a.s.) refuted from
himself what they were attributing to him, in order to show his inability in this way; he attributes
it to his Lord, and shows finest manner by adding the phrase: "if He please", and then saying:
"and you will not make (Him) incapable", i.e. will not make Allah incapable. That is why he had
used the word: Allah, instead of saying, 'My Lord', because Allah is He to Whom is the end goal
of every beauty and grandeur. Also, he did not consider this much refutation and affirmation
enough until he supported it by saying that his advice would not profit them if Allah did not
intend them to get its benefit. Thus he completed the refutation of power from himself and its
affirmation for his Lord, and showed its reason by saying: "He is your Lord, and to Him you will
be returned."

This is a dialogue steeped in beautiful manners vis-a-vis Allah; Nuh (a.s.) used this speech to
address the transgressors of his ummah, disputing with them. And he was the first prophet who
opened the door of argumentation in calling to the monotheism, and stood up against the idol-
worship, as the noble Qur'an describes.

This is the greatest of the doors which lets the researcher's eyes free to look at the prophets'
manners; one sees in them the finest of their characteristics which are steeped in good manner
and perfection. It is because all their talks and deeds, movements and stillness, are based on
contemplation and servitudal presence, although, in form, it looks like the deed of him who is
absent from his Lord, and his Lord is absent from him. Allah says: ...and those who are with
Him are not proud to worship Him, nor do they grow weary. They glorify (Him) by night and
day; they are never languid (21:19-20).

Allah has quoted in His Book many dialogues of Hud, Salih, Ibrahim, Musa, Shu'ayb, Yusuf,
Sulayman, 'Isa and Muhammad, etc. (peace be upon them), in different conditions of theirs, like
hardship and ease, war and peace, disclosure and secrecy, good omens and warning and so on.

Contemplate on the divine speech: So Musa returned to his people wrathful, sorrowing. Said he:
"O my people! Did not your Lord promise you a goodly promise: did then the time seem long to
you, or did you wish that displeasure from your Lord should be due to you, so that you broke
(your) promise to me?" (20:86). He mentions Musa when he returned to his people while he was
filled with wrath and rage, but it did not turn him away from observation of manner while
mentioning his Lord.

Also, look at the divine words: And she in whose house he was sought to make himself yield (to
her), and she made fast the doors and said: "Come forward." He said: "I seek Allah's refuge,
surely my Lord made good my abode: Surely the unjust do not prosper." (12:23).

And the divine words: They said: "By Allah! Now has Allah certainly chosen you over us, and
we were certainly sinners." He said: "(There shall be) no reproof against you this day; Allah
may forgive you, and He is the most Merciful of the merciful." (12:91-92). He mentions Yusuf in
privacy wherein the woman of 'Aziz tried to make Yusuf yield to her; it was a situation where
man forgets all understanding; yet it did not turn him away from piety, and did not distract him
from observation of manners when mentioning his Lord and with others.

Also, the divine words: ...Then when he saw it settled beside him, he said: This is of the grace of
my Lord that He may try me whether lam grateful or ungrateful; and whoever is grateful, he is
grateful only for his own soul, and whoever is ungrateful, then surely my Lord is Self-sufficient,
Honoured (27:40). So, this is Sulayman (a.s.), and he was given of the great kingdom, effective
order and amazing power, that he ordered to bring the throne of the queen of Sheba from Sheba
to Palestine, and it was brought down in less than a twinkling of an eye, yet he was not taken
over by pride and pompousness and did not forget his Lord, and at once offered praise to his
Lord in the presence of his courtiers with best praise.

Compare it with the story of Nimrod with Ibrahim (a.s.), as Allah says: Have you not considered
him who disputed with Ibrahim about his Lord, because Allah had given him the kingdom? When
Ibrahim said: "My Lord is He Who gives life and causes to die," he said: "I give life and cause
death."... (2:258). He said it when he ordered two prisoners to be brought before and ordered one
of them to be killed and the other to be freed.

Or, it may be compared with what Pharaoh said, as Allah has quoted him: "O my people! Is not
the kingdom of Egypt mine? And these rivers flow beneath me; do you not then see? Nay! I am
better than this fellow who is contemptible, and who can hardly speak distinctly: But why have
not bracelets of gold been put upon him, or why have there not come with him angels as
companions?" (43:51-53)

He shows his pride in the kingdom of Egypt and its rivers and a quantity of gold which was in
his possession and that of his nobles; and it did not take him long to announce: 'I am your
sublime lord,' and this was the same fellow who was being humiliated by Musa (a.s.)'s signs day
after day, like flood, locust, lice and frogs, etc.

Other examples of manner: Allah says:... when they were both in the cave, when he was saying
to his companion: "Grieve not, surely Allah is with us."... (9:40); And when the Prophet secretly
communicated a piece of information to one of his wives... so when he informed her of it, she
said: "Who informed you this?" He said: "The Knowing, the One Aware, informed me." (66:3).
So, the hard situation, terror and anxiety on the day of fear did not upset him to forget his Lord
who was with him, and his noble self was not affected by the threatening situation; and likewise
the information which he secretly communicated to one of his wives, all this contains the good
manners in referring to his Lord.

These are a few examples, and in the same style we find the finest manner and noble
characteristics, which appear in their stories in the noble Qur'an. We have already gone beyond
our self-imposed limit in this topic; otherwise we would have narrated their stories at length and
described them fully.

8. Prophets' manners with the people in their dealings and talks: Samples of this manner are
found in their arguments with the unbelievers which are quoted in the Qur'an, and in their talks
with the believers; also some aspects of their life histories which are narrated.

As for the manners in talk, you will not find them in their talks with those arrogant and ignorant
people ever using any word that would annoy them or any abusing, insulting or debasing remark;
while their adversaries went to the extreme in abusing and taunting them and in attacking and
mocking them, but they never replied to them except with best of the words and most sincere
admonition; they turned away from them in peace, and when the ignorant ones talked to them
they said: "Peace!"

Allah says: But the chiefs of those who disbelieved from among his (Nuh's) people said: "We do
not consider you but a human being like ourselves, and we do not see any have followed you but
those who are meanest of us at first thought and we do not see in you any excellence over us;
nay, we deem you liars." He said: "O my people! Tell me if I have with me clear proof from my
Lord, and He has granted me mercy from Himself and it has been made obscure to you; shall we
constrain you to (accept) it while you are averse from it? "(11:27-28). Also, He quotes the tribe
of 'Ad, the people of Hud, as saying: "We do not say aught but that some of our gods have
smitten you with evil. "He said: "Surely I call Allah to witness, and do you bear witness too, that
I am clear of what you associate (with Allah), besides Him,..."(11:54-55).

They meant that some of their gods had smitten Hud with evil, i.e., madness or idiocy, etc.

Also, Allah quotes Azar as saying: "Do you dislike my gods, O Ibrahim? If you do not desist I
will certainly revile you (or, stone you to death) and leave me for a time." He said: "Peace be on
you, I will pray to my Lord to forgive you; surely He is ever Affectionate to me." (19:46-47)

Also, He quotes the people of Shu'ayb (a.s.) as saying: The chiefs of those who disbelieved from
among his people said: "Most surely we see you in folly, and most surely we think you to be of
the liars." He said: "O my people! There is no folly in me, but I am a messenger of the Lord of
the worlds; I deliver to you the message of my Lord and I am a faithful adviser to you." (7:66-68)

Also, Allah says: Pharaoh said: "And what is the Lord of the worlds? " He said: "The Lord of
the heavens and the earth and what is between them, if you understand."...Said he: "Most surely
your Messenger who is sent to you is mad." He said: "The Lord of the east and the west and
what is between them, if you understand." (26:23-28)

Also, He says quoting the people of Maryam: They said: "O Maryam! Surely you have done a
strange thing. O sister of Harun! Your father was not a bad man, nor was your mother an
unchaste woman." But she pointed to him. They said: "How should we speak to one who is a
child in the cradle? " He said: "Surely I am a servant of Allah; He has given me the Book and
made me a prophet...." (19:27-30)

And Allah has said consoling His Prophet (s.a.w.) when they accused him of soothsaying,
madness and of being a poet: Therefore, continue to remind, for by the grace of your Lord, you
are not a soothsayer, or a madman. Or do they say: "A poet, we wait for him the evil accidents
of time." Say: "Wait, for surely I too with you am of those who wait."(52:29-31)

Also, He says: And the unjust say: "You do not follow any but a man bewitched." See what
likeness do they apply to you, so they have gone astray; therefore they shall not be able to find a
way. (25:89)

Add to it many other types of abuse, accusation and insult which have been quoted in the Qur'an;
yet it has not been narrated from the prophets (a.s.) that they ever faced them with rudeness or
obscenity; they rather replied to them with correct speech and good and gentle logic, in
obedience to the divine instruction which had taught them good speech and beautiful manners.
Allah says addressing Musa and Harun: Go both of you to Pharaoh; surely he has become
inordinate. Then speak to him a gentle word, haply he may mind or fear (20:43-44). And He said
addressing His Prophet (s.a.w.): And if you turn away from them to seek mercy from your Lord,
which you hope for, speak to them a gentle word (17:28).

It was an aspect of their manner in talks and discussions that they took themselves to be equal in
position to general people; thus they talked with every stratum of society according to the level
of its understanding. It becomes manifest if you ponder on their talks with the people with all
their differences beginning from Nuh onwards. Both sects have narrated from the Prophet
(s.a.w.) that he said: "Surely, we the group of the prophets has been ordered to talk with the
people to the degree of their understanding."

It must be known that the sending of prophets was only based on the foundation of guidance and
its explanation and support. So, it was incumbent on them to equip themselves with truth in their
mission, be devoid of falsity, and remain on guard against traps of error whatever they might be,
whether it agreed with the people's pleasure or went against their liking, whether it resulted in
their willingness or unwillingness. Allah has ordained very strict prohibition and extreme caution
in this matter for His prophets, the falsity cannot be followed in words or deeds even for helping
the truth, for the falsity is falsity no matter it falls in the path of truth or not; and the call to truth
does not combine with sanction of falsity even in the path of truth; a truth which is led to by
falsehood and which results from untruth is not a total truth.

That is why Allah has said:... nor could I take those who lead (others) astray for aiders. (18:51);
And had it not been that We had already made you firm, you would certainly have been near to
incline to them a little; in that case We would certainly have made you to taste a double
(punishment) in this life and a double (punishment) after death, then you would not have found
any helper against Us (17:74-75), For there is no indulgence, no close association, and no
adulation in truth, and no respect for falsity.
And that is why Allah equipped the people of His mission and guardians of His religion, i.e. the
prophets (peace be upon them), with what would pave for them the path for following and
helping the truth. Allah says: There is no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has
ordained for him: such has been the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before;
and the command of Allah is a decree that is made absolute: Those who deliver the messages of
Allah and fear Him, and do not fear anyone but Allah; and Allah is sufficient to take account
(33:38-39). Allah says that the prophets do not feel any difficulty in doing what Allah has
ordained for them; they fear only Him, and do not fear anyone other than Him; there is no snag
in their declaring the truth, come what may.

Then He promised them help in what they stood up to do for Him. He says: And certainly Our
word has already gone forth in respect of Our servants, the messengers: Most surely they shall
be the assisted ones, and most surely Our host alone shall be the victorious ones. (38:171-3).
Most surely We help Our messengers,... (40:51).

That is why we find in their narrated stories that they do not care for anything in declaration of
truth and the word of veracity, even if the people did not like it and found its taste bitter. Allah
quotes Nuh addressing his people: ...but I consider you a people who are ignorant (11:29). And
Hud said: ...you are nothing but forgers (of lies), (11:50). Also, he told them: Indeed
uncleanness and wrath from your Lord have lighted upon you; what! Do you dispute with me
about names, which you and your fathers have given? Allah has not sent any authority for
them;... (7:71), And He quotes Lut as saying: ...nay, you are an extravagant people (7:81). Also,
He quotes word of Ibrahim addressed to his people: "Fie on you and on what you worship
besides Allah; what! Do you not then understand?" (21:67); again He quotes Musa as he replied
to Pharaoh's claim: "Most surely I deem you, O Musa! To be a man bewitched." He said: "Truly
you know that none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth has sent down these as clear
proofs, and most surely I believe you, O Pharaoh! To be given over to perdition." (17:101-2),
i.e., prevented from believing in truth, turned out, steeped in perdition. There are many other
such examples.

All of this shows observation of manners about truth and its following; and there is no desired
thing more honorable than this, nor is there any sought after item more noble and more valuable.
Yet sometimes it contains what goes against the prevalent manners among the people because
their lives are based on following the side of desires and proceeding to the life's pleasure, by
indulging the people of falsehood, and submitting to those who create disturbance in society and
exceed the limit in practical policy.

In short, manner, as earlier explained, appears in palatable words and good deeds. Thus it differs
with changed ways of life in societies, and the opinions and beliefs, which are settled in it and
shape it. As for the divine mission, upon which the religious society depends, it only follows the
truth in belief and action. The truth does not mix with falsity or depend on or get supported by it.
So, there is no escape from declaring and following it. The manner that springs from it is that one
should proceed on the best path of truth and dress in it with the finest robe, like opting for soft
words when one has the option of speaking softly or harshly, and to choose hastening in doing
good when both hastening and delaying are permissible.
It is this aspect which Allah has ordered in His Book: And We ordained for him (Musa) in the
tablets admonition of every kind and clear explanation of all things: so take hold of them with
firmness and enjoin your people to take hold of what is best thereof;... (7:145). Then He gave
good news to His servants who adhered to it: ...therefore give good news to My servants, those
who listen to the word, then follow the best of it; those are they whom Allah has guided, and
those it is who are the men of 'understanding (39:17-18). So there is no manner found in falsity,
nor any manner in a mixture of truth and falsehood; whatever is out of the fold of pure truth is
error which the Guardian of truth is not pleased with, and He has said: ...and what is there after
the truth but error;... (10:32)

It is this factor that led the prophets of truth to clear declaration and true language; even if on
occasions it was against the demands of sycophancy and false manners that are prevalent in non-
religious societies.

It was a part of their manners in their dealings and characteristics with the people that they
accorded respect to the weak and to the powerful in equal degree; if there was increase and
augmentation, it was for the people of knowledge and piety. For, when they built on the
foundation of servitude and upbringing of human soul, it resulted in equality of judgment
between rich and poor, big and small, man and woman, master and slave, ruler and ruled, leader
and follower, king and subject. At this juncture, the distinction of attributes becomes ineffectual,
exclusive possession of social distinctions by powerful people is negated; and division of gain
and loss, deprivation and enjoyment, felicity and infelicity between the attributes of wealth and
poverty, and power and weakness, becomes inoperative; the system is nullified in which the
powerful and wealthy are placed at the topmost stratum, enjoy the most tender life, are given in
every endeavor the easiest and most comfortable and in every responsibility the lightest; rather
all people are treated equally. Allah says: O you men! Surely We have created you of a male and
a female, and made you tribes and families that you may know each other; surely the most
honorable of you with Allah is the one among you most pious;... (49:13). In this way, the
arrogance of the powerful because of their power, and pride of the rich because of their wealth,
turns into humility for the truth, and hastening to forgiveness and mercy, racing to the good
deeds, endeavoring in the way of Allah for the purpose of Allah's pleasure.

Thus, they accorded respect to the poor just as they did to the wealthy, and observed good
manners with the weak as they did with the rich. Rather the weaker section was reserved for
more magnanimity, mercy and graciousness. Allah says teaching His Prophet (s.a.w.): And
withhold yourself with those who call on their Lord morning and evening desiring His good will,
and let not your eyes pass from them, desiring the beauties of this world's life; and do not follow
him whose heart We have made unmindful to Our remembrance, and he follows his low desires
and his case is one in which due bounds are exceeded. (18:28); And do not drive away those who
call upon their Lord in the morning and the evening, they desire only His favor; neither are you
answerable for any reckoning of theirs, nor are they answerable for any reckoning of yours, so
that you should drive them away and thus be of the unjust. (6:52); Do not strain your eyes after
what We have given certain classes of them to enjoy, and do not grieve for them, and make
yourself gentle to the believers; and say: "Surely I am the plain warner." (15:88-89).
This fine manner is seen in the dialogue between Nuh and his people as Allah narrates: But the
chiefs of those who disbelieved from among his people said: "We do not consider you but a man
like ourselves, and we do not see any have followed you but those who are the meanest of us at
first thought, and we do not see in you any excellence over us; nay, we deem you liars." He said:
"O my people! Tell me if I have with me clear proof from my Lord, and He has granted me
mercy from Himself and it has been made obscure to you; shall we constrain you to (accept) it
while you are averse from it? And O my people! I ask you not for wealth in return for it; my
reward is only with Allah and I am not going to drive away those who believe; surely they shall
meet their Lord, but I consider you a people who are ignorant (because of your disdaining the
poor and weak servants of Allah): And O my people! Who will help me against Allah if I drive
them away? Will you not then mind? And I do not say to you that I have the treasures of Allah;
and I do not know the unseen, nor do I say that I am an angel (i.e. I do not claim for myself any
distinction against you except that I have been sent as a messenger to you): nor do I say about
those whom your eyes hold in mean estimation (that) Allah will never grant them (any) good -
Allah knows best what is in their souls (of the good and felicity expected from them):  for then
most surely I should be of the unjust." (11:27-31).

A similar negation of distinction is seen in the words Shu'ayb addressed to his people, as Allah
narrates: "...and I do not desire that in opposition to you I should betake myself to that which I
forbid you: I desire nothing but reform so far as I am able to, and with none but Allah is the
direction of my affair to a right course; on Him do I rely and to Him do I turn. "(11:88). And
Allah says introducing His Messenger to the people: Certainly a Messenger has come to you
from among yourselves, grievous to him is your falling into distress, excessively solicitous
respecting you, to the believers (he is) compassionate, merciful. (9:128); And there are some of
them who hurt the Prophet and say: "He is an ear;" say: "A hearer of good for you (who)
believes in Allah and believes in the faithful and a mercy for those of you who believe;"... (9:61);
And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality (68:4). Also, He says and it gathers
all preceding attributes: And We have not sent you but as a mercy to the worlds (21:107).

Although apparently these verses describe his good characteristics, and not his manners which
are something beyond that; yet a sort of manners, as described earlier, is inferred from a sort of
characteristics; moreover, manner itself is a branch of characteristics.

Other Traditions
Most of the Qur'anic verses, from which the Prophet (s.a.w.)'s noble characteristics and beautiful
manners inferred are revealed in the forms of imperative and prohibitive orders. Therefore, we
thought it advisable to write here some traditions about his (s.a.w.)'s customary usage, which
contain collections of his characteristics which point to his beautiful divine manners; and they
are also supported by the noble Qur'anic verses.

1. Ma 'ani 'l-Akhbar (as-Saduq) narrates through his chain, from Abu Hala at-Tamimi, from al-
Hasan ibn 'Ali (peace be upon both); and through another chain from ar-Ridha (a.s.), through his
forefathers, from 'Ali ibn al-Husayn from al-Hasan ibn 'Ali (peace be upon all of them); also
through a third chain, from a man from the progeny of Abu Hala, from al-Hasan ibn 'Ali (peace
be upon both), that he said:
"I asked my maternal uncle Hind ibn Abi Hala, who was a describer of (the attributes of) the
Prophet (s.a.w.); and I was desirous that he should describe to me something of it in order that I
should hold fast to it. So he said: '"The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was magnificent and
honored, his face radiated like the full moon on moonlit night; taller than al-marbu' (of medium
height), and shorter than al-mushadhdhab (tall and excellent); (he had) big skull and long,
straight hair; if his hair was parted it separated in the middle, otherwise his hair did not reach
beyond his earlobes; of bright color, wide forehead; his eyebrows were thin and long, lengthy
from one end to the other without joining in the middle; between them was a vein; he had a light
over-whelming him, if one did not ponder over him, would deem him having high nasal wind
pipe, of thick beard, soft checks and wide mouth; had white teeth not tightly joined; had a thin
line of hair from middle of the chest to the stomach; it seemed as his neck was like that of a deer
in clarity of silver; of medium stature, plump and holding himself properly; his stomach and
chest were in one level; his shoulders were wide; his bone-joints were thick; his chest was broad;
when he disrobed, his body was brilliant; a thin line of hair joined his neck to the navel-pit; apart
from that, his breasts and belly were without hair; there was hair on his arms, shoulders and
upper chest; his wrists were long, his palms wide; his palms and soles were thick; his sides
flowed, his joints were soft; hollows of his soles were deep, the feet were wide, water did not
adhere to them; he proceeded ahead well-balanced, and walked in humbleness, fast-paced, when
he walked it seemed as if he was going down a slope; when he turned (towards someone), turned
with his whole body; kept his eyes down, he looked to the earth much longer than he looked at
the heaven; most of his look was observation; he hastened to say salam to whomever he met.'"

He said: "Then I said to him, 'Describe to me (the way of) his speaking.' He said, 'He (s.a.w.),
was constantly in grief, always contemplating, he never spoke unnecessarily; he began his talk
and ended it very eloquently; he spoke short sentences, pithy and expressive, in which there was
neither any superfluous word nor any shortcoming; mild-tempered, neither in vain nor insulting;
exalted a bounty (gifted to him) however small it might be; he never criticized any of it;
however, he never derogated nor praised any taste. When he stood for the truth nobody
recognized him; nothing could stand against his anger until he obtained its right for it. When he
pointed, he did so with his whole palm, and when he was astonished he turned [the palm]; when
he talked he joined it and touched his right palm with inside of his left thumb. When he was
angry he turned away and cast down his eyes; mostly his laugh was a smile; when he laughed his
teeth appeared like hail-stone.'"

as-Saduq says: Up to here was the narration of al-Qasim ibn al- Mani' from Isma'il ibn
Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Ja'far ibn Muhammad; and the rest is the narrative of 'Abdu 'r-Rahman
up to the end.

"al-Hasan (a.s.), said, 'I did not mention the [above tradition] for a while to al-Husayn (a.s.), then
I narrated it to him, but I found that he already knew it. So, I asked him about it and found that
he had asked his father (a.s.) about the Prophet (s.a.w.) - his entry and exit, his sitting and his
features - not leaving anything out.'

"al-Husayn (a.s.), said, 'I did ask my father (a.s.), about the entrance of the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.). He said, "His entrance in itself was allowed to him; so when he went to his house, he
divided his entry in three parts: one part for Allah, one for his family and one for himself; then he
divided his own part between himself and the people and dealt with general public through his
especial people and did not keep away anything from them.

"'"And it was part of his (s.a.w.)'s characteristics in the part of the ummah to give preference to
the people of excellence in his manners, and apportion it on them according to their superiority
in religion; so among them was one with one need, another with two needs, and a third with
many needs; so he remained engaged with them and kept them busy in that which was good for
them, and constantly asked about the ummah and informed them of that which should be done;
and he used to say: 'The one who is present must convey [the message] to him who is absent;'
[and he admonished]: 'Convey to me the need of him who is unable to convey it (to me); because
anyone who conveys to an authority the need of him who is unable to convey it himself, Allah
will make his feet firm on the Day of Resurrection.' Nothing else was mentioned in his presence,
and he did not accept from anyone any other thing; people came to him in groups and did not go
out except after tasting (food), and went away as guides (to the other)."

"'And I asked him about the going out of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) how did he do it? He
said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to preserve his tongue except from that which
concerned him; he kept them united, and not to alienate them; he honored the noble man of every
community and made him their governor; he remained on watch about the people and kept
guards against them, without turning his face away from anyone or showing any change in his
manners; he checked conditions of his companions, and asked the people about the people. He
praised the good, strengthened it, showed the ugliness of the evil, and weakened it; he was
moderate in his affairs, not contradictory. He was never oblivious lest they become oblivious and
incline (to one side); was never short from truth and never allowed it; those who were close to
him were best of the people; the one having excellence near him was the one who was most
sincere to the Muslims, and the one having greatest rank near him was the one who was best of
all in beneficence and assistance.'" "He (a.s.), said, 'Then I asked him about his (s.a.w.)'s sitting.
He said, "He never sat down or stood up except with remembrance (of Allah); he did not reserve
any seat for himself; when he reached a group, he sat down where he had arrived, and he ordered
(others) to do the same. He gave each of the group his due share (of attention); and no co-
participant in the gathering thought that any other person was more honored than him (in the
Prophet's eyes). Whoever sat with him, (the Prophet), patiently remained with him until he took
his leave. Whoever asked him for a need, did not return except either with that thing or with
sweet words. His good manners overwhelmed the people until he was (like) a father to them; and
all of them were equal in his eyes in their rights. His gathering was one of forbearance, modesty,
truth and trust, voices were not raised therein, nor were people's honors disgraced there. If one of
them committed a mistake, it was (gracefully) amended so that no one repeated it; they dealt
with each other with justice, joining together with piety, humble with each other; they respected
the elder and had mercy on the younger; they gave preference to a needy person over themselves
and provided safety to a stranger."'

"Then I said, 'How was his dealing with those who sat with him?' He (a.s.) said, 'He (s.a.w.) had
always a smiling face; he was of agreeable manner and gentle hearted; he was neither rude nor
rash, neither loud voiced nor obscene; neither exposer of defects nor eulogist, he ignored what he
did not desire, so neither they despaired of him nor those who had hoped of him were
disappointed. He freed himself from three (things): dispute, increase and what did not concern
him; and freed the people from three (things): He never condemned anyone or put him to shame;
never did he look for any one's slips or defects; he did not speak except about what he hoped
(divine) reward; when he talked his companions bowed their heads in silence, as though there
were birds on their heads; so when he became silent, they spoke; they did not dispute near him in
a talk, whoever spoke they listened to him until he finished; their talk near him was one after
another; he laughed at what they laughed at, and wondered at what they wondered at. He
remained patient when a stranger was rude in his talk and demands until his companions fulfilled
his requirements, and used to say: "When you see a needy person seeking his needs, fulfill it."
He did not accept praise except for a favor he had done to him. He did not interrupt anyone's talk
until he exceeded the limit, then he stopped it by forbidding it or standing up.' He said: "Then I
asked him about the silence of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) so he (a.s.) said, 'His (s.a.w.)'s
silence was based on four (factors): forbearance, caution, estimation and meditation; as for the
estimation, it was in equally looking at the people and listening to them; and as for his
meditation, it was on what would abide and what would perish. Forbearance and patience were
united in him; therefore nothing would enrage or agitate him. His caution had gathered in four
things: his holding fast to good in order to follow it, his abstaining from evil in order to desist
from it, his deep thinking regarding the welfare of his ummah, and standing up for what is
gathered for him of the good of this world and the next.'"

The author says: as-Saduq has also narrated it in Makarimu 'l-akhlaq, copying it from the book
of Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Ibrahim at-Taliqani who has narrated it through his trusted narrators
from al- Hasan and al-Husayn (peace be upon both), al-Majlisi has said in Biharu'l-anwar. "This
is a famous tradition and the Sunnis have narrated it in most of their books."

And numerous traditions on this theme or on some of its parts have been narrated from the
Companions.

[Note: From here about two pages of Arabic book contain meanings and explanations of the
difficult words and phrases of this tradition. We are omitting it here, because our English version
has incorporated them fully, tr.]

2. Ihyau'l-'Ulum writes: He (s.a.w.) was the most eloquent in speech and the sweetest... He spoke
comprehensive sentences, there was neither any superfluous word in them nor any shortcoming;
it was as though his words followed one another; he paused between his speech in order that the
hearer could memorize and preserve it; he was loud-voiced with most beautiful melody, (al-
Ghazali)

3. at-Tahdhib: (as-Saduq) narrates through his chain from Ishaq ibn Ja'far, from his brother
Musa, through his forefathers from 'Ali (a.s.) that he said: "I heard the Prophet (s.a.w.), saying, 'I
have been sent with noble ethics and the best manners.'"

4. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), was more
modest than a virgin girl in her private room; and when he disliked a thing, we knew it from his
face." (at-Tabrisi)
5. al-Kafi: (al-Kulayni) narrates through his chains, from Muhammad ibn Muslim that he said: "I
heard Abu Ja'far (a.s.) saying that an angel came to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and said,
'Surely Allah has given you option to choose that you become a servant, Messenger (and)
humble or a messenger angel.' (Abu Ja'far) said, 'So the Prophet looked at Gabriel (who) pointed
with his hand that be a humble (Messenger); so he said, "(I shall be) a servant, Messenger (and)
humble." The messenger (angel) said, "With (condition that) it would not decrease anything that
you have got with your Lord." (He said), "And with it are the keys of the treasures of the earth."'"

6. Nahju'l-Balaghah: 'Ali (a.s.) said: "So you follow your pure cheerful Prophet ... He gnawed at
the world and did not lend any glance at it. He was most suffering of all inside and most empty
of stomach. The world was offered to him but he refused to accept it. He knew that Allah
disliked a thing, so he disliked it, and He degraded a thing, so he degraded it. If we did not have
except our love to what Allah disliked, and our honoring what Allah degraded, it was enough for
discord with Allah and deviation from Allah's command.

"And the Messenger of Allah used to eat sitting on the earth, and sat like a slave; he mended his
shoes by his hand, rode an unsaddled donkey, and allowed someone to ride behind him.
(Sometimes) there would be a curtain on his door with pictures on it, so he would say, 'O so-and-
so! (Addressing a wife of his): Remove it from me, because whenever I look at it, I am reminded
of this world and its adornments.' Thus he turned away from the world by his heart, and let its
remembrance die from his soul; he liked that its adornment be wiped away from his eyes, lest he
takes some equipment from it. He did not believe that it was something to abide, and did not
expect to remain therein; so he turned it out of his soul, and dispatched it from his heart and
removed it from his sight. In this way, whoever hates a thing, he hates to look at it and does not
like it to be mentioned before him."

7. al-Ihtijaj: Musa ibn Ja'far has narrated from his father, from his forefathers, from al-Hasan ibn
'Ali, from his father, 'Ali (peace be upon them), inter alia, in a lengthy hadith: "He (s.a.w.) used
to weep for fear of Allah, the Mighty, the Great, until his place of prayer became wet without
any sin..." (at-Tabrisi)

8. al-Manaqib:  "He (s.a.w.) used to weep until he fainted. Somebody told him, 'Has not Allah
forgiven you your past faults and those to follow?' He said, 'Well, should I not be a grateful
servant?' And exactly like that were the fainting of 'Ali ibn Abi Talib, his successor in his
positions." (Ibn Shahrashub)

The author says: That question was based on the idea that the purpose of divine worship is
safety from chastisement; and it has been said in traditions that it is the worship of slaves; and his
(s.a.w.)'s reply is based on the idea that the reason is to show one's gratitude to Allah, it is the
worship of noble people, and it is another of the types of worship. It has been narrated from the
Imams of Ahlu'l-Bayt (a.s.): "Surely among the worship is the one that is done for fear of
punishment, and it is the worship of slaves; and there is the one that is done for desire of reward,
and it is the worship of traders; and among them is the one that is done to show one's gratitude to
Allah." (Some traditions say: 'for love of Allah'; some others say: 'because He deserves it'.)

We have discussed the meaning of these traditions in detail in vol.4 (English vol.7) of the book
under the "Commentary" of the verse:. . . and Allah will reward the grateful. (3:144). We have
explained there that gratefulness to Allah in His worship means being sincere to Him, and that
the grateful are the purified ones who are described in such wordings of Allah as: Glory be to
Allah (for freedom) from what they describe, but not so the servants of Allah, the purified ones
(37:159-60).

9. al-Irshad, ad-Daylami: "Surely during the prayer of Ibrahim (a.s.) the wheezing sound of fear
was heard from him because of fear of Allah; and the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) too was like
that."

10. Tafsir of Abu'l-Futuh: It is narrated from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri that he said, "When the verse:
...remember Allah, remembering frequently [33:41] was revealed, the Messenger of Allah
became engaged in the remembrance of Allah until the unbelievers said that he had become
insane."

11. al-Kafi: (al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Zayd ash-Shahham from Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to repent to Allah every day seventy
times." "I [Zayd] said, 'Was he saying: "I seek pardon of Allah and return (repent) to Him?'" He
said, "No; but he used to say, "I return to Allah.'" I said, '(How is it that) the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) used to repent and did not return (to that fault) and we repent and then return?' He said,
'Allah's help is sought.'"

12. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: (at-Tabrisi) narrates from 'Ali (a.s.) copying from Kitabu 'n-Nubuwwah
that he (a.s.) used to say when he described the attributes of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.): "He
was the most generous of hand, the bravest of the chest, the most truthful in speech, the most
fulfilling of obligations, of the mildest nature, from the noblest family; whoever saw him all of a
sudden, was afraid of him, and whoever mingled with him knowing him, loved him; I did not see
like him (s.a.w.) neither before him nor after him."

13. al-Kafi: (al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from 'Umar ibn 'Ali from his father (a.s.) that
he said: "It was (the style) of the swearing of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) that he said, 'No,
and I seek pardon of Allah'."

14. Ihyau'l-'Ulum: "When he (s.a.w.) was very upset, he touched his noble beard frequently."

15. Ibid: "And he (s.a.w.) was the most generous of all people; dinar or dirham did not remain
with him; if something was left with him and he did not find one to give it to him and the night
came, he did not go to his house until he found someone who needed it. He did not take from
what Allah had given to him except the food sufficient for the year from easily available dates
and barley; and he put all of it in the way of Allah.

"He was not asked for a thing except he gave it out; then he returned to the nourishment of the
year - so much so that he often was empty-handed before the expiry of the year if nothing new
came to him." He said, "And he enforced the truth even if it resulted in harm to himself or his
companions." He said, "And he used to proceed alone between his enemies without a guard." He
said, "Nothing from worldly affairs ever intimidated him."
He said: "He sat with poor, took food with needy; he used to respect the people of excellence in
their ethics, and was on intimate terms with the people of dignity by doing good to them. He did
good to his relatives, without giving them preference over one who was superior to them; he was
not harsh to anyone, he accepted the apology from one who offered it."

He said: "He had some slaves and slave girls but did not rise over them in meals or dress. He
never passed a time without some work for Allah or for something, which was necessary for his
welfare. He used to go forth to the orchards of his companions. He never looked down any poor
with disdain because of his poverty or chronic illness. He was not awed by any king because of
his kingdom; he called this and that towards Allah in equal way."

16. Ibid: "And he (s.a.w.) was furthest from anger and nearest in pleasantness; he was most
gracious of all people towards the people, the best of all for all people, and the most beneficial of
all for the people."

17. Ibid: "When he (s.a.w.) was happy and pleased, he was the best of the people in pleasantness;
when he admonished, he admonished seriously, and when he was angry - and he was never angry
except for Allah - nothing could stand against his anger. And he was like that in all his affairs;
and when any affair occurred to him, he entrusted that to Allah, freed himself from power and
strength, and invoked the guidance."

The author says: Reliance on Allah, entrusting the affairs to Him, freeing oneself from power
and strength and invocation of guidance from Him, all of it returns one to another, and all of it
sprouts from one root, and it is this: All affairs are based on the Divine Will which is the
conqueror, unconquered, and His power which is the subduer, unlimited. The Book and the
Sunnah with one voice call to it. Allah says: ...and on Allah should the reliant rely. (14:12);...and
I entrust my affair to Allah,... (40:44); ...and whoever trusts in Allah, He is sufficient for him;...
(65:3); ...surely His is the creation and the command;... (7:54); And that to your Lord is the goal,
(53:42) apart from other such verses. As for the traditions they are beyond counting.

Acquiring these ethics and learning these manners is based on the fact that they apply the human
activities on the proper realities, which establish them on the natural religion. It is because in
reality all affairs return to Allah, as He says: ...now surely to Allah do all affairs eventually come
(42:53). It has a magnificent benefit: When man relies and depends on Allah - and he recognizes
His unlimited power and subduer Will - this factor strengthens man's will and builds the pillars
of his determination; as such he is not affected by any hindrance which appears in the way, nor is
he constrained by any difficulty or tiredness that faces him; his firm intention is not shaken by
any seduction or Satanic whispering which may appear in his inner self in the form of imaginary
significances.

Some of the Prophet's Customs and Manners in his Social

Relations
18. Irshadu'l-Qulub, ad-Daylami: "The Prophet (s.a.w.) used to patch his clothes, mend his shoes
and milk his goat; he ate with slaves, sat on the earth and rode a donkey and allowed someone to
sit behind him; he was not ashamed to carry his provisions from market to his family; he shook
hands with rich and poor, and did not remove his hand from any one's hand until it was the
opposite party who removed it; he greeted anyone who came before him, be he rich or poor,
senior or junior; he never degraded what he was invited to even if it was date of inferior quality.

"And he (s.a.w.) was light of provision, noble of nature, of beautiful social relation and cheerful
face; smiling without laughter, sorrowful without scowling; humble without humiliation,
magnanimous without extravagance, soft-hearted, merciful to every Muslim; he never filled his
stomach so that it would result in belching, and did not extend his hand to anything because of
covetousness."

19. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: It is narrated about the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he looked into mirror, let his
hair grow long and combed it; sometimes he looked into water and managed his hair in this way.
He used to adorn himself for his companions more than he did for his family. And he (s.a.w.)
said: "Surely Allah likes from His servant when he goes out for his brethren that he should
prepare and beautify himself for them."

20. 'Ilalu 'sh-Sharai: 'UyunAkhbari'r-Rida, and al-Majalis: as-Saduq narrates through his chain,
from ar-Rida (a.s.) from his forefathers that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said,
'(There are) five (things) that I shall not leave them till I die: To eat (sitting) on the earth with
slaves, my riding with someone, milking my goat by my hand, wearing wool (len dress), and
greeting the children in order that it may be a custom after me.'"

21. Man la Yahduruhu'l-Faqih: It is narrated from 'Ali (a.s.) that he said to a man from Banu
Sa'd: "Should not I tell you about Fatimah and myself?... So came to us the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) early in the morning, and we were under our blanket; and he said: 'Peace be on you!' But
we remained silent and felt shy because of our position.

"Then he (s.a.w.) said: 'Peace be on you!' And we remained silent. Then he (s.a.w.) said: 'Peace
be on you!' So we feared that if we did not respond (this time) he would go back. (And it was his
custom that he would say salam three times, and if he was given permission, well and good;
otherwise he would go away.) So we said: 'And on you be salam, O Messenger of Allah! Come
in.' so he entered ..."

22. al-Kafi: (al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Rib'i ibn 'Abdillah, from Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to greet (say salam to) the women and
they gave him the reply of the salam, and the Leader of the Faithful (a.s.) used to greet the
women; and he disliked to greet the young ones from among them, and used to say: 'I fear that
her voice would give me pleasure and thus I would become liable to more (responsibility) than
the reward I seek."'

The author says: And as-Saduq has narrated it as a mursal tradition; and so has done Sibt at-
Tabrisi in al-Mishkat copying from Kitabu'l-Mahasin.
23. Ibid: (al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from 'Abdu'l-'Azim ibn 'Abdillah al-Hasam, as a
marfu' tradition. He said: "The Prophet (s.a.w.) used to sit in one of the three styles: al-Qurfusa',
i.e. he raised his legs and encircled them with his hands, holding fast to the arms with the hands;
and he rested on his knees; and he doubled one leg, putting the other over it; and he was never
seen cross-legged."

24. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq, copying from Kitabu 'n-Nubuwwah: It is narrated from 'Ali (a.s.) that he
said: "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), shook hand with someone, he did not remove his
hand from that one's hand until it was the other man who pulled his hand away; and no one
talked with him about some need of his or for some other purpose and the Prophet went away,
until that man himself was the one who went away; and no one cut his talk until that man became
silent; and he was never seen extending his leg before a companion.

"And he was never given an option between two courses of action but he opted for the harder
one; and he did not avenge himself for any injustice, until someone disgraced a sanctuary of
Allah, then he shall be angry for Allah; he never took meal reclining (on pillow) until he
departed from this world; and he was never asked for a thing and he replied in negative; no
petitioner ever asked for his need, but he (s.a.w.) accepted it or (alternatively) talked to him in
easy language; he was lightest of all in prayer, shortest of them in lecture and least of all in
useless talk. When he came he was known by the good scent; when he ate with the people, he
was the first to begin and last to stop his hand; when he ate, he ate from the side that was near
him; however if it was dates, his hand roamed all over it; when he drank he divided it in three
breaths; he used to sip the water, not flooding it. His right hand was for his food and drink, for
his taking and giving, he did not take but by his right hand and did not give but by his right hand;
and his left hand was for other functions of his body; he liked to begin with the right side in all
his affairs - in wearing dress, shoes, and dismounting.

"When he called, he called three times, when he spoke, he spoke once, and when he sought
permission, he did so thrice. His speech was in sections; whoever heard him clearly, understood
him; when he spoke, it seemed as if a light went forth from between his teeth. When you saw
him you would say (his teeth were) separated, but they were not.

"His observation was glancing with his eyes; he did not tell anyone anything, which he disliked;
when he walked it was as though he was going down a slope. He used to say: 'Surely the best of
you is the best of you in ethics (manners);' he never condemned any taste nor did he praise it; and
never did the speakers dispute before him. The one describing him used to say: 'I did not see with
my eye anyone like him, neither before him nor after him (s.a.w.)."

25. al-Kafi: (al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain, from Jamil ibn Darraj, from Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) divided his glance between his companions,
he looked to this and to that equally." (Also he said:) "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) never
spread his legs between his companions; if someone shook his hand, the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) did not remove his own hand from that man's hand until it was he who removed his
hand; so when they became aware of it, the man on shaking his hand (soon) moved his hand and
removed it from the Prophet's hand."
26. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said a thing, he smiled in his
speech."

27. Ibid: Yunus ash-Shaybani said: "Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said to me, 'How is your joking (and
jesting) with each other?' I said, 'Very little.' He said, 'Why don't you do it?' Because joking (and
jesting) is a part of good manners; and surely you introduce through it joy to your brother; and
the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to jest with a man intending to make him happy.'"

28. Ibid: Abu'l-Qasim al-Kufi  narrates in Kitabu'l-Akhlaq from as-Sadiq (a.s.) that he said:
"There is no believer but there is jesting in him; and the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to joke,
yet he never spoke other than the truth."

29. al-Kafi: (al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Mu'ammar ibn Khallad that he said: "I
asked Abu'l-Hasan (a.s.) and said: 'May I be made your ransom! A man (mingles) with the
people and talk among them continues, they joke and laugh?' He said, There is no harm (in it) as
long as there is no.'  (So I thought that he meant 'obscenity'.)

"Then (the Imam) said, 'Surely, a Bedouin used to come to (the Messenger of Allah) and bring to
him (some) gift; then he used to say: "Give us the price of our gift." So the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) used to laugh. And when he was distressed, he used say: "What happened to the
Bedouin, would that he came to us."'"

30. Ibid: (al-Kulayni) narrates through his chain from Talhah ibn Zayd, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.)
that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to sit mostly facing qiblah."

Pages 143-146 missing

70. Lubbu'l-Lubab, (by ar-Rawandi): It is narrated from the Prophet (s.a.w.), that he did not
depart from a station but prayed therein two rak'ahs and said: "So that it will testify for me of
prayer."

71. Man la Yahduruhu '1-Faqih: He says: "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) bid farewell to
the believers, he used to say: 'May Allah give you sustenance of piety, and direct you to every
good, and fulfill every need of yours, and keep safe your religion and your world for you, and
bring you back safely to those who are successful.'"

The author says: There are different traditions about his (s.a.w.)'s prayer at the time of bidding
farewell, yet despite their differences, all contain the prayer of safety and success.

72. al-Ja'fariyyat: It narrates through his chain from Ja'far ibn Muhammad, from his forefathers,
from 'Ali (a.s.) that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to say to the one arriving from Mecca:
"May Allah accept your rituals, and forgive your sin, and replenish your expenses to you."

73. Among his (s.a.w.)'s manners regarding dresses and what pertains to them, is what is written
in Ihyau'l- 'ulum: "He (s.a.w.) used to wear the dress that was available, be it loin-cloth or cloak,
shirt or jubbah, etc. He liked green dresses, yet most of his dresses were white, and he used to
say: 'Dress it to your living and shroud in it your dead.'

"He used to wear stuffed qaba' (outer-garment) for war and at other times; he had a qaba' of silk
brocade, when he wore it, its green color contrasted beautifully with his white color; all his
dresses were turned up above the ankles, and the loin-cloak reached above it up to middle of the
leg; his shirt was buttoned up, and sometime he opened the buttons in prayer.

"He had a wrapper dyed in saffron; sometimes he prayed with the people wearing that alone; at
other times he wore only the cloak without adding any other thing; he had a felt cloak which he
wore and said: 'I am but a slave, I wear like slaves.' He had two dresses reserved for Fridays,
separate from his dresses of the other days. Sometimes he wore one cloak alone, and tied its two
corners between his shoulders; often he prayed in it with the people in funeral prayer; sometimes
he prayed in his house in the one cloak wrapping it around keeping its sides crossed; and it could
be the cloak which he had used during sexual intercourse; he often prayed at night in the cloak
only and put on part of the dress that adjoined his fringe, and left the other portion on one of his
wives and prayed.

"And he had a black cloak, then he gave it (to someone); so Umm Salamah said to him, 'May my
father and mother be made your ransom! What happened to that black cloak?' He said, 'I put it on
(someone).' So she said, 'I had never seen anything more beautiful than your whiteness on its
blackness.' Anas said, 'And often I saw him praying with us the zuhr prayer, wearing a cloak,
tying its two sides; and he used to wear ring, and sometimes he came out having tied a thread on
his ring for remembering something; and he used to seal the letters with it and said, "Seal on the
letter is better than insinuation." '

"And he used to wear a skull-cap under his turban, or without turban; and often he removed his
skull-cap from his head and used it as a cover before him and prayed towards it. Sometimes he
did not have a turban, so he tied head-band on his head and forehead; and he had a turban named
sahab (cloud), then he gifted it to 'Ali. Sometimes 'Ali appeared in it, then he (s.a.w.) used to
say: 'Ali is coming to you in the cloud.'

"And when he put on a dress, he began from its right side, and said: 'All praise is due to Allah
Who clothed me with what I cover my shame, and beautify myself among the people;' and when
he undressed, he removed it from his left side; When he wore a new dress, he gave the old one to
a needy person and then said: 'There is no Muslim who covers a Muslim with his worn out dress
- not doing it except for Allah - but he will be in Allah's security, guaranty and good as long as it
would cover him, dead or alive.'

"And he had a ground-spread of leather stuffed with palm-frond, its length was two arms or so,
and breadth one and a half arms or so; and he had a cloak spread for him, wherever he moved, it
was folded twice under him; and he slept on mat, there was nothing else under him.

"And it was among his manners to give name to his riding animals, arms and provisions. The
name of his standard was 'uqab (eagle), and his sword, which he took with him in wars, was
named Dhu'l- Fiqar; he had a third sword called al-Mukhdhim, and yet anothers, called ar-Rasub
and al-Qadib; the grip of his sword was gilded with silver. He wore a leather-belt which had
three silver rings; his bow was named al-Katum, and the quiver al-Kafur; his she-camel's name
was al-'Adba', his mule was al-Duldul, his donkey was Ya'fur; and his milking goat, whose milk
he drank was called 'Aynah.

"He had a cleansing pot of clay, which he used for performing ritual ablution and drinking.
People used to send their small children (who had reached the age of understanding) to the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and they were not prevented from approaching him; so if they found
in that pot some water, they drank from it and wiped it on their faces and bodies, seeking
blessings with it."

74. al-Ja'fariyyat: It is narrated from Ja'far ibn Muhammad, from his forefathers from 'Ali (a.s.)
that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) wore quilted caps ... He had a shield called
Dhatu'l-Fudul, it had three silver links, one in front and two at the back..."

75: al-'Awali: It is narrated that he (s.a.w.) had a black turban, in which he used to pray.

The author says: It is narrated that his (s.a.w.)'s turban had three, or five, coils.

76. al-Khisal: Narrates through his chain from 'Ali in the hadith of four hundred that he said:
"Wear cotton dresses, because it is the dress of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), and he did not
wear hair or wool except during sickness."

The author says: as-Saduq has also narrated it as a mursal hadith as-Safwani has narrated, it in
Kitabu't-Ta'rif, it clarifies the meaning of what was earlier said about his (s.a.w.)'s wearing wool,
and that there is no contradiction.

77. Man la Yahduruhu'l-Faqih: Narrates through his cha'in from Isma'il ibn Muslim, from as-
Sadiq (a.s.) from his father (a.s.) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had a short spear
with a crutch at its end; he leaned on it, and took it out on the two 'id days and (fixing it before
him) he prayed towards it."

The author says: It has also been narrated in al-Ja'fariyyat.

78. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Hisham ibn Salim from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he
said: "The ring of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was from silver."

79. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from Abu Khadijah that he said: "He (the Imam) said, 'The
stone of the ring is round.' Then he said, 'Like this was the ring of the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.).'"

80. al-Khisal: Narrates through his chain from 'Abdu 'r-Rahim ibn Abi 'l-Bilad, from Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had two rings (seals), on one of
them was written: La ilaha ilia 'llah, Muhammadun Rasiilu'llah, and on the other (was): Sadaqa
'llah."

81. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from Husayn ibn Khalid, from Abu '1-Hasan II (a.s.) inter
alia in a hadith. "Surely the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the Leader of the Faithful, al-Hasan, al-Husayn
and the Imams (peace be upon them) wore the rings in the right hand."

82. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: It is narrated from as-Sadiq from 'Ali (peace be upon both) that he said:
"The Prophets used to wear shirt before trouser."

The author says: It is also narrated in al-Ja 'fariyyat; there are other traditions on the above
themes.

83. Among his (s.a.w.)'s manners regarding his residence and its related things are what is
written in Kitabu't-Tahsin (by Ibn Fahd) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), left this
world and never put a brick over a brick."

84. Lubbu'l-Lubab: "He (a.s.), said, 'Mosques are the sitting places of the prophets.'"

85. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from as-Sakuni, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said:
"When the Prophet (s.a.w.) came out from the house in the summer, he did so on a Thursday;
and when he wanted to enter because of cold in the winter, he entered on a Friday."

The author says: It has also been narrated in al-Khisal as a mursal one.

86. al- 'Udadu'l-Qawiyyah (by ash-Shaykh 'Ali ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Mutahhar, brother of
al-'Allamah, may Allah have mercy on both): Narrates from Khadijah, may Allah be pleased
with her, that she said: "When the Prophet (s.a.w.) entered the house, he used to call for a
receptacle, and cleansed for prayer, then he stood up and prayed two short rak'ahs; then he came
to his bed."

87. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from 'Abbad ibn Suhayb, that he said: "I heard Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.) as saying, 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) never hatched any plan against an
enemy.'"

88. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: "The bedding of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was a cloak, and his
pillow was of leather stuffed with palm-fronds; one night it was folded double, when morning
came, he said: 'This bedding prevented me last night from prayer;' so he ordered that it should be
kept unfolded; and he had a bedding of leather stuffed with palm-fronds. Also, he had a cloak
which was spread for him wherever he went and it was folded double."

89. Ibid: Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said: "Never did the Messenger of Allah wake up from sleep but
prostrated in sajdah of Allah."

90. Among his (s.a.w.) manners regarding matrimony and children was what is narrated in the
tract of al-Muhkam wa 'l-mutashabih of al-Murtada, through his chain up to at-Tafsir of an-
Nu'mani, from 'Ali (a.s.) that he said: "A group of the Companions had forbidden to themselves
women, eating during the day and sleeping at night. Umm Salamah gave this news to the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), so he went out to his Companions and said, 'Do you feel aversion
from women? But surely I go to the women, and eat during the day and sleep at night; so
whoever dislikes my sunnah is not from me...'"

The author says: This meaning is narrated in the books of both sects through many ways.

91. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Ishaq ibn 'Ammar, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he
said: "Among the ethics of the Prophets is the love of women."

92. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from Bakar ibn Kardam and several (others), from Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said, 'The delight of my eyes is
made in prayer and my enjoyment in women.'"

The author says: Nearer to it is what has been narrated through other ways.

93. Man la Yahduruhu'l-Faqih: "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) wanted to marry a
woman he used to send to her someone who looked at her..."

94. at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi: It is narrated from al-Husayn, son of the daughter of Ilyas, that he said:
"I heard Abu'l-Hasan ar-Rida (a.s.) saying, 'Surely Allah has made the night time for rest, and He
has made the women means for rest; and it is a part of sunnah to perform marriage at night and
give food (to people).'"

95. al-Khisal: Narrates through his chain from 'Ali (a.s.), inter alia, in the hadith of four
hundred, that he said: "Shave the heads of your children on the seventh day, and give, equal in
weight to their hair, silver as sadaqah to a Muslim; and likewise had done the Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.) with al-Hasan and al-Husayn and all his children."

96. Among his manners regarding food and drink and related to the table, is what has been
narrated in al-Kafi, through his chain from Hisham ibn Salim and another one, from Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "There was nothing more liked by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.),
than that he should remain hungry (and) afraid regarding Allah."

97. al-Ihtijaj: Narrates through his chain from Musa ibn Ja'far, from his forefathers, from al-
Husayn ibn 'Ali (peace be upon them), inter alia, in a lengthy hadith, concerning the questions of
a Syrian Jew from the Leader of the Faithful (a.s.):"... The Jew said to him, 'They believe about
'Isa that he was ascetic.' 'Ali (a.s.) said to him, 'He was like that, and Muhammad (s.a.w.) was the
most ascetic of all prophets; he had thirteen wives, apart from the slave-girls who were under his
possession; and yet no table-cloth was raised for him that had a food on it; and he never ate
wheat bread, nor did he eat his full three nights consequently from barley bread.'"

98. al-Amali: as-Saduq: Narrates from al-'Is ibn al-Qasim that he said: "I said to as-Sadiq (a.s.),
'A hadith is narrated from your father that he said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) never ate his
full from wheat bread." Is it correct?' He said, 'No, the Messenger of Allah never ate wheat
bread, and never ate his full from barley bread.'"

99. ad-Da'awat (by ar-Rawandi): He said, "It is narrated that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)
never ate (while) reclining except once, then he sat down (straight) and said, 'O Allah! I am your
servant and your Messenger.'"

The author says: This meaning has been narrated by al-Kulayni, ash-Shaykh (through many
chains), as-Saduq, al-Barqi and al-Husayn ibn Sa'id (in Kitabu 'z-Zuhd).

100. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Zayd ash-Shahham, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that
he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) never ate reclining since Allah raised him (as Prophet)
until he expired; he used to eat like a slave and sit like a slave." "I said, 'Why?' He said, 'In
humility to Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty.'"

101. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from Abu Khadijah who said: "Bashir ad-Dahhan asked
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) and I was present (there), 'Did the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to eat
reclining upon his right or left side?' He (a.s.) said, 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) never used
to eat reclining upon his right or left side, but he used to sit like a slave.' I said, 'For what [he did
so]?' He (a.s.) said, 'In humility to Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty.'"

102. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from Jabir, from Abu Ja'far (a.s.), that he said: "The
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to eat like a slave and sit like a slave; and he used to eat on the
ground and sleep on the ground."

103. Ihyau'l-'Ulum: "When he (s.a.w.) sat for eating, he gathered his knees and legs as one does
in prayer, except that a knee was over the other and a foot was over the other; and he used to say,
'I am but a slave, I eat as a slave eats and sit as a slave sits.'"

104. Kitabu't-Ta'rif (by as-Safwani): Narrates from 'Ali (a.s.): "When the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) sat on a table, he sat like a slave and he reclined upon his left thigh."

105. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: It is narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "The Prophet (s.a.w.) used
to sit on the earth, tether the goat and accept the invitation of a slave."

106. al-Mahasin: Through his chain from Hammad ibn 'Uthman, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that
he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to lick his fingers when he ate."

107. al-Ihtijaj: Copying from the book, Mawalidu 's-Sadiqin that he said: "The Prophet (s.a.w.)
used to eat all types of food; and he ate what Allah had made lawful for him with his family and
servants when they ate; and with whoever invited him from among the Muslims for eating; and
on whatever they partook of [i.e. table or plate] and whenever they ate, except when a guest
came to them, then he ate with his guest... . And the most agreeable food to him was that which
was (taken) with a lot of dependents."

108. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Ibnu l-Qadah from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he
said: "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) took any meal with the people, he was the first to
put his hand (in the food) and the last to remove it, in order that the people should eat (their
full)."

109. Ibid: Narrates through his chain to Muhammad ibn Muslim, from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he
said: "The Leader of the Faithful (peace be upon him) has said, 'The prophets' evening meal is
after 'isha' prayer; therefore you should not leave (neglect) evening meal, because surely leaving
the evening meal ruins the body.'"

110. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from 'Anbasah ibn Najad, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he
said: "No food, in which contained dates, was presented to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) but he
began with dates."

111. al-Kafi and Sahifatu 'r-Rida (a.s.): Narrate through their chains from his forefathers (peace
be upon them) that he said: "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) ate dates, he put the stone on
the back of his palm, and then threw it away."

112. al-Iqbal (Ibn Tawus): Copying from the second part of Tarikh an-Naysaburi (in the
biography of al-Hasan ibn Bashar), through his chain, that he said: "The Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) used to thank Allah between every two morsels."

113. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain, from Wahb ibn 'Abd Rabbih, that he said: "I saw Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.) using tooth-pick. I looked at him; so he said, 'Surely the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) used toothpick; and it makes mouth pleasant,'"

114. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: It is narrated from the Prophet (s.a.w.) that when he drank, began and
said tasmiyah ., . and he sipped the water slowly without swallowing the lot; and he used to say,
"Liver ailment is from swallowing."

115. al-Ja'fariyyat: Narrates from Ja'far ibn Muhammad, from his forefathers, from 'Ali (a.s.)
that he said: "I checked the Prophet (s.a.w.) several times and (found that) when he drank he
breathed three times, with every breath he recited: Bismi 'llah... to begin with, and: al- hamdu li
'llah at the end; so I asked him about it, and he said, 'O 'Ali! (It is) to thank Allah with: al-hamdu
li 'llah, and tasmiyah is for (protection from) sickness.'"

116. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: "He (s.a.w.) did not breathe into the pot when he drank; and if he
wanted to breathe, he kept the pot away from his mouth until he breathed."

117. Ihyau 'l-'Ulum: "And when he (s.a.w.) ate meat, he did not lower his head to it; he used to
raise it to his mouth properly then tore it to pieces." Then he said, "And when he ate meat
especially, he washed both his hands thoroughly then wiped his face with the water left over-
hand."

118. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: It is narrated about the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he used to eat various
kinds of food.

The author says: Thereafter at-Tabrisi has described several types of food which he (s.a.w.)
used to eat, like, bread, meat (of various types), melon, water-melon, sugar, grapes, pomegranate,
date, milk, harisah, ghee, vinegar, wild chicory and cabbage. It is narrated that he liked dates;
also that he loved honey; another narration says that the most loved fruit for him was
pomegranate.
119. al-Amali, at-Tusi: Narrates through his chain, from Abu Usamah, from Abu ' Abdillah (a.s.)
that he said: "The [staple] food of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was barley when he found it,
and his sweetmeat was dates, and his firewood was palm-leaves."

120. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: It is narrated about the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he did not eat hot (food)
until it became cold, and he used to say: "Surely Allah has not fed us fire, certainly hot food does
not have barakah."

And when he ate, he said: "Bismi 'llah..."; and he used to eat with three fingers, and from the side
that was close to him, and he did not take from that (side) which was adjacent to another person.
When food was brought before him, he began before the others, and then they began. He used to
eat with three fingers - the thumb, the one adjacent to it and the middle finger, and sometimes
took help from the fourth. He used to eat with his entire palm, and he never ate with two fingers.
And he used to say: "Eating with two fingers is the Satan's eating." And one day his companions
brought faludhaj and he ate (it) with them, and then said, "From what is it made?" They said,
"We mix ghee and honey and it comes to this as you see." He said, "It is a good food."

And he used to eat bread made of unsieved barley floor; and he never ate wheat bread, nor did he
eat his full with barley bread; and he never ate on a table-cloth until he died. And, he used to eat
water-melon and grapes; and he ate dates and fed its stone to the goat; and he never ate garlic,
onion, leek or the honey which had maghafir,; and maghafir is a residue of the tree that remains
in the bee's stomach, and it throws it into the honey; so its smell remains in the mouth.

And he never criticized any food - if he liked it, he ate it; and if he disliked it, he left it, but did
not make it unlawful to others; and he used to lick out the bowl and said, "The last part of the
plate is the greatest food in barakah" When he finished, he used to lick his three fingers (with
which he ate) one by one; and he used to wash his hand from the food until it became clean; and
he never took food alone.

The author says: The expression, the thumb, the one adjacent to it and the middle finger, shows
the beautiful manner of the narrator, because he did not say, the thumb and the sabbabah ...
avoiding to call a finger of the Prophet (s.a.w.) reviler or rebuker.

What is narrated here that he (s.a.w.) ate from the faludhaj, goes against what has been narrated
in al-Mahasin, with its chain, from Ya'qub ibn Shu'ayb, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said:
"While the Leader of the Faithful (a.s.) was in ar-Rahbah with a group of his companions, a dish
of faludhaj was presented to him as gift. He said to his companions, 'Extend your hands;' so they
extended their hands and he too extended his, then he withdrew it and said, 'I (just) remembered
that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had never eaten it, so I did not like to eat it.'"

121. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: He said: "The Prophet (s.a.w.) used to drink from the bowls of glass,
which were brought from Syria; and he drank from bowls, which were made from wood, hides
and earthen ware."

The author says: Near to its earlier part is narrated in al-Kafi and al-Mahasin, and there is in it:
«and he liked to drink from Syrian bowl, and he used to say: "It is the cleanest of your vessels."»

122. Ibid: It is narrated about the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he used to drink from his palm (and water
was poured in it), and he used to say: "There is no vessel cleaner than hand."

123. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from 'Abdullah ibn Sinan that he said: "The Messenger
of Allah (s.a.w.) used to slaughter two rams on the day of al-Adha, one for himself and the other
on behalf of those who did not have means from his ummah."

124. And among his (s.a.w.)'s manners regarding toilet is what is written in Sharhu 'n-Nafliyyah
(of the Second Martyr) about the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he was never seen [engaged in] urinating
or relieving bowel.

125. al-Ja'fariyyat: Narrates through his chain from Ja'far ibn Muhammad, from his forefathers,
from 'Ali (a.s.) that he said: "Verily, when the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) wanted to discard
mucous he covered his head, then buried that, and when he wanted to spit, he did like that, and
when he wanted to relieve bowel, he covered his head."

The author says: Constructing the toilet appeared in Arabia after Islam; before that they used to
go forth to open spaces, as is inferred from some traditions.

126. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from al-Husayn ibn Khalid, from Abu'l-Hasan II, that he
said: "I said to him, 'A hadith has been narrated to us that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to
do istinja' and his ring was in his finger, and so was done by the Leader of the Faithful (a.s.); and
the engraving on the seal of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was: "Muhammad the Messenger of
Allah".' The Imam (a.s.) said, 'They speak truth.' I said, 'So we too should do (like that)?' He said,
'Surely they wore the ring (seal) in the right hand and you wear it in the left.'.. ."

The author says: Near to it is narrated in al-Ja'fariyyat, and in al-Makarim copying from
Kitabu'l-Libas (of al-'Ayyashi) from as-Sadiq (a.s.).

127. And among his (s.a.w.)'s manners at the time of calamities and trials and regarding dead
bodies and related matters are what are narrated in al-Makarim: "Whenever the Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.) saw a pimple in his body, he sought refuge with Allah and showed humility and
fervently prayed to Him. They used to say to him: 'O Messenger of Allah! There is no problem in
it' and he used to say: 'Surely, when Allah wants to magnify a small thing, it becomes great, and
when He wants to reduce a great thing, it becomes small.'"

128. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Jabir, from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said: "The
sunnah is to carry the bier on its four sides; and whatever carrying is done in addition to it, is
voluntary."

129. Qurbu'l-Asnad: It is narrated from al-Husayn ibn Turayf, from al-Husayn ibn 'Alwan from
Ja'far, from his father, that al-Hasan ibn 'Ali (peace be upon both) was sitting and there were
some of his companions with him; then a funeral procession passed from there; some of the
people stood up and al-Hasan (a.s.) did not stand. When they went away, some people said to
him, "Why did you not stand up? May Allah preserve your health! Because the Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.) used to stand up for a bier when they passed with it." So, al-Hasan (a.s.) said, "The
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had stood up only once; it happened that a Jew's bier was proceeding
and the place was confined, so the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) stood up and he did not like that
that bier should rise above his head."

130. ad-Da'awat, al-Qutb: He said that when the Prophet (s.a.w.) followed a bier, he was
overcome by grief, did much talking to himself, and did not talk much.

131. al-Ja'fariyyat: Narrates through his chain from Ja'far ibn Muhammad, from his forefathers
from 'Ali (peace be upon them) that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to scatter three
handfuls of earth on a grave.

132. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Zurarah, from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) that he said: "The
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to do especially with someone dying from among the
Hashimites a thing which he did not do with any of the (other) Muslims; when he prayed
(funeral) prayer of the Hashimite and his grave was sprinkled with water, the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) put his palm on the grave until (the marks of) his fingers could be seen on the wet earth;
so if a stranger or a traveler from the people of Medina arrived and saw a new grave with marks
of the palm of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) he would ask, 'Who has died from the progeny of
Muhammad?'"

133. Musakkinu'l-Fuad (of the Second Martyr): Narrates from 'Ali (a.s.) that when the
Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) condoled, he said: "May Allah give you (its) reward and have mercy
on you"; and when he congratulated, he said: "May Allah bless you and send His blessings to
you."

134. And among his (s.a.w.)'s manners concerning wudu' and bath is what is narrated in Ayatu'l-
ahkam (of al-Qutb) from Sulayman ibn Buraydah, from his father, that the Prophet (s.a.w.) used
to perform wudu' for each prayer; when it was the year of victory he prayed his prayers with one
wudu', 'Umar said, "O Messenger of Allah! You have done something, which you had not done
(before)." He said, "Intentionally have I done it."

135. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Zurarah, that he said: "Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said,
'Should not I relate to you the wudu' of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)?' We said, 'Certainly.' So,
he called for a basin with some water and put it in front of him; then he uncovered his arms; then
he dipped his right palm in it and said, 'Like this (will be done) when the palm is clean'; he then
scooped up a handful of water and put it on his forehead, and said, 'In the name of Allah'; and let
it fall down to the sides of his beard, then he passed his hand once on his face and forehead; then
he dipped his left palm and scooped up a handful and put it on his right arm, then passed his
hand on his forearm until the water flowed to his fingertips; then he dipped his right palm and
scooped up a handful and put it on his left arm, and passed his hand on his (left) forearm until the
water flowed to his fingertips; then he wiped the front part of his head and backs of his feet with
the wetness of his left hand and the residue of the wetness of the right hand."

He said: "And Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said, 'Surely Allah is odd and likes odd (number); sufficient then
for you in wudu' is three dippings: one for the face and two for the two forearms, and you will
wipe the forepart of your head with the wetness of your right hand, and with the residue of that
wetness the back of your right foot, and will wipe with the wetness of your left hand the back of
your left foot.'"

Zurarah said: "Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said, 'A man had asked the Leader of the Faithful (a.s.) about the
wudu' of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) so he demonstrated to him like this.'"

The author says: This theme is narrated from Zurarah, Bukayr and others through numerous
ways; have narrated it al-Kulayni, as- Saduq, ash-Shaykh, al-'Ayyashi, al-Mufid, al-Karajiki and
others; and traditions of Ahlu'l-Bayt (peace be upon them) for this matter are mustafidah, nearly
mutawatir.

136. al-Amali (by Mufidu 'd-Din at-Tusi): Narrates through his chain from Abu Hurayrah that
when the Prophet (s.a.w.) performed wudu', he began with his right side.

137. at-Tahdhib: Narrates through his chains from Abu Basir that he said, "I asked Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.) about wudu'. He said, 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to perform wudu' with a mudd
of water, and take bath with saa' (nearly 3 Kg of water) '"

The author says: A similar tradition is narrated through another way from Abu Ja'far (a.s.).

138. al-'Uyum: Narrates through his chains from ar-Rida (a.s.), from his forefathers (peace be
upon them), inter alia in a lengthy hadith: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) said, 'Surely, we
Ahlu'l-Bayt, sadaqah is not allowed to us, and we have been ordered to perform wudu' properly,
and we do not make an ass jump on a she-ass.'"

139. at-Tahdhib: Narrates through his chains from 'Abdullah ibn Sinan, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.)
that he said: "Gargling and rinsing the nose is among what the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) has
made sunnah."

140. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from Mu'awiyah ibn 'Ammar that he said: "I heard Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.) saying, 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to do ghusl (bath) with one saa' (of
water); and if one of his women was with him, he did ghusl with saa' and a mudd' "

The author says: al-Kulayni has narrated this meaning in al-Kafi, through his chain from
Muhammad ibn Muslim from the Imam (a.s.), and there it elaborates that both did ghusl from
one vessel; and likewise is narrated by ash-Shaykh through another chain.

141. al-Ja'fariyyat: Narrates through his chain from Ja'far ibn Muhammad from his father (peace
be upon both) that he said: "al-Hasan ibn Muhammad asked Jabir ibn 'Abdillah about the bath of
the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), Jabir said, 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), used to scoop water
[with his hand] on his head three times.' al-Hasan ibn Muhammad said, 'I have a lot of hair (on
my head), as you see.' Jabir said, '0 noble man! Do not say so, because the hair of the Messenger
of Allah (s.a.w.) was thicker and more fragrant.'"
142. al-Hidayah (by as-Saduq): "as-Sadiq (a.s.) said, 'The ghusl of Friday is sunnah wajibah for
men and women in journey and in presence ...' And as-Sadiq (a.s.) said, 'Ghusl of Friday is purity
and atonement of sins from Friday to Friday.' He (also) said, The reason of (laying down of)
Friday bath was this: That the Helpers (Ansar) used to work for their camels and properties;
when Friday came, they came (direct) to the mosque and the people got annoyed with smell of
their armpits. So, Allah ordered the Prophet (s.a.w.) to take bath, and thus the sunnah was
established.'"

The author says: Concerning his (s.a.w.)'s customs regarding ghusl, traditions have been
narrated for the ghusl of the day of Fitr and similar baths in all the 'ids and numerous other baths;
probably some of them will be mentioned later on, God willing.

143. And among his (s.a.w.)'s manners and sunnahs concerning prayer and related matters is
what is narrated in al-Kafi, through his chain from al-Fudayl ibn Yasar, 'Abdu'l-Malik and
Bukayr, that they said: "We heard Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) saying, 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)
used to perform supererogatory prayers double of the obligatory, and keep supererogatory fast
double of the obligatory.'"

The author says: ash-Shaykh too has narrated it.

144. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from Hanan that he said: "'Amr ibn Hurayth asked Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.), and I was sitting there, he said, 'May I be made your ransom! Please tell me
about the prayer of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.).' He said, 'The Prophet (s.a.w.) used to pray
eight rak'ahs of noon, and four of the first (i.e. zuhr), and eight after it and four of 'asr, and three
of maghrib and four after maghrib, and 'isha' the last four, and eight tahajjud and three (shafa'
and) witr, and two rak'ahs (nafilah) of fajr and dawn prayer two rak'ahs.'

"I said, 'May I be made your ransom! If I have strength to pray more than that, will Allah punish
me for excess of prayer?' He said, "No; but He will punish you for leaving the sunnah.'"

The author says: This tradition shows that the two rak'ahs in sitting position prayed after 'isha'
prayer are not part of fifty (rak'ahs), but with them the number, fifty-one, is completed, counting
them as equal to one rak'ah in standing position. Rather it was laid down as a substitute of the
witr, in case the death came before he could stand up for witr; as al-Kulayni (may Allah have
mercy on him), has narrated in al-Kafi, through his chain, from Abu Basir from Abu 'Abdillah
(a.s.) that he said: "Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day, should not sleep (at night)
without (praying) witr." "I said, 'You mean the two rak'ahs after the 'isha'? He said, 'Yes; they
are counted as one rak'ah, whoever prayed them, then something happened to him (i.e. he died),
he would die on witr; and if death did not happen to him, he would pray witr in the last period of
the night.'

"I said, 'Did the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) prayed these two rak'ahs?' He said, 'No.' I said,
'Why?' He said, 'Because the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to receive revelation, and he knew
whether he would die in that night or not, while others do not know it. That was why he did not
pray them, and ordered (the people) to pray them.'..."
Probably the statement that he did not pray them, means that he did not pray them regularly,
rather on some nights he prayed and on others he left them, as is inferred from some other
traditions. In this way, it would not go against what has been narrated that he used to pray them.

145. at-Tahdhib: Narrates through his chain from Zurarah that he said: "I heard Abu Ja'far (a.s.)
saying, 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was not praying in day time until the noon; when the
shadow reached (towards the east) about half a finger, he prayed eight rak'ahs-, then when the
shadow reached an arm's length, he prayed zuhr, then after zuhr he prayed two rak'ahs, and he
used to pray two rak'ahs before the time of 'asr when the shadow extended to two arm-lengths,
he prayed 'asr; and he prayed maghrib after sunset; when the reddish color (in the sky) vanished
the time of 'isha' came; the last time of maghrib is the end of the reddish color; when the reddish
color vanished the time of 'isha' came, and the end of the 'isha' time is one third of the night.

"'And he did not pray after 'isha' until midnight, thereafter he prayed thirteen rak'ahs including
the witr and two rak'ahs of nafilah of fajr; then at dawn-break he prayed the morning prayer.'"

The author says: This tradition does not describe fully the nafilah of 'asr, and it is known from
other traditions.

146. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from Mu'awiyah ibn Wahb that he said: "I heard Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.) saying, and he was describing the prayer of the Prophet (s.a.w.); he said, 'The
cleansing (water) was brought to the Prophet (s.a.w.), and covered (and put) near his head, and
his teeth-cleansing small stick was put under his bed; then he slept as long as Allah wished;
when he awoke, he sat up, then turned his eyes in the sky, then recited some verses from [ch. of]
"The House of 'Imran": Most surely in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the
alternation of the night and the day there are signs for men who understand [3:190], Then he
cleansed his teeth and performed cleansing, then proceeded to the mosque and prayed four
rak'ahs, equal to his recitation was his ruku', and equal to his ruku' was his sajdah; he remained
in ruku' until it was said: "When will he raise his head?" and he remained in sajdah until it was
said: "When will he raise his head?"

"'Then he returned to his bed and slept as long as Allah wished; then he woke up, and sat up;
then he recited the verses from "The House of Imran", and turned his eyes in the sky, then
cleansing the teeth, he performed (ritual) ablution, then proceeded to the mosque and prayed four
rak'ahs like he did before.

"'Then he returned to his bed and slept as long as Allah wished; then he woke up and sat up; then
he recited verses from "The House of Tmran", and turned his eyes in the sky; then cleansing his
teeth, he performed (ritual) ablution, then proceeded to the mosque and prayed two rak'ahs, then
went forth for prayer.'"

The author says: This meaning has also been narrated in al-Kafi from two chains.

147. It is narrated that he (s.a.w.) used to make the nafilah of the dawn prayer short, he used to
pray it in the beginning of the fajr and then proceeded to the (wajib) prayer.
148. al-Mahasin: Narrates through his chain from 'Umar ibn Yazid, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.)
that he said: "Whoever, while praying witr, said in it seventy times: 'I seek pardon of Allah, my
Lord, and repent to Him', and keeps doing it diligently, until he completes a year, Allah writes
him among those who seek pardon in early dawn.

"And the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to seek Allah's pardon in the witr seventy times, and
used to say seven times: 'This is the stand of him who seeks Your refuge from the Fire.'..."

149. Man la Yahduruhu'l-Faqih: "The Prophet (s.a.w.) used to say in the qunut of witr: 'O Allah!
Guide me among those whom You guided, and give me remission among those whom You
remitted, and take care of me among those You cared for, and give me barakah in what You
have given me, and protect me from the evil of what You have decreed; surely You do decide
and no one decides against You; Glory be to Thee, O Lord of the House! I seek Your pardon and
return to You, and I believe in You and rely on You; and there is no strength or power except
with You. O Merciful!'"

150. at-Tahdhib: Narrates through his chain from Abu Khadijah from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he
said: "When the month of Ramadan came, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to increase in
prayer, and I too increase; therefore, you too should increase."

The author says: The Imam (a.s.) means by this increase, the thousand rak'ahs of tarawih, the
nafilah of the month of Ramadan, which the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to pray in addition
to the fifty rak'ahs of daily nawafil; many traditions have been narrated as to how to pray it and
how to divide it on the Ramadan nights; and it has come through the chains of Ahlu'l-Bayt (peace
be upon them) that the Prophet (s.a.w.) used to pray it without congregation, and prohibited
praying it with congregation. He used to say: "There is no congregation in nafilah."

And there are other especial prayers reserved for the Prophet (s.a.w.), narrated in the books of
invocations; we have not copied them here because they are beyond our purpose here. Likewise,
there are many prophetic sunnahs about prayers, invocations and awrad, whoever wants to know
about them should look in the relevant books.

151. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Yazid ibn Khalifah that he said: "I said to Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.), 'Surely 'Umar ibn Hanzalah has brought to us from you the time [of prayer].' He
said, 'Then he will not tell lie about us.'.. . And I said, 'He said that the time of maghrib (prayer)
is when the disc [of the sun] disappears; but when the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was on a
journey, he delayed the maghrib and combined maghrib with 'isha'.' He said, 'He said right.'"

152. at-Tahdhib: Narrates through his chain from Talhah ibn Zayd from Ja'far from his father
(peace be upon them) that the Prophet (s.a.w.), in rainy nights, used to shorten the maghrib and
hasten the 'isha', praying both together, and used to say: "He who does not have mercy will not
be dealt with mercy."

153. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from Ibn Abi 'Umayr, from Hammad, from al-Halabi, from
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was on a journey, or had
an urgent work, he used to combine zuhr with 'asr and maghrib with 'isha',..." This meaning is
narrated by al-Kulayni, ash-Shaykh, Ibnu 'sh-Shaykh and the First Martyr, may Allah have
mercy on them.

154. Man la Yahduruhu'l-Faqih: Narrates through his chain from Mu'awiyah ibn Wahb from
Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "The muadhdhin used to come to the Prophet (s.a.w.) during hot
season (calling him) for the prayer of zuhr, so the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to tell him:
"Abrid, abrid"

The author says: as-Saduq interpreted the last two words as, "make haste, make haste", taking it
from "al-barid" [post]; but apparently it indicates delay, so that intense heat might go away, as
points to it what is narrated in the Book of al-'Ula', from Muhammad ibn Muslim that he said,
"Passed from near me Abu Ja'far (a.s.) in the mosque of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and I
was praying. Then he met me after that and said, 'Take care not to pray wajib at that time; do you
perform it in the intense heat?' I said, 'I was praying nafilah.'"

155. Ihyau'l-'Ulum. He said: "Never sat anyone near him when he was praying, but he shortened
his prayer and turned to him and said, 'Do you need something?' Then after accomplishing his
work, he returned to his prayer."

156. Kitab Zuhdu 'n-Nabi (by Ja'far ibn Ahmad al-Qummi): He said: "Whenever the Prophet
(s.a.w.),stood up for prayer, his face turned ashen, and there was whizzing sound coming from
his chest or belly because of the (Divine) fear."

The author says: This meaning has also been narrated by Ibn al-Fahd and others.

157. Ibid: He said: "And another tradition says that when the Prophet (s.a.w.) stood in prayer (it
looked) as if he was a flung away cloth."

158. Biharu'l-Anwar: He said: "'Aishah said, 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) talked with us and
we talked with him, but when the (time of) prayer came then it was as if he did not know us nor
we did know him.'"

159. al-Majalis (by Mufidu 'd-Din at-Tusi): Narrates through his chain to 'Ali (a.s.) that he wrote
to Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr, when he made him the governor of Egypt: "... Then look at your
ruku' and sujud, because surely the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was most perfect of the people in
prayer, and shortest of them in its activities."

160. al-Ja'fariyyat: Narrates through his chain from Ja'far ibn Muhammad, from his forefathers
from 'Ali (a.s.) that he said: "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) yawned during the prayer, he
stopped it with his right hand."

The author says: A similar tradition is narrated in ad-Da 'aim.

161. 'Ilalu 'sh-Sharai': Narrates through his chain from Hisham ibn al-Hakam from Abu '1-
Hasan Musa (a.s.), inter alia, in a hadith that he said: "I said to him, 'For what reason it is said in
the ruku': Subhana rabbiya 'l- 'azimi wa bi-hamdih, and it is said in sajdah: Subhana rabbiya 'l-a
'la wa bi-hamdih? He said, 'O Hisham! Surely when the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was taken
up in mi'raj, and he performed prayer, and remembered what he had seen of the grandeur of
Allah, his limbs trembled and he sat down on his knees and he began saying: Subhana rabbiya
'l-'azimi wa bi-hamdih; then when he stood up from the ruku' and looked at a place still higher,
he fell down on his face, saying: Subhana rabbiya 'l-a'la wa bi-hamdih when he said it seven
times, that fear went away; therefore this began as a sunnah.'"

162. Tanbihu'l-Khawatir (of ash-Shaykh Warram ibn Abi Firas) from an-Nu'man that he said:
"The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to level our lines, as if he equalizes the arrow-shafts, until
he saw that we were heedless of it. Then one day he came out and stood up until he was about to
say takbir, and he saw a man whose chest was shown ahead, so he said, 'Servants of Allah! You
should level your lines or your faces will be turned aside.'"

163. Ibid: It is narrated from Ibn Mas'ud that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to
touch our shoulders in prayer and say, 'Be straight and be not uneven, otherwise your hearts will
differ from one another.'..."

164. Man la Yahduruhu'l-Faqih: Narrates through his chain from Dawud ibn al-Hasin, from
Abu'l-'Abbas, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) remained
in seclusion (i'tikaf) in the first ten days of the month of Ramadan, then remained in seclusion in
the middle (second) ten days of Ramdan, thereafter he continued to remain in seclusion in the
last ten days."

165. Ibid: He said: "Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said, 'The (battle of) Badr was in the month of
Ramadan, and the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) did not remain in seclusion; so when the next year
came, he remained in seclusion for twenty days: ten days for that (current) year and ten as
repayment of what he had missed [of the last year].'"

The author says: al-Kulayni has narrated this and the preceding tradition in al-Kafi.

166. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from al-Halabi, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said:
"When the last ten days came [i.e. of the month of Ramadan), the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)
used to remain in i'tikaf (seclusion) in the mosque, and a cupola of hair was erected for him, and
he tucked up his apron, and his bed was rolled up." (Someone added): "and was detached from
the women." (The Imam) said, "As for detachment from the women, No."

The author says: This theme is narrated in many traditions; the negation of detachment from the
women - as they have explained and what the traditions say - means permission of mixing with
and living with them, not cohabitation.

167. And among his manners and sunnahs regarding fast, is what is narrated in Man la
yahduruhu'l-faqih, through his chain from Muhammad ibn Marwan that he said: "I heard Abu
'Abdillah (a.s.) saying, 'The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to fast until it was said, "He would
not break the fast", and used to break the fast until it was said: "He would not fast"; then he
fasted one day and broke the fast the next day; then he fasted on Mondays and Thursdays. Then
he returned from it to the fast of three days in a month: Thursday at the beginning of the month,
Wednesday in the middle of the month, and Thursday at the end of the month; and he (s.a.w.)
used to say: "That is the fast of the life-time."

"'And my father (a.s.) used to say: "No one is more hated by Allah than the man who, when it is
said to him that the Messenger of Allah used to do such and such, says: 'Allah will not punish me
for my striving in prayer and fast'; it is as if he thinks that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) had
left out some good work being unable to do it."'"

168. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Muhammad ibn Muslim, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.)
that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), in the beginning of his prophethood, used to fast
[continuously] until it was said: "He will not leave fasting"; and left fasting until it was said: "He
will not fast (again)"; then he left this and began fasting one day and breaking the fast the next
day (and it is the fast of Dawud); then he left it and fasted three bright days; then he left it and
divided them - one day in eveiy ten days - two Thursdays with a Wednesday in the middle, and
he (s.a.w.) expired and he followed the same.

The author says: There are numerous nearly mutawatir traditions of this theme.

169. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from 'Anbasah al-'Abid that he said: "The Prophet (s.a.w.)
kept up fast on Sha'ban, Ramadan and of three days in every month.

170. an-Nawadir (of Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn 'Isa): Narrates from 'Ali ibn Nu'man, from
Zar'ah, from Suma'ah, that he said: "I asked Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about the fast of Sha'ban,
whether the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) did fast it. He said, 'Yes, and he did not fast its whole
month.' I said, 'How many days he broke the fast?' He said, 'He broke it.' So I repeated (the
question) and he repeated it three times, without adding to the word, 'he broke it'. The next year I
asked him the same question, and he replied to me in the same way...."

171. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: It is narrated from Anas that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)
had a drink with which he broke the fast, and another drink for the suhur (the last meal before
dawn in fasting); and often both were the same, and often it was milk, and sometime the drink
was a bread liquified..."

172. al-Kafi: Narrates through his chain from Ibnu'l-Qaddah, from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), that he
said: "The first thing with which the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) broke his fast in the season of
fresh ripe dates with those fresh dates, and in the season of dried dates with dried dates."

173. Ibid: Narrates through his chain from as-Sakuni, from Ja'far, from his father (peace be upon
both), that he said: "When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) fasted and did not get anything sweet,
he broke his fast with water; and it is written in some traditions that sometimes he broke his fast
with dried grapes."

174. al-Muqni'ah: It is narrated from the progeny of Muhammad (peace be upon them) that they
said: "It is mustahab to take something before the dawn, even a sip of water. And it is narrated
that the best of it is date and a mush made of wheat or barley, because the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) used to take it."
The author says: And it is among his continued sunnahs. One of the things reserved to him was
the fast of wisal, i.e. fasting continuously for more than one day without any intervening iftar.
And he expressly prohibited it to his ummah and said: "Surely you are not strong enough to do it
and surely for me there is near my Lord what feeds me and gives drink to me."

175. Makarimu'l-Akhlaq: It is narrated about the Prophet (s.a.w.) that he used to eat harisah most
of the times and used it for suhur too.

176. Man la Yahduruhu'l-Faqih: He said: "When the month of Ramadan came, the Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.) freed every prisoner, and gave to every beggar."

177. Da'aimu'l-Islam: 'Ali (a.s.) said, "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to roll up his bed
and became very active during the last ten days of Ramadan; and he used to keep his family
awake in the twenty-third night, and sprinkled water on the faces of the sleepy ones in the night;
and Fatimah (peace be upon her) did not let anyone to sleep from her family in that night, and
prepared them for it by reducing their meal during the day; and she used to say: 'Deprived is he
who is deprived of its [i.e. this night's] good.'"

178. al-Muqni': It is sunnah that the man should break his fast in al-Adha after the ('id) prayer,
and in al-Fitr before the prayer.

179. And among his (s.a.w.)'s manners regarding recitation of the Qur'an and invocation are what
is narrated in al-Majalis (of ash- Shaykh) through his chain from Abu 'd-Dunya, from the Leader
of the Faithful (a.s.) that he said, "Nothing prevented the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) from
recitation of the Qur'an except janabah [major ritual impurity]."

180. Majma 'u'l-Bayan: It is narrated from Umm Salamah that the Prophet (s.a.w.) used to
disconnect his recitation verse to verse.

181. Tafsir (of Abu'l-Futuh): "He (s.a.w.) used not to sleep until he recited al-musabbihat, and he
used to say: 'There is, in these chapters, a verse that is better than a thousand verses.' They said,
'And what is al-musabbihat? He said, 'Chapters of "Iron", "The Mustering", "The Ranks",
"Congregation" and "Mutual Fraud"'.

The author says: This meaning has been narrated in Majma'u'l-bayan, from al-'Irbas ibn
Sariyah.

182. Duraru'l-La'ali (of Ibn Abi Jamhur): Narrates from Jabir that he said: "The Prophet (s.a.w.)
used not to sleep until he recited Tabaraka and Alif-Lam-Mmim at-Tanzil."

183. Majma 'u'l-Bayan: "'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) has narrated that the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) loved this chapter: Sabbih isma rabbika
'l-A 'la; and the first to say: Subhana Rabbiya 'l-A 'la, was Mika'il."

The author says: The first part of this hadith is narrated in Biharu'l-anwar from ad-Durru'l-
manthur. There are other traditions about what he (s.a.w.) used to say at the time of reciting the
Qur'an, or reciting (various) chapters, or especial verses. Whoever wants to know it should refer
to the relevant books.

There are lectures and statements issued by him (s.a.w.) in which he awakens the awareness of,
and prompts, the people to hold fast to the Qur'an and meditate on it, to be led by its guidance
and be illuminated by its light. And he (s.a.w.) had more right than anyone else to reach, for the
perfection he called the people to, and the first and quickest to reach to every good; and,
according to the well-known narration, he had said: "Turned my hair white the chapter of Hud'."
And it has been narrated from Ibn Mas'ud that he said: "Ordered me the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.) that I should recite for him some parts of the Qur'an; so I recited for him the chapter of
Yunus; until when I reached the divine words: and they shall be brought back to Allah, their true
Master [10:30], I saw him and tear was trembling in his noble eyes."

These are some small bits from his (s.a.w.)'s manners and sunnahs; there are nearly mutawatir
traditions, which have been repeatedly narrated in a lot of books of both sects, and Divine
Speech supports it and does not refute any of it; and Allah is the Guide.

Slavery and Enslavement

The Divine Words: If Thou shouldst chastise them, then surely they are Thy slaves [5:118]
explain the meaning of slavery and servitude. Although there are many verses in the Qur'an that
have this theme, but this verse contains the rational argumentation which shows that if there were
a slave it would conform with reason that his master had the right to punish him as he wished,
because he was his master and owner.

The reason does not accept the permission of giving punishment; and does not allow the
management that would be very hard, except after establishing that the master is allowed to have
all managerial disposals. So, the master has the right to deal with his slave anyhow he wishes and
with whatever he wishes; the reason has made exception of only those disposals which it
disapproves because they are disgusting and ignoble, not because the slave is slave.

As its concomitant, the slave is bound to obey his master in all that he is told to do, and to follow
him in his wishes. He has no authority to engage in any activity if his master does not approve of
it. It is somehow pointed at by the Divine Words: Nay! They are honoured servants; they do not
precede Him in speech and (only) according to His command do they act (21:26-27). See also
the verse: Allah sets forth a parable - (consider) a slave, the property of another, (who) has no
power over anything, and one whom We have granted from Ourselves a goodly sustenance so he
spends from it secretly and openly; are the two alike? (16:75).

A full discussion of various aspects of what the noble Qur'an sees on the question of servitude
and slavery depends on the following chapters:

1. Consideration of Servitude to Allah (s.w.t.):

There are numerous verses in the noble Qur'an which count the people slaves of Allah (s.w.t),
and builds on it the root of the religious call: The people are slaves and Allah is their true Master.
Rather it crosses this limit and takes all those who are in the heavens and the earth stamped with
the brand of servitude; like the reality which is called angel in their multitude, and another reality
which the Qur'an has named jinn. The Sublime, to Whom belong Might and Majesty says: There
is no one in the heavens and the earth but will come to the Beneficent God as a slave (20:93).

There is no doubt that the consideration of the servitude to Allah (s.w.t.) is an aspect arrived at
through analysis. First, we analyse the meaning of servitude to its basic components, then we
decide that its reality is established after removal of its extra characteristics, which attach
themselves to the basic meaning in the rational creatures. There are some people one of whom is
called slave. Why? Because his person is owned by another, an ownership which allows that
another person (who is his owner and master) to manage him in any way he wishes and with
whatever he desires, and removes from the slave the independence of will altogether.

Meditation in this meaning leads one to decide that a human being - and if you wish, you may
extend it and say, everyone who has cognizance and will - is slave of Allah in the true meaning
of servitude. The fact is that Allah is the Owner of all that is called "thing" in the real meaning of
ownership. Nothing owns - neither by itself nor through something else - any harm or benefit,
nor death, life or resurrection; and nothing becomes independent in existence by its person,
attribute or action except what Allah has made it its owner - an ownership which does not negate
Allah's ownership, nor does it transfer the ownership from Him to someone else; rather He is the
Owner of what He has made them the owner of, and has power over what He has given them the
power on, and He has power over everything, and He encompasses everything.

This real authority and actual ownership is what makes it obligatory to them to obey what Allah
wants from them by His legislative will, and the religious laws and regulations which He lays
down, through which their affairs are mended and their bliss and happiness in both worlds is
achieved.

In short, Allah, the Sublime, is their owner in the creative ownership, which makes them His
slaves, submissive to His decree, no matter whether they knew Him or not, obeyed His
commands or disobeyed. He is, also, their owner in the legislative ownership, which obligates
them to listen and obey, and commands them to observe piety and worship.

This ownership and mastership in its effect is distinguished from the ownership and mastership
which is prevalent among the people - and likewise its opposite, the servitude - as follows: As
Allah is the creative Owner unrestrictedly, and there is no owner other than Him, it is not
permissible, in the stage of legislative servitude, to take any other master, nor to worship any
other. Allah says: And your Lord has commanded that you shall not worship (any) but Him
(17:23). It is contrary to the mastership prevalent among the people, because here he who
overcomes others through any means of domination enjoys ownership.

Also, as among His slaves who are owned by Him, there is nothing which is not owned by Him,
and they are not divided in their existence between owned and not owned, and as they are in their
persons and attributes as well as in their conditions and deeds, creatively owned by Him, which
is followed by legislative ownership. So, this ownership decrees that the servitude will be
everlasting and will cover all that returns to them in any way. They have no latitude to worship
Allah partially, for example, that they worship Him with tongue, but not with hand. Also, they
are not allowed to reserve some parts of their worship to Allah and the other parts to someone
else. It is contrary to the mastership prevalent among the people, in which the master has no
rational authority to do whatever he wishes. Ponder on it.

It is this theme which leads to the unrestrictedness of the like of Divine Words:.. . you have not
besides Him any guardian or any intercessor;... (32:4). And He is Allah, there is no god but He!
All praise is due to Him in this (life) and the hereafter, and His is the judgment,... (28:70).
Whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth declares the glory of Allah; to Him
belongs the kingdom, and to Him is due (all) praise, and He has power over all things (64:1).

In any case, the servitude considered in regards to Allah is an analytical meaning inferred from
the servitude, which rational people see in their societies, so it has a basis in human society.
Now, Let us see what its basis is:

2. Enslaving Human Beings and Its Causes:

Enslavement and holding people in bondage was prevalent in human society up to about seventy
years before today. And probably it is still found in some primitive tribes in Asia and Africa.
Keeping slave-boys and slave-maids was an established system among ancient nations for which
no historical beginning can be fixed. It had its special system and rules and regulations, which
were commonly followed, in all nations, and some special rules were found in different nations.

Its basic meaning: A human individual, in presence of some special conditions, becomes
merchandise, owned like other owned items of trade, e.g. animals, vegetables, and stones, etc.
When the person is owned, he is deprived of all options; someone else owns his actions and his
effects that manages them as he wishes.

This was their custom concerning enslavement. However it was not based on an at random will,
nor was it unrestricted or not based on any condition. It was not possible for someone to enslave
whomsoever one wished, nor could he own whomsoever he wished through trade or gift and so
on. In short, the basic meaning was not based on any recklessness or foolhardiness, although
contained within the laws related to it there could have been numerous foolish items, according
to varying opinions and customs of the nations.

Enslavement was. based on a sort of victory and domination, for example, victory in war, which
gives the victor power to do with his vanquished enemy whatever he wishes e.g., killing,
imprisoning and so on; and the domination of presidency which makes a tyrant president do
whatever he wants in his jurisdiction; and the mutual relationship of procreation and breeding
which puts the mastership of the affairs of a weakling infant in the hands of his strong father who
could do with him whatever he thought fit, even selling him, gifting him, exchanging him or
lending him and so on.

We have repeatedly mentioned earlier that the ownership in the human society is based on the
power ingrained in human nature to utilize and take benefit from everything it is possible to
utilize in any way. And man, by nature, employs other things; he employs, for continuing his
life, everything he has in power, and gets benefit from his existence's beneficial things,
beginning from his basic matter, then elements, then various components of solid matters, then
animal kingdom until another human being who is his like in humanity.

However, as he found that he is in dire need of society and social cooperation, he felt himself
obliged to accept partnership with all individuals of his species in utilization of the benefits,
which are obtained from the things through their joint activities. In this way, he and all
individuals of the human species together will form a society, in which every part will be
reserved for one or more deeds, and the whole society will benefit from the whole benefits. You
may say it in other words that the results of those activities will be divided among them, and
every one of them will enjoy those benefits according to his status in social order. That is why
we see that as much as a social individual gets strength and power, he negates natural sociology
and begins employing people, dominating and enslaving them, and decides about their persons,
honor and properties in whatever way he wishes.

Consequently, if you ponder freely on their system of enslaving people, you will find that they
do not consider owning a man if he is a member of their society; rather an owned man is
considered outside of society, like a fighting enemy whose only aim is to destroy the tilt and
offspring; and man erases his name and trace as he is out of his enemy's society, and he has a
right to destroy him through annihilation and to enslave him as he wishes, because there is no
sanctity attached to him; or like a father vis-a-vis his minor children and his other dependents as
he believes that being his dependents in the society they cannot be his equal, of the same status
or similar, and he has the right to do whatever he likes with them, not excluding killing or
selling, etc.

Possibly, the owner has some special characteristics because of which he believes that he is
above the society, he is above the others in importance, and he does not share with them a
benefit; rather he has the final say and definite decision; and has the right to enjoy the best of
what he chooses, and to manage their persons even through ownership and enslavement.

It is now clear that the basic root on which man has built the custom of enslavement is the right
of special domain and unconditional ownership which man believes he has, and that he does not
exclude from it anyone except his partners in human society, those who are equal to him in social
weight, and with whom he secures himself in the citadel of cooperation and mutual help. As for
others, he does not see any hindrance in owning or enslaving them.

The main candidates for this enslavement are three groups: (i) A fighting enemy, (ii) weak
children and women vis-a-vis their fathers and guardians, respectively, (iii) a vanquished
demeaned person vis-a-vis the victor and dominant person.

3. Origin of Enslavement in History

Although it is not known when the system of slavery began in the society, yet most probably
slaves were taken in the beginning as a result of war and domination, and then their children and
women were included in it. That is why we find in the history of strong warrior nations stories
and tales as well as the laws and regulations related to enslavement through imprisonment, and
which is not found in other nations.

Slavery was prevalent in ancient civilized nations, like India, Greece, Rome and Iran, and among
religious communities like the Jews and the Christians, as is seen in the Tawrat and the Injil.
This was the case until the advent of Islam. Islam affirmed the basic idea but restricted its circle
and ameliorated its laws; finally came the Brussels Convention some seventy years ago, which
resolved to abolish the slavery.

Ferdinand Total says in his Dictionary of Eminent Persons of East and West:

Slavery was widespread among the ancients and slave was taken from war-prisoners and
captives and from defeated tribes. Slavery had a system well known among the Jews, the Greeks,
the Romans and the Arabs in the days of ignorance and in Islam.

The system of slavery was abolished gradually: In India (1843), in French colonies (1848), in the
U.S.A. after the Civil War (1865), and in Brazil (1888) until the Brussels Convention resolved to
abolish enslavement; but it is still found in some tribes in Africa and Asia.

The basis of the abolition of slavery is equality of human beings in rights and responsibilities.

4. Islamic View about It

Islam divided the slavery according to its causes: It has been explained earlier that its main
causes were three: War, domination and guardianship like parentage, etc; and it abolished two of
them altogether, i.e., domination and guardianship.

According to Islam all people are equally honorable, be they king or subject, ruler or ruled,
commander or soldier, master or servant; it abolished all distinctions and life characteristics, and
established equality amongst individuals in the respect which it accorded to their persons, honor
and properties; and gave weight to their perceptions and wills - and it means full authority within
the circle of respected rights - and to their actions and what they acquired, and it is their authority
and control on their properties and benefit of their existence in activities. A master of affairs in
Islam has authority over the people only in implementation of penal code and other laws and
regarding the general welfare, which returns to the religious society. But as to what his heart
desires and what he likes for his individual life, he is just like any other person, he has no special
privilege among them, and his order is not implemented in what he desires, be it great or small.
This abolishes the slavery based on domination, as a negative with absence of the subject.

It also regulated the guardianship of fathers over their sons; they do have the rights of nursing
and protection, and they are duty bound to bringing them up and educating them, and looking
after their properties as long as they are prevented from managing it because of their minority;
and when they reach the age of maturity, then they are equal to their fathers in social religious
rights; they are independent in their lives, and they have the option for what they do like for their
own selves.
Of course, it has emphasized the enjoinment of doing good to their parents and consideration of
the rights of upbringing. Allah says: And We have enjoined man in respect of his parents - his
mother bears him with fainting upon fainting and his weaning takes two years - saying: "Be
grateful to Me and to both your parents; to Me is the eventual coming. And if they contend with
you that you should associate with Me what you have no knowledge of, do not obey them, and
keep company with them in this world kindly, and follow the way of him who turns to
Me,..."(31:14-15); And your Lord has commanded that you shall not worship (any) but Him, and
goodness to your parents. If either or both of them reach old age with you, say not to them
"Ugh" nor chide them, and speak to them a generous word. And make yourself submissively
gentle to them with compassion, and say: "O my Lord! Have mercy on them, as they brought me
up (when I was) little." (17:23-24).

And the Islamic shari'ah has counted disobedience of parents among major sins that lead to
perdition.

As for the women, it gave them a position in society and accorded them a social weight from
which the healthy reason cannot deviate a single step. In this way they became one half of the
human society while hitherto they were deprived of it; they were given independent authority in
matters of matrimony and property when until now they had no such power, or were not
independent.

They participated with men in many affairs, while some affairs were exclusively reserved to
them and some others were reserved to men. All this was decided considering their being's
sustenance and their physiological composition; then she was given latitude in some matters
while men were put under hard pressure, like providing sustenance of the family, participating in
battlefields, and so on.

We have talked on this subject in detail at the end of the chapter of "The Cow" in the second
volume of the book and in the beginning of the chapter of "Women" in the fourth volume
(English volume 7); and it was made clear there that the women enjoy in Islam more leniency
vis-a-vis the men which cannot be found in any sociological system, ancient or modern.

Allah says: ...for men is the benefit of what they earn and for and for women is the benefit of
what they earn;... (4:32); ...there is no blame on you for what they do for themselves in a proper
manner;... (2:234); ...and they have rights similar to those against them in a just manner;...
(2:228); "That I will not waste the work of a worker among you, whether male or female, the one
of you being from the other;..."(3:195). Then He has declared for the whole species joined
together: ...for it is (the benefit of) what it has earned, and upon it is (the evil of) what it has
wrought;... (2:286); ...and no soul earns (evil) but against itself, and no bearer of burden shall
bear the burden of another;... (6:165). Of the same import are many other unrestricted verses
which treat an individual man a complete and perfect part of the society and gives him an
independence with which he becomes separate from any other person in the result of his actions,
be it good or evil, beneficial or harmful, without making exception of big or small, male or
female.
Then He equalized them all in honor and dignity, and then He abolished all honor and dignity
except the religious dignity, which is acquired by piety and deeds. Allah says: ...and to Allah
belongs the honor and to His Messenger and to the believers,... (63:8); O you people! Surely We
have created you of a male and a female, and made you tribes and clans that you may recognize
each other; surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one among you most pious;
(49:13).

However, Islam affirmed the third cause of enslavement, i.e. war. It means that an unbeliever
who fights Allah, His Messenger, and the believers will be arrested and enslaved. But in case the
believers fight amongst themselves there is no imprisonment nor enslaving; rather that party
which has crossed the limit will be fought against until it submits to the rule of Allah. Allah says:
And if two parties of the believers fight, make peace between them; but if one of them acts
wrongfully towards the other, fight that which acts wrongfully until it returns to Allah's
command; then if it returns, make peace between them with justice and act equitably; surely
Allah loves those who act equitably. The believers are but brethren, therefore make peace
between your brethren and... (49:9-10).

It is because a fighting enemy whose only aim is to annihilate humanity and destroy tilt and
offspring, the human nature does not entertain least doubt that he should not be treated as a part
of the human society who should be allowed to enjoy the fruits of life and the societal rights; and
that it is incumbent to remove him even by annihilation, if necessary. On this runs the system of
human beings since they came on this earth until this day, and it will continue in the same
manner.

Islam has laid the foundation of the society - the religious society - on the basis of monotheism
and the government of Islamic religion; it has kept away a man who spurns monotheism and
religious government, from being a part of human society, except as a dhimmi or under
agreement. He who is outside the religion and its government or agreement is outside the human
society. Islam deals with him as a non-human, whom a human being may deprive from any
blessing which man enjoys in his life; it pushes him to the fringe, thus cleansing the earth from
the impurity of his arrogance and corruption. In short, he is deprived of any respect in his person,
his action and the results of any of his endeavors; therefore, the Islamic army may arrest him and
enslave him when he is vanquished.

5. What is the Way of Enslaving in Islam?

The Muslims prepare to deal with neighboring unbelievers. They complete the proof against
them and invite them to the word of truth with wisdom, admonition and argumentation in a
beautiful manner. If the unbelievers respond to it positively, then they become brethren in
religion, sharing in all what is for or against the Muslims. But if they reject it, and they are from
the People of the Book, and accept to pay jizyah, then they are left alone to enjoy their dhimmah.
Or, if they entered into agreement, no matter they were the People of the Book or not, their
agreement would be honored and fulfilled. But if there was nothing of the above, then they are
given ultimatum and fought.

In such encounter, whoever among them raises a sword and enters the battle, will be killed; but
will not be killed from them the weakened men, women and children; they will not be attacked at
night or ambushed; water will not be cut off from them, they will not be tortured nor their organs
cut off; they shall be fought against until there is no fitnah and religion becomes of Allah; then if
they desisted then there is no hostility except against the unjust.

When the Muslims vanquished them and the fighting came to its end, then whatever the Muslims
brought under their control - be it their persons or properties - will become their property. The
history of the wars of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and his expeditions contains bright shining
pages, that is full of his comportment brimming over with beautiful justice, full of chivalry and
generosity, magnanimity and kindness.

6. What is the Behavior of Islam Concerning Slave-Men and Women?

When one gets enslaved, he becomes his master's property; benefits of his work are for another
person [i.e. his master] and his expenses are on his master.

Islam has enjoined that the master should treat his slave as he treats his family members, and he
is one of the family [members]; he/she equally shares with them in requirements of life and its
needs. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) used to eat with his slaves and servants and sit with
them; he did not give preference to himself over them in food, cloth, etc.

Islam also laid down that the slaves should not be burdened with hard labor; they should not be
tortured, abused or oppressed. They were allowed to marry among themselves with permission
of their masters, also free men could marry slave girls; they could give evidence like free people
and could be their partners in work during slavery and after that.

Islam showed so much compassion towards them that they participated with free men in all
public affairs. We find many slaves who were given governorship and military command, etc., as
the history of the early days of Islam shows; among the very respected companions of the
Prophet, there were some slaves or freed slaves, like Salman, Bilal and others.

The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) emancipated his slave-girl Safiyyah, daughter of Huyayy ibn
Akhtab and married her; and he married Juwayriyyah daughter of Harith after the battle of
Banu'l-Mustaliq, and she was among the captives, and they were two hundred houses with their
women and children, and this marriage became the cause of the emancipation of all the captives;
and this story, in short, was written in the fourth volume of this book (English volume 7).

It is evident from the behavior of Islam that it gives precedence to a pious slave over a dissolute
free man; and it allows a slave to own property and enjoy general privileges of life with
permission of his master. This is in short what Islam has done for them.

Then it puts utmost emphasis on recommendation to emancipate them, and called in attractive
way to remove them from the environment of slavery to the open field of freedom; and in this
way their number was continuously decreasing and their group was turning free for the sake of
Allah. Not only that: It made emancipation of slave a part of atonements, like atonement of
murder, atonement of missing a fast, etc. Then it allowed them to make condition with their
masters, or enter into agreement of kitabah and tadbir. All this meticulousness of giving them
freedom and joining them with healthy human society, in a definite way, was rendered with the
aim of removing from them all manners of humiliation.

7. Gist of the Above Discussions:

The above discussion leads us to three results:

First: Islam spared no effort to abolish the causes of enslavement, to reduce the number of and
to weaken, those causes, until it stopped at the one cause which was inevitable by nature's
decision, that is, allowing the enslavement of every person who fights against the religion, who
opposes the human society and does not submit to the truth in any possible way.

Second: Islam used all possible means to accord respect to slaves - male and female - and in
bringing their life affairs nearer to the life of the members of the free society, until they became
like one of them - even if not one of them; and there did not remain on them except a thin
curtain, that is, whatever they earn in excess of what is needed for their necessities of an average
life, belongs to their masters, not to them. You may also say: There is no difference between a
free man and a slave in Islam except permission of the master about the slave.

Third: Islam used every effective device to join the group of slaves to the society of free men: in
some cases by exhortations, and in others by compulsion, like atonements, and through
permission and enforcement, like tadbir and kitabah.

8. Progress of Enslavement in History:

Scholars have said that enslavement appeared, when it appeared, through capture and
imprisonment. Before that, when tribes overcame in their wars and battles and captured some
enemies, they killed all of them. Then they thought that it was better to leave them alive and keep
them under their ownership like other war booties. It was done not for benefitting from their
work, but as a good deed towards them, and for preservation of mankind and for respect of moral
laws which gradually had appeared among them on the path of civilization.

This system appeared among the tribes only after they had left getting their sustenance through
hunting; because upto that point they did not enjoy enough affluence which could allow them to
spend on slave boys and girls; until they changed to the life of settlement and emigration, and
then they could do so.

With the spread of slaveiy among tribes and nations - by whichever way it was - man's social life
was transformed, as first some system and decipline appeared in the societies, and second, there
appeared division of labour.

Slavery, when it was prevalent in the world, was not of one manner throughout; it was not found
in some regions altogether, like Australia, Central Asia, Siberia, North America, Skimos and
some regions in Africa in north of Nile and south of Rambis.
Conversely, it was wide spread in Arabia, primitive Africa, Europe and South America. Also, it
was prevalent among the Jews; the Torah calls the slaves to obey the masters; and the same was
the case with Christianity; St. Paul in his epistle to Philemon writes that Onesimus was a defector
slave whom Paul caused to return to his master, Philemon.

The Jews were most gentle with their slaves; its evidence may be seen in the fact that we have
not found any towering building built by them, unlike the pyramids of Egypt and historical
Assyrian buildings, which were built by back breaking labour of slaves; the Romans and the
Greeks were the harshest nations to slaves.

The idea of emancipation of slaves spread in the Eastern Rome after Constantine, until slavery
was abolished there in the 13th century C.E.; but it continued in Eastern Rome in another form,
that is, they sold and bought farms together with the farm workers - Farming was among slaves'
activity - but forced labour was abolished among them.

Slavery was widely prevalent in most of the European countries upto 1772 C.E. Shortly before
that an agreement was made between England and Spain that the English would fetch to them
every year four thousand eight hundred African slaves upto thirty years in exchange of a huge
amount that they would pay.

Public opinion was raised among them against slavery and enslavement in 1761 C.E. The earliest
group, which rose against it, was the religious sect, the Quakers. This continued until a law was
passed that whoever entered the British isle would become free.

However, it appeared after deep investigation in 1788 C.E. that England dealt every year in two
hundred thousand slaves; and those slaves who were taken from Africa to America alone were
one hundred thousand.

This continued until keeping of slaves was abolished in'Britain in 1833; and the government paid
slave-trading companies twenty million pounds as price of the slave boys and girls who were
thus emancipated. At this time 770,380 persons became free.

Slavery was abolished in America in 1862, after tough struggles by American people. The
northern and the southern states of the U.S.A. had different views on slavery. The northern states
kept slave boys and girls for 'adornment', for status purpose only; not so the southern states -
their main occupation was farming and agriculture, and they were in dire need of a great number
of working hands; they kept the slaves for getting the benefits of their labour. That was the
reason they felt restrained from accepting the general emancipation.

Slavery continued to be abolished in one kingdom after the other until the Brussels Convention
of 1890 C.E. decided to abolish it completely, and the governments enforced it and it was
abolished in the whole world, and in this manner millions of people were emancipated. (End of
their statement, abridged)

If you look minutely you will see that this long struggle and this argumentation, then the laws of
emancipation that were laid down and enforced, all of this was related to the slavery through
guardianship or domination, as may be witnessed from the fact that most or all of the slaves were
brought from around Africa where such slavery was practised. As for the enslavement through
captivity in war (which Islam had confirmed), it was never discussed about.

9. A Glance on their Structure:

This natural independence, which we call God-gifted independence of man, (and we do not know
what is the reason of depriving all other animal species of this freedom while they too are similar
to man in psychological cognizance and motivating will; except that we say that it is man himself
who snatches it away in order to benefit from them), does not branch out from any root except on
this: that man is equiped with inner cognizance which differentiates between what he enjoys and
what gives it pain, and then with a will which incites it to pull towards him what gives him
enjoyment and to push away what gives it pain; thus he has the ability to choose for himself what
he pleases.

Human cognizance is not restricted - that it attaches to one thing and does not attach with another
in that a weak and humble man does not know what a strong and powerful man does; nor is the
human will limited with a circle which prevents it from attaching to some of what it likes, or
compels it to be attached with what someone else's will is attached, in order to proceed in a way
that some other person benefits from it and he forgets himself. A weak and vanquished man
wants for himself things similar to all that strong and victorious man wants; and there is no
physical connection between the will of a weak and that of a strong person which could compel
the will of the weak not to be attached with what the will of the strong one is attached; or which
might make the will of the weak dissolve in that of the strong man, so that the two together
would become one will acting for the benefit of the strong one; or the weak's will would follow
the strong's will in a way that it loses its freedom.

In such a case, as is necessary for the laws of life to be based on the foundation of physical body,
it was incumbent for man to live independent in his person and in his deeds; and from this breast
has suckled the abolition of slavery.

But we should think over this God-gifted freedom to man: Whether it is prevalent in the human
society in general since it began and remained in human body.

Human species - according to our knowledge - since its beginning lives in sociological condition;
and it cannot do otherwise, according to its system of being, and it is impossible for a society to
continue as a society even for a short period without a common system shared by all its
members, no matter whether it is a national and just system, or is based on tyranny, fool-
hardiness or whatsoever; this system, whatever it is, limits the individual's freedom.

Moreover, man cannot live without some interference in the matter that ensures his continuity.
This is not possible except if he attaches to himself the thing in which he interferes - the
attachment which we call ownership - which is more general than the terminology of right and
ownership - whatever this man wears, that one cannot wear it; whatever this individual eates,
buys or engages in, another individual cannot hold it under his control. It is nothing but putting a
limit to the non-interfering person in generality of his will, a restriction to his freedom.
The humanity has always been subject to discord and dispute since it has come on the earth. Not
a single day passes over these persons who are spread over the earth, except that the sun rises
over them with their discords and sets over them with their disputes. These controversies push
them to the loss of lives, despoiling of honour and plundering of properties. Had the man
believed in unrestricted freedom for himself - i.e. for humanity - there would not have been any
trace of these discords. Also, the system of censure and punishment was always prevalent in
various types of societies, civilized or barbaric. What is the implication of this censure? It only
means that the society takes away from the guilty person somes blessings, which the creation had
given him, and deprives him of some of the freedom. Now, if the society or the one who has
some authority in society did not own the life of a guilty person who is punished for murder, it
could not take it away from him; and if a sinner, indicted for his sin and punished for it by
various kinds of chastisement and offence, like amputation, stroke and imprisonment, etc., did
not know that the society owned the judgement and its implimentation, which affects his life
affairs and deprives him of ease and comfort, and takes away his financial authority, he would
not have submitted to it. How can a tyrant transgressor be admonished not to indulge in tyranny
and transgression; how can he be prevented from aggression against a person or his honour or
property without depriving him of some of his freedom?

In short, what no reasonable man can have a doubt about is the fact that if the human freedom
unrestrictedly remains in human society, even for a single moment, it would create disturbance in
the social system at that moment. So, this get together, which also is natural for man and without
which it cannot live, puts restriction on the natural freedom which is gifted to man by his natural
will and cognizance. Thus, no human society can live except with some restriction to its
freedom, in the same way as it cannot live with negation of freedom altogether. And the human
society has always been preserving between these two boundaries this freedom which the
western propaganda makes us think that it is they who have laid down its name after they had
invented its meaning, and have protected it without restriction.

So, it is this natural sociology, which restricts that natural freedom, and demarcates it as all
physical and non-physical powers demarcate one another. Thus, a power stops from working in
consideration of some other power with which it works; like the sight, which is the basis of
seeing power, goes on doing its work until the eye becomes tired, or the thinking faculty
becomes wearied, and then the sight stops its work in consideration of its colleague's work;
likewise the perception of taste enjoys devouring tasty meal and chewing it and swallowing it,
until the jaws' muscles become tired and restrain the power of taste, thus it stops from its desired
food.

So, the natural sociological demands are not completed for man except when he abandons some
of his freedom in action and forgoes his enjoyment.

10. What is the Amount of Limitation?

As for the amount by which this freedom, gifted by the natural get together, is limited, and by
which its natural releasing is restricted, it differs with difference of human societies looking at
the multitude of the laws which are prevalent in the society, and their smallness because, the
restricter of freedom, after the basic get together, is the law which prevails among the people; the
more the laws increase and looked minutely at their actions, the more deprivation from freedom
will take place; and vice versa.

But what no sociological get together can avoid in whatever society we look at, and what is
incumbent, which no social man can ignore it, is the preservation of the society's existence,
because man cannot live without it, and protection of the systems, that are found therein, from
any defect and breakdown. That is why you will not find any human society but there is in it a
defence system which averts dangers from people and their offspring, and protects them from
annihilation; and there is a guardian and overseer, who oversees their affairs, and protects from
breakdown the prevalent customs and the established precedents which are respected among
them, by spreading the social peace and punishing the tyrant aggressor. And the history, as we
know, supports it.

This being the case, the first right laid down for the society in the natural shari'ah is that it
should take away the freedom from the enemy of the society in the basic get together. You may
say in other words: That the society should own the person and action of its enemy, who intends
to annihilate its life and destroy his tilth and offspring, and do away with the freedom of his will
in any way he wishes - right through killing downwards, deprive the enemy of custom and law of
freedom of action, and own from him what he loses through retribution of person or property,
etc.

How can a man - even an individual - believe in the freedom of an enemy who does not respect
his society, (so that he might treat him as a brother and join and mingle with him) nor does he
desist from destruction of his society (so that he might leave him alone)? How can the natural
consideration of society be joined with leaving this enemy free to do whatever he likes? Is it
anything but clearly joining two mutually contradictory things? It is only idiocy or insanity.

The above discourse clearly shows that:

First: To base one's ideal on generalization of human freedom is contrary to the clear natural
truth laid down for man, which is among the first natural rights that are laid down.

Second: The right of enslavement recognized by Islam fully conforms to natural shari'ah: That
the enemies of the true religion who fight the Islamic society should be enslaved. They should be
deprived of the freedom of action and be taken inside the religious society and made to live as
slaves, so that they should be trained with good training, and proceed gradually to emancipation;
in this way they will join the free society with safety and benefit. Also, the master of the affairs
has the option to purchase them and emancipate them altogether if he sees in it the good of the
religious society, or to use in this respect some other way which does not lead to abrogation of
divine commands.

11. The End Result of the Abolition:

The big powers enforced the Brussels Convention, strictly banned slave trade, and the slave girls
and boys were emancipated. Now, they are not lined up in slave-traders' shops, nor are they
pulled ahead like sheep and goats; consequently keeping of eunuchs too was abolished. Today it
is impossible to find slaves or eunuchs - even in small number, except what sometimes is
reported about primitive nations.

However, will this much - i.e. removal of the name of enslavement from tongues, and absence of
those called slaves from our sights - convince a critical scholar on this topic? Will not he ask
whether it is a verbal problem in which it is enough to ban the use of the name and to call the
slave a free man, even if he is deprived of the benefits of his work, and is bound to follow his
master's will. Or, if the problem is related to its meaning, in which consideration is to be given to
its meaning according to its reality and external effects.

Now, look at the Second World War, has not passed more than a few decades since its end; the
victor nations imposed on the defeated enemy unconditional surrender, then they settled in their
countries, took millions of their property and ruled over them and their children; not only that,
they transferred millions of their captives to their (victors') country and they used them in
whatever work they wished and in any way they desired. And the situation continues uptil now.

Would that I knew does enslavement mean something, which is not found here, even if its name
is not used in it? Does enslavement mean anything except deprivation of freedom, control of (the
slave's) will and work, and enforcement by the powerful dominating party of its command on the
weak and humiliated party in whatever way it wished, be it justice or injustice?

By God, is it not astonishing that the Islam's judgement in the best possible way is called
enslavement, and their order is not called so, while Islam uses the easiest and lightest aspect and
they use the hardest and harshest one? We have experienced their love and friendship when they
entered our country under the banner of love, help and protection. What would be the condition
of those whom they dominated over by enmity and chicanery?

It is now clear that the Convention of abolition (of slavery) was nothing but a political ploy. In
reality it took what it rejected.

As for enslavement as a result of war and fighting, Islam enforced it and they too enforced it in
practice, although they avoided uttering its name. As for enslavement based on sale by fathers of
their sons, which they banned, Islam banned it long ago. And enslavement through domination
and command, Islam had banned it too 1400 years before; but these people unanimously banned
it, yet we have to see whether this ban too stopped at the words like other aspects or really
reached to its meaning and was supported in practice?

You may find answer to this question by looking at the history of European colonialism in Asia,
Africa and America. Look at the calamities they brought there, the blood they shed, the honour
they despoiled, the properties they plundered, and arbitrary decisions they took - and not by one,
one hundred and one thousand.

You do not have to go far for this observation - if it be far - it is enough to think over the reports
of what the people of Algeria are suffering since many years at the hand of France, how the lives
are destroyed, towns wrecked and people overburdened under pressure. Also, see what the Arab
countries had to bear from the English, and what the blacks and Red-Indians are suffering in
America. Again look at Eastern Europe vis-a-vis the Socialist Republics. What we are suffering
at the hands of these and those; all this in its words is sincerity and compassion, but in its
meaning is enslavement.

It is clear from the above that when they came to the stage of practice, they took what Islam has
legislated, i.e., abolition of freedom when its natural cause is found, and that is war and fighting
with the one who wants demolition of society and annihilation of humanity. It is a lawful
decision based on a factual basis, which never changes. That basis is that humanity for its
continuation needs removal of what opposes it in existence and continuity. Then comes another
reasonable sociological basis which does not change and branches out from its real root, i.e. it is
incumbent to protect the human society from annihilation and demolition.

This is what they aimed at in their action; they took it in reality and rejected it in words.
However, they did not stop at the lawful type, and crossed the boundary into unlawful one. That
is, they adopted enslavement through domination and control. Thus they continue to enslave
thousands, nay, millions, before the talk of abolition and after it. They still sell and purchase,
give in gift and lend; but they do not name it enslavement, they call it colonialism or acquisition,
protection or guardianship, consideration or help; or similar other words whose only purpose is
to put a veil on the meaning of enslavement; and whenever a veil becomes worn out or torn, it is
discarded and another is put in its place.

Now, nothing remains from what had been abolished by the Brussels Convention - which is
continuously announced to the world and its people, and of which the civilized nations are so
proud - those who are the pioneers of the developed civilization and in whose hand is the banner
of human freedom - except the enslavement through the sale of sons and daughters and
castration. And there is not any important benefit, which returns to the slaves; more over this
much, is more of a personal aspect than a sociological problem. As such, its abolition is merely a
verbal argument, which serves as propaganda matter in their hands, like their all other
arguments, which do not go beyond words, and do not affect any meaning.

Of course, there remains here another debatable issue and it is as follows. Islam begins in its war
booties, from slave or other properties (other than the land conquered by force) with individuals
from its society, and divides those booties amongst them; then it ends at the government, as was
done in early days of Islam, and they reserve the right of their use for the government. But it is
another topic apart from the original topic of enslavement; probably we shall be helped by Allah
to fully discuss it later, God willing, under the verses of zakat and khums and the help is saught
from Allah.

After all this, we return to the words of the author of Mu'jamu'l-a'lam copied earlier: "The basis
of abolition of slavery is equality of men in rights and duties." What is the meaning of: 'equality
of men in rights and duties'?

Does it mean that they equally have rights whose consideration is necessary, even if those right
are different and not equal, like the difference between the president and the subordinate, the
ruler and the ruled, the commander and the subaltern, a law abiding citizen and the law-breaker,
the just and the unjust, because they differ in their sociological weight?

If yes, then it is correct. But it does not mean that there is equality between a beneficial part of
the society and the one who is unable to attach to the society and has no honour; he is rather like
a lethal poison wherever it reaches destroys the life; it is the clear natural order that there should
be difference between the two, and full freedom should be accorded to the former while the latter
should be deprived of it; an enemy has no right on his enemy in his enmity, the wolf has no right
over his victim, nor the lion over his prey.

Or, does it mean that because humanity is shared by all human individuals, and any individual,
whoever he may be, has power to rise above in civilization, and receive happiness as others have
done; so it is a right of humanity on the developing society that it should give freedom to every
human being and to train and bring him up until it joins the good society?

This too is right. But sometimes training demands that the trainer should take away from the
trainee the freedom of will and action for sometime until he is fully trained, and acquires
expertize and the use of his will; then he will truly enjoy the bliss of his freedom; just as a sick
person is treated and given unpalatable medicines for his cure; and as a child is trained in a
manner which he dislikes. Exactly in the same way Islam takes away the freedom of will and
action from the unbelieving people who fight against Islam; it brings them inside the religious
society, trains them and gradually brings them in the arena of freedom. The preceeding statement
shows that it is a sociological progress; we should look at it and its result and effect in a general
and comprehensive manner; it is not an individual's matter, which may be seen individually and
partially. Again, it is astonishing that they too affect an action which is followed in Islam,
although they differ from it in name and the good intention, as explained earlier.

Or, does it mean that it is the right of the human freedom that it should be applied to all men, and
every man should be left free to implement his unrestricted will?

But, it is clear without any doubt that it is not acceptable, nor is it feasible to do in its generality,
especially about a fighting enemy - and it is the only aspect, which Islam considers for taking
away the general freedom.

Apart from that, if it was true then there should be no difference between one or two and a group:
Then why do they accord legal freedom to one (even in suicide) and two (in duel), yet they do
not accept the right for a poor group from the humans that they should remain aloof in caves or
such shelters and remain concerned with their own selves, eating the sustenance of their Lord
and proceeding on the paths of their lives.

Now, remains one thing: Some one may say: Why did not Islam allow the slaves to own
property, so that he could use it on necessities of his life without being a burden on his master?
And why did it not put a limit on slavety by Islam, in order that the slave would become
automatically free if he accepted Islam? This would remove from him the stigma of depravity,
which stained him and his offspring, upto the Day of Resurrection.

But it should be realized that the order for establishment of slavery and depravity from owning a
property, appears and is enforced, according to the Islamic shari'ah, at the first moment of his
capture; and the natural order against them, the fighting enemies, allowing their depravity of
freedom aims at negating their plans and taking away their power of fighting (with which they
could destroy the good religious society); and there is no strength or power except through
ownership; so when they would not own any work or its result, they would not get power for
disputation or fighting. Of course, Islam has allowed them ownership in general by their masters'
bestowing ownership on them; and it is an ownership under an ownership, and it does not carry
the risk of the slaves' independent manipulation.

As for the suggestion that slaves should have become automatically free if they accepted Islam, it
is a proposal that would negate the religious policy regarding the defence of Islamic territory,
establishment of religious society on its feet, and religiously training these fighting groups (who
have come under Muslims' control). Otherwise, they would have pretended to enter into Islam
soon at coming under its authority, and just on being enslaved; in this way they would have
preserved their power and armaments and then returned to their previous behaviour.

We may go looking back at the custom prevalent among nations and groups from today to the
earliest era in human history that we can get any information about. We shall see that when two
nations or tribes fought and one of them vanquished and subjugated the other, then it considered
it as its lawful right to go on killing the enemies until they totally submitted to its rule
unconditionally.

This submission did not mean that the defeated party should put its arms on the earth, and then
they would be left free to do, as they liked. Nay, they must accept the control of the victorious
group, and must totally submit to what they decide about them and how they manage their
persons and properties.

It would be foolish to restrict this control with a condition which would destroy the effect of this
open submission; and which would negate its order, pave the way for the enemy to return to his
planning and deception and give him a chance to hope to return to the original point. How can
the victorious group tolerate this, while it had sacrificed the souls and properties for the
independence of the blessed society? Will it be anything except injustice to its own self and
insult to the most precious item, which it has, and wastage of the blood, properties and
endeavours?

No one can raise objection against the victors (who sacrificed their lives and properties to
overcome their enemies and thus reduced them to slavery) and say: Well, their men had fought
and killed and perverted, so they were arrested and deprived of their freedom; but what is the
fault of the children who were born after it, who had not taken arms, drawn a sword, or entered
into battlefield? But it is because they are their fathers' sacrifice.

After all this, it should not be forgotten that the Islamic government has the right to seek ways to
emancipate the slaves through purchase or freeing, etc. when it finds that it is in the interest of
Islamic society. And Allah knows better.

A Talk on Punishment and Forgiveness

1.What is the Meaning of Requital?

No society is devoid of sociological responsibilities, which its members are required to respect.
The only aim of the society is to maintain conformance between the members' activities, bring
them nearer to one another and join one side of it to the other, in order that it all unites and
combines and with its effects and results fulfils the members' needs to the extent everyone is
entitled to according to his deeds and endeavours.

These responsibilities, inasmuch as they are related to voluntary affairs, a man may undertake
them or leave them; and this in itself would not happen without some negation of the man's
freedom of his will and action; it is not impossible for him to stay away from it wholly or
partially because man by his nature inclines to freedom without restriction.

Attention to this defect in the laws, and this weakness in its structure, called the sociological man
forth to complete this defect and strengthen its weakness by another means: That he should join
its disobedience or neglect with some things which an adult and sane man dislikes. This exhorts
him to obey the imposed law lest he is faced by consequences, which he dislikes and is hurt with.

This is the requital of the evil; and it is the right of the society or of the ruler against the
disobedient ones. Parallel to it run the aspects of obedience. It is possible to keep for the obedient
one something which he prefers and like as a recompense of his fulfilment of responsibilities, in
order that it would induce him to perform an incumbent, or likeable deed; and it, in its turn, is the
right of the obedient and submissive member of the society or the ruler; and it is the requital of
the good deeds. Often the recompense of the evil is called punishment, and that of good is named
reward.

On this very mode, the laws of Islamic shari'ah are laid down. Allah says: For those who do
good is good (reward)... (10:26); And (as for) those who have earned evil, the punishment of an
evil is the like of it,... (10:27); And the recompense of evil is punishment like it,... (42:40).

Punishment and reward run to a broad spectrum, beginning from dislike and like, censure and
praise, reaching to the ultimate point of good and evil. They are related to various factors:
especialities of the deeds and the doers, the controller of affairs, and the extent of the benefit or
harm that would accrue to the society. Probably, all this may be summarized in this way that the
more consideration is given to an affair, the greater the punishment or reward for disobedience or
obedience, respectively.

Between a deed and its recompense, a sort of similarity and resemblence is kept in mind, even if
approximately. And the speech of Allah runs on the same pattern. Allah says: ...that He may
reward those who do evil according to what they do, and (that) He may reward those who do
good with goodness (53:31). Even more clear are the divine words quoting the scriptures of
Ibrahim and Musa (peace be upon both): And that man shall have nothing but what he strives
for; and that his striving shall soon be seen; then shall he be rewarded for it with the fullest
reward (53:39-41). And it is even more manifest in the laws of retribution. Allah says: ...
retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the slain: the free for the free, and the slave for
the slave, and the female for the female;... (2:178); The sacred month for the sacred month and
all sacred things are (under the law of) retaliation; so whoever then acts aggressively against
you, inflict injury on him according to the injury he has inflicted on you, and fear Allah ...
(2:194).

Consequently, it means that the punishment or reward returns to the doer's person with
something similar to what he has done. For example, when he disobeys a sociological law, and
enjoys himself with what inflicts harm to the society, then he will be deprived of equal amount of
the enjoyments in his self, or body, or property, or prestige, etc. which somehow returns to him.

This is to which we pointed under discussion of the meaning of enslavement, that the society or
the ruler owns from the culprit his person or some of his personal affairs, which is equal to the
crime he has committed, or the defects of the harms, which he has inflicted on the society. Thus,
he is punished, i.e., the society, or the ruler, manipulates in relation to this ownership - i.e. the
right - in the life of the culprit or in some affair of his life, and takes away his freedom to that
extent.

If he killed a person - when that person had not killed anyone nor had he done any mischief in
the land - in the Islamic society, the ruler would own the person of the culprit because he had
brought to the society loss of a respectful life; and its penalty, i.e., killing, manipulates his life in
exchange of the ownership he enjoyed. If he stole what amounts to a quarter dinar from a secure
place, he had brought harm to the society by tearing away a general peace and security's curtain
laid down by the hand ofshari'ah and protected by the hand of trust. Its penalty is amputation of
the hand. What is the reality of this penalty? It means that the ruler has owned from the thief, in
exchange of his felony, an affair of his life, which includes his hand and does in it what he
decides by taking away his freedom and its means from this aspect. You may judge by analogy
various punishments in different shari'ahs and customs.

It is clear from above that the sociological crime and disobedience attract to themselves a sort of
slavery and enslavement, for this reason a slave is the clearest example of punishment. Allah
says: If Thou shouldst chastise them, then surely they are Thy slaves;... (5:118).

This theme has different expositions in different customs and shari'ahs, Allah mentions in the
story of Yusuf when he had put the drinking cup in the bag of his brother so that he could take
him to himself: They said: "But what shall be the requital of this, if you are liars?" i.e., in your
denial of the theft of the king's drinking cup: They said: "The requital of this is the person in
whose bag it is found; thus do we punish the wrongdoers," i.e., we punish the thief by enslaving
him: So he began with their sacks before the sack of his brother, then he brought it out from his
brother's sack. Thus did We plan for the sake of Yusuf... They said: "O Chief He has a father, a
very old man, therefore retain one of us in his stead; surely we see you to be of the doers of
good." This was the exchange and a sort of ransom: He said: "Allah protect us that we should
seize other than him with whom we found our property, for then most surely we would be unjust.
"(12:74-79)

Often the killer was taken as a prisoner enslaved; sometimes he offered in ransom one of his
women like his daughter or sister, etc. Ransoming through giving in marriage was prevalant upto
these days among the tribes and clans in our areas, because they treat marriage as a sort of
enslavement for women.

2. Is An Obedient Person Counted as Slave of the Obeyed?

Based on this idea, sometimes an obedient one is counted as a slave of the obeyed one; because
by this obedience his will follows the will of the obeyed one, thus he is his slave deprived of the
freedom of will. Allah says: Did I not charge you, O children of Adam! That you should not
serve the Satan? Surely he is your open enemy, and that you should serve Me;. .. (36:60-61).
Have you then considered him who takes his low desire for his god, ...? (45:23).

So, the society or ruler owns the guilty one who is punished. Conversely, the obedient one who is
rewarded owns from the society or the ruler the reward that is equal to his obedience, because the
society or the ruler has decreased through this responsibility some of the God-gifted freedom of
the obedient one.

What we have explained just now, is the secret of what is generally accepted that fulfilling the
promise is incumbent, but not that of the threat. It is because the theme of promise in the arena of
mastership and slavery is the reward for obedience, while the theme of threat is punishment for
disobedience. The reward, inasmuch as it is the right of the obedient on the ruler and is his
responsibility, its fulfilment is incumbent on him, so that he may discharge his responsibility;
contrary to the punishment, because it is the right of the ruler over the guilty person, and it is not
necessary that man must manage his property and get the benefit of his right - it is left to his
option. This topic needs further elaboration.

3. Forgiveness and Pardon:

We have reached in the preceding discussion to the conclusion that it is OK to leave the
punishment of disobedience, contrary to the reward of obedience. It is a natural dictate to a
certain extent, and is based on the fact that meting out the punishment is the right of the ruler
over the disobedient one, and it is not always necessary that one should use his right without fail.
However, as it is not always necessary to use one's right of punishment, likewise, it is not
allowed to neglect this right altogether. Otherwise the natural decision of establishing the right
would become null and void; there will be no sense in establishing a thing, which will have no
effect at any time. Moreover, negating the right of punishment altogether would demolish the
laws, which are made to protect the structure of society; if they are demolished the society would
be demolished without doubt.

The decision - allowability of pardoning a sin - is established to a certain extent; but it is an

unclear proposition. If there is a reason supporting the pardon, pardoning will be allowed;
otherwise retribution is compulsory to maintain the respect of the law, which would protect the
society and man's bliss. To this reality point the words of 'Isa (a.s.): ...and if Thou shouldst
forgive them, then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise (5:118).

There are found in the noble Qur'an two general causes of pardon which the divine wisdom
endorses:

One: Repentance of the servant to Allah, the Glorified - whether it is a return from disbelief to
belief, or from disobedience to obedience, as was explained under "Repentance" in the volume
four of the book (English vol.8). Allah says: Say: "O My servants! Who have acted
extravagantly against their own souls, do not despair of the mercy of Allah; surely Allah forgives
the faults altogether; surely He is the Forgiving, the Merciful. And return to your Lord time after
time and submit to Him before there comes to you the punishment, then you shall not be helped.
[This indicates the repentance from disbelief, to which applies the threat of punishment where no
helper or intercessor can avail.] And follow the best that has been revealed to you from your
Lord before there comes to you the punishment all of a sudden while you do not even perceive"
(39:53-55). [This indicates the repentance from disobedience to obedience, and here the benefit
of intercession is not negated.]

Allah also says: Repentance with Allah is only for those who do evil in ignorance, then turn (to
Allah) soon, so these it is to whom Allah turns (mercifully), and Allah is ever-Knowing, Wise.
And repentance is not for those who go on doing evil deeds, until when death comes to one of
them, he says: "Surely now I repent"; nor (for) those who die while they are unbelievers. These
are they for whom We have prepared a painful chastisement. (4:17-18)

Two: Intercession on the Day of Resurrection. Allah says: And those whom they call upon
besides Him have no authority for intercession, but he who bears witness of the truth and they
know (him) (43:86). There are many such verses, which deal with the topic of intercession; and
we have fully discussed this topic in the volume one of the book. There are found in the noble
Qur'an different occasions wherein forgiveness is mentioned without giving its cause, although
by meditation, one may understand the general reason, which has been kept in sight, and it is the
well-being of the religion. For example, see the divine words:... and He has certainly pardoned
you, and Allah is Gracious to the believers (3:152); Are you afraid to give in charity before your
secret conversation? So when you did not do it and Allah has turned to you (mercifully), then
keep up prayer and pay the zakat and obey Allah and His Messenger;... (58:13). Certainly, Allah
has turned (mercifully) to the Prophet and the immigrants and the helpers who followed him in
the hour ofstraitness after the hearts of a part of them were about to deviate, then He turned to
them (mercifully); surely to them He is Compassionate, Merciful (9:117). And they thought that
there would be no affliction, so they became blind and deaf, then Allah turned to them
(mercifully), then many of them became blind and deaf; ... (5:71). (As for) those who put away
their wives by likening their backs to the backs of their mothers, they are not their mothers; their
mothers are no others than those who gave them birth; and most surely they utter a hateful word
and a falsehood; and most surely Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving. (58:2). O you who believe! Do
not kill game while you are in the robe o/ihram, ... Allah has pardoned what is gone by; and
whoever returns (to it) Allah will inflict retribution on him; and Allah is Mighty, Lord of
Retribution (5:95).

These are various occasions of the divine pardoning, and we have explained the particular
especiality of each of them under each verse in the book, which may be consulted.

Of a totally different genre is the word of Allah: Allah pardon you! Why did you give them
leave...? (9:43). It is a du'a', like our saying: 'May Allah pardon you! Why did you do this and
this?' Similar is the case of the verses 74:18-19, although in an opposite way: Surely he reflected
and guessed, but may he be cursed how he plotted. Also of a different genre are the words:
Surely We have given to you a clear victory, that Allah may forgive you your past faults and
those to follow... (48:1-2). It is understood from the fact that the forgiveness is taken to result
from the conquest of Mecca, which Allah had bestowed on His Prophet, but there is no
relationship between the forgiveness of fault (i.e. sin) and the conquest. It will be fully explained,
God willing, under the exegesis of that verse.

4. Forgiveness has Grades:

Forgiveness and pardon relates to sin; and sin generally attracts a sort of retribution and
punishment. As you have seen, retribution has a very wide spectrum and covers various ranks;
consequently pardon too has various ranks and grades. This difference does not appear in the sin
itself, i.e. in the evil consequence that follows the deed (because no one can deny such
difference), and the requital, whether it is punishment or reward, is weighed in that scale.

We cannot avoid here the discussion about the sin and its various grades, and the meditation into
what the natural reason leads to. Although the discussion is Qur'anic and its aim is to arrive at
what the Divine Book leads to concerning these realities, yet as the Sublime God has declared in
His speech, He speaks to us according to our understanding and the natural balance with which
the things are weighed in the stages of theory and practice; and we have pointed to this fact in
various topics of this book; and Allah has taken the support of human understanding and thought
in various places, and has strengthened with it the aims of His speech; as He has variously said:
'then do not you understand', 'then do not you contemplate', and so on.

It is inferred from correct consideration that the first factor with which human society is attached
and which it respects is the practical laws and esteemed customs by which the society preserves -
through its implementation - the objects of humanity, and leads it to its felicity in life; then it lays
down the laws by which the one who goes against it is punished, and the obedient one is
rewarded.

At this stage the name, sin, is not used except for going back on the text of the practical laws,
and inevitably it stands parallel to a number of sociological rules; and this meaning is settled in
our - the Muslims' - minds, and so is the import of similar words like evil, fault, wrong, misdeed,
error, outrage, transgression and so on.

Not only this practical laws, when they are acted upon, guarded and preserved, pull the society to
suitable characteristics and attributes conforming with the societal aims which are the ultimate
destination of human togetherness. It is these characteristics that the society calls human
nobilities and exhorts to it. Opposite to them are evil traits.

Although these factors differ one from another based on the difference in societies' customs and
objects, yet the principle that they are the products of sociological laws cannot be ignored or
refuted.

Although these good characteristics are spiritual attributes, and there is no guarantee to enforce it
practically in the societies, and they are non-voluntary because they are traits; yet because their
appearance follows repetition of enforcement of laid down rules in the society, or repeated
neglect of those rules, the putting in practice those laws ensure their enforcement; and they are
counted voluntary inasmuch as their preliminaries are voluntary, i.e. repeated actions. Among its
occasions may include rational commands related to noble characteristics like bravery, chastity
and justice; and likewise prevents the evil traits like cowardice, rashness, degeneration,
covetousness and injustice; in the same manner may be imagined for them rational punishment
and reward like praise and censure.

In short, in this way takes place a stage of the sin above the preceding one, and it is the stage of
negligence of creational laws and related rational commandments.

These rational commands are not counted as command except because of mutual attachment
between them and the wajib actions, which lead to them. So, there is a judge, which establishes
its incumbency and orders it, and that is the human intellect. Parallel to it the naming of rational
prohibition as prohibition. And this is our way in all occasions of mutual attachment. So,
whenever we enforce one side of the mutual attachments we at once order to enforce the other
part and declare it as incumbent. And we consider neglecting it as disobedience to that rational
command, and a sin that entails some sort of retribution.

This also makes clear another matter: As these virtues contain incumbent factors which one has
to attach himself to - and likewise the evil traits contain forbidden items - and also cover
recommended factors which serve as adornments and beauties in characterstics - and they are
good manners with which are attached recommended rational commands. Yet when we look at it
vis-a-vis ourselves, the attached manners (which are recommended in themselves) will inevitably
become recommended rationally, following that inter-relation. For example, the environment of
a Bedouin to life (who lives a bedouistic life) is removed from the average standard of the
civilized life; so he is not held responsible except for the elementary laws of society and general
customs which his understanding power may grasp; sometimes he commits reprehensible deeds
or utters ugly words, but a civilized man ignores it putting its blame on his misapprehension and
his living far away from civil environment- where repeated observation of customs and manners
is the best teacher for its residents.

Again an average civilian is not held responsible for those things for which people of exceptional
qualities are deemed responsible - the people of fine understanding and lofty manners. When an
average man does not observe fine maaners and neglects attractive words and deeds, the only
excuse offered on his behalf is that it is the limit of his understanding; he does not understand the
concomitants of manner more than he performs, because of his environment.
And what he does (which he should not) is what the unique people are held responsible for.
Often they are blamed for an undertone in speech, or a slight delay in movement, or missing an
imperceptible moment in stillness, or turning or closing the eyes and so on - all this is counted as
a fault or sin from them. But it is not a sin in the meaning of going against legislative articles, be
it related to religion or to worldly affairs. It is well known that the good deeds of righteous
people are the sins for the near ones.

The more the path becomes intricate and the position delicate, the more hidden sins become
apparent which hitherto were unnoticed and the man had not perceived them, nor any ruler or
controller was deemed responsible for them.

This, according to deep consideration, leads us to the commands, which develop in the
framework of love and hate. An eye of hate - particularly in the condition of rage - sees all good
deeds as condemnable sins. Conversely, a lover, when he wanders in love and is submerged in
affection, deems slightest inattention towards his beloved a great sin, even if he performs all
actions by limbs with all its pillars. It is only because he evaluates his deeds in the way of love
according to his mind's attention and attraction of his heart towards his beloved. If it is
discontinued because of heart's inattention then he has turned away from his beloved, cut himself
from his remembrance, and thus negated the purity of his heart.

Until a time comes that he counts as crime and disobedience even engagement with necessities
of life like eating, drinking, etc. He realizes that although the said action is a necessity which
man is compelled to do, yet each one of these compulsory actions in its root is voluntary; and
engagement in it is engagement with other than the beloved and turning away from him by one's
own will - and it is a sin. That is why we see that one who is overwhelmed with love and
affection, and likewise a grieving and depressed person and others like these neglect food and
drink, etc.

On this style should be explained what has been narrated from the Prophet (s.a.w.): Surely desire
covers my heart, so I seek pardon from Allah every day seventy Aims. And the same may be
taken to mean in a way the divine words:... and ask pardon for your fault and celebrate the
praise of your Lord in the evening and the morning (40: 55). Then celebrate the praise of your
Lord, and ask His forgiveness; surely He is oft-returning (to mercy), (110:3).

The same will be the bearing of what Allah has quoted from various noble prophets; like the
words of Nuh (a.s.): "My Lord! Forgive me and my parents and him who enters my house
believing,..." (71:28); and the words of Ibrahim: "O our Lord! Forgive me and my parents and
the believers on the day when the reckoning shall come to pass!" (14:41); and the words of Musa
for himself and his brother: "My Lord! Forgive me and my brother and cause us to enter into
Thy mercy,..." (7:151); and what has been quoted from the Prophet (s.a.w.): "We hear and obey;
our Lord! Thy forgiveness (do we crave), and to Thee is the eventual course." (2:285).

So, the prophets (peace be upon them!), inasmuch as they were ma'summ (infallibles), could not
have committed any disobedience, nor could they perpetrate any sin in the meaning of
contradicting any article of religion which they were sent to invite to, and which they were
engaged in conveying by words and deeds; as their obedience was obligated from Allah, and
there was no sense in obligating the obedience of one who was not assured of abstaining from
disobedience, Sublime is Allah from it.

The same will be the bearing of the confession of injustice and so on, as quoted from some of
them (peace be upon them), like the words of Dha 'n-Nun: "There is no god but Thou, glory be to
Thee; surely I was of the unjust ones!" (21:87); because as it is possible that they should count
some lawful deeds done by them as sin for themselves and should ask forgiveness from Allah,
likewise it is possible to count it as their injustice, because every sin is injustice.

It had been said earlier that there might be another explanation: That injustice might indicate
injustice against one's soul, as was seen in the words of Adam and his wife: "Our Lord! We have
been unjust to ourselves, and if Thou forgive us not, and have (not) mercy on us, we shall
certainly be of the losers." (7:23).
Beware! You should not think that when we say for a verse: It has this or that bearing, we admit
that it is against its apparent meaning and then we strive to invent a meaning which could be
applied to it; in other words, the Qur'anic verses should be reinterpreted with the aim of
protecting the sectarian views, A free discussion was given in the volume two of this book
(English vol.3) on the subject of the prophets' sinlessness, without relying on strange and
extraneous premises.

We have explained there that the apparent speech is not restricted in its identification on
common understanding confined to the sentence concerned; rather it also seeks help from
associations of context and wordings, joined to it and separate from it, like a verse which throws
light on another verse. These associations have definite effects on apparent meanings, especially
in the divine speech, one part of which interpretes another, some portions of which testify for and
affirm the other portions.

Inattention to this point has given rise among many exegetes and theologians to the idea of
reinterpretation, in the meaning of turning the speech away from its apparent import, and striving
to do so in the verses, which go against their particular belief. You see, they cut up the Qur'an
into fragments, and then hold each piece to mean what a vulgar plebian understands from the talk
of another vulgar person like himself. Thus, when they hear Allah (s.w.t.) saying [about Yunus,
a.s.]: ...so he thought that We would not straiten him,... [21:87], they take it to mean that, God
forbid, he (a.s.) thought or believed that Allah was unable to catch him; in spite of the fact that
the next verse:... and thus do We deliver the believers [21:88]; counts him among the believers,
and he who enntertains slightest doubt about Allah's power is devoid of faith and belief, let alone
the one who gives more weight to Allah's [supposed] feebleness or believes Him to have no
power.

And when they hear Him saying:... that Allah may forgive you your past faults and those to
follow... [48:2], they think that the Prophet (s.a.w.) had committed a sin and Allah forgave it, just
as one of us commits sin by going against a divine order or prohibition given by masterly
authority, from which springs a law of fiqh.

They were not led by meditation even to the extent of looking at the preceding verse: Surely We
have given you a clear victory [48:1]; otherwise it would have been clear to them that if this fault
and the related forgiveness were like the sins committed by us, and the subsequent forgiveness,
there was no reason to attach the forgiveness to the conquest of Mecca (as an objective is
attached to its controller).

Also, there was no reason to join with conjunction what follows, i.e. the words: ...and complete
His favour to you and keep you on a right way, and that Allah might help you with a mighty help.
[48:2-3]
Likewise, when they hear all those verses which, according to their view, contain the "slips" of
the prophets, like those in the stories of Adam, Nuh, Ibrahim, Lut, Ya'qub, Yusuf, Dawud,
Sulayman, Ayyub and Muhammad (blessings of Allah be upon him and his progeny and these
prophets), they hasten to attack their esteemed status, and they do not refrain from speaking ill-
manneredly about them, although they themselves deserve those insulting remarks; what defect
surpasses ill manners?

Their wrong thinking and rotten outlook misled them until they exchanged their Lord, the Lord
of the universe, with the Lord, which is, portrayed in the corrupted Old and New Testaments.
They think that the Lord is an unseen power who has a solid body, and who turns around the mill
of existence, as an arrogant person manages his kingdom, who has no aim except to satiate his
desire and anger. First, they were ignorant of the status of their Lord, and then they forgot the
position of the prophets effacing their noble and spiritual high grades, and actual sublime
positions. This made those purified sacrosanct souls resemble the rotten contemptible souls
whose only share in human nobility is its name; it destroys soul of this (refering to what they
have narrated about Dawud, Sulayman, Ibrahim, Lut and others, peace be upon them) deceives
honour of that, and looks coveteously at property of that other. And with all their ignorance, they
are not ready to accept that a person who manages any of their worldly affairs, or the one who is
given responsibility to look after their home and family, should be afflicted by such scandals.
Then how do they agree to ascribe such disgraceful things to Allah, the Glorified? And He is the
Knowing, the Wise, Who sent His messengers to His servants, so that they should not have any
proof after their advent. Would that I knew, what proof would be established against an
unbeliever or a transgressor if it were possible for a messenger to disbelieve or transgress or
invite to polytheism and idolatory, then he washes his hand of it and ascribes it to the Satan.

And when they are reminded of the divine protection enjoyed by divine prophets (peace be upon
them) and shown their God-gifted positions and spiritual status, they count it as polytheism, and
inordination regarding the servants of Allah, and start repeating the verse: Say: "I am but a
mortal like you!"

They, to a certain extent, are right in refuting it; because what they think about the Lord, and
what attributes they ascribe to Him, is much lower than what they mention of the positions of the
prophets (peace be upon them) and much below their status and honour. It is all an example of
the afflictions, which Islam and Muslims had to suffer because of what the People of the Book,
and especially the Jews, have inserted, in Muslim traditions. Thus they turned the hand mill of
Islam around an strange pivot, and they believed about the Glorified God (like Whom there is
nothing) that He is like an arrogant man who thinks that he is totally free, he is not asked about
his actions while the others have to answer about their activities. According to them, when
effects follow their causes, when results appear after premises, and when the existing particulars
(in the form or substance) demand appearance of their effects, it all happens at random, without
any real connection. And when Allah ended the prophethood on Muhammad (s.a.w.) and
revealed the Qur'an to him, then He reserved Musa for talking and 'Isa for support through the
Spirit, it all was not because of any particular especiallity in their noble souls, but just because
He wanted to bestow on them this and that. And when Musa hit his staff on a rock and there
appeared water streams in it, it was exactly as one of us hits his staff on a rock, but the difference
is that Allah made that to flow and does not make this to do so. And when 'Isa said to the dead
bodies: "Stand up by the permission of Allah", it was just as if we might announce in graveyard:
"Stand up by the permission of Allah", but Allah gave them new life and does not give life to
these. And so on.

It is not but an analogy of the creative system with the legislative system; but the latter has no
natural structure except that people make it, give it a terminological name and preserve it, so it
does not go beyond the area of society and does not cross the world of the societal man.

If they had used a little intelligence and meditated on the verses dealing with the affairs of fault
and forgiveness (in its terminological meaning, i.e. going against the master's command and
prohibition) they would have realized that there is a forgiveness that is above the well-known
forgiveness.

Thus, Allah, the Glorified, repeatedly says in His speech that there are some of His servants
whom He calls 'sincere' ones [or 'purified' ones] who are protected from sin (in its usual
meaning). So they do not have any sin in their account, and consequently they do not need
forgiveness related to that sin. He has clearly said about several of His prophets, like Ibrahim,
Ishaq, Ya'qub, Yusuf and Musa that they were purified, sincere. For example, He says about
Ibrahim, Ishaq and Ya'qub: Surely We purified them by a pure quality, the keeping in mind of the
(final) abode (38:46); and about Yusuf: ...surely he was one of Our sincere servants. (12:24); and
about Musa: ...surely he was one purified,... (19:51). And Allah has quoted their asking for
forgiveness, as the words of Ibrahim: "Our Lord! Forgive me and my parents..." (14:41); and the
words of Musa: "My Lord! Forgive me and my brother and cause us to enter into Thy mercy,..."
(7:151). If forgiveness were not ascribeable except to sin (in the common meaning), this
invocation would not be understandable.

Of course, one may say: They (peace be upon them) count themselves as sinners in humility
before Allah, although they had not sinned. But such a man should realize that they (peace be
upon them) were not wrong in this view of theirs and there was no recklessness in their talk,
because forgiveness covers them in a correct meaning and this is a serious matter.

Moreover, see that Ibrahim (a.s.) offers his du'a' for forgiveness for all the believers: "O our
Lord! Forgive me and my parents and the believers on the day when the reckoning shall come to
pass!" [14:41], which includes the sincere ones. Likewise, Nuh (a.s.) prays: "My Lord! Forgive
me and my parents and him who enters my house believing,..." [71:28], and it by its generality
includes the sincere ones. And there is no meaning in asking forgiveness for him who has not
committed any sin, which would need forgiveness.

All this makes us realize that some sins with which forgiveness is attached are other than the sin
(in its common meaning), and also some forgiveness is other than the forgiveness of common
meaning. Allah has quoted Ibrahim as saying: "And Who, I hope, will forgive me my mistakes on
the Day of Judgement." (26:82). Probably, that is the reason that we find in the divine speech that
when Allah mentions mercy or the mercy of the next world which is the Garden, He mentions
forgiveness before it. Like the Divine Words: And say: "O my Lord! Forgive and have mercy,..."
(23:118);"...and forgive us and have mercy on us;..." (2:286); and He quotes Adam and his wife:
"...and if Thou forgive us not, and have (not) mercy on us,..." (7:23); and quotes Nuh: "...and if
Thou shouldst not forgive me and have mercy on me, . . ."(11:47).

The above statement proves that sin has different grades one above another and likewise
forgiveness has grades parallel to the sin; each grade of forgiveness is attached to its parallel
grade of the sin. Also, it is clear that it is not necessary that every sin and fault should be attached
to a masterly command or prohibition, which average, man's mind would recognize; nor that
every forgiveness should be attached to this type of sin.

Thus, the preceding discussion makes it clear that sin and forgiveness have four grades:

First: The sin related to masterly command and prohibition, i.e. going against a rule of shari'ah
whether connected with its root or branch. You may also say: 'going against a legal article,
whether religious or non-religious'. And forgiveness is attached to it, which stands parallel to it
in rank.

Second: The sin, which is related to a creative rational command, and the forgiveness attached to
it.

Third: The sin related to a mannered command (done by the one whose way of life is way of
mannerism), and the forgiveness attached to it. Probably the above-mentioned two grades are not
counted by common understanding among the sins and the forgiveness; an average man might
treat that as a metaphorical use. But it has no relation with metaphor at all, because you have
seen that real effects take place on them.

Fourth: The sin, which is pointed at by the taste of love, and the forgiveness attached to it. And
the opposite is the case with hate in all grades. Average men do not count it as a grade of love;
but they have erred in it; not intentionally, but because their rationality does not reach to the level
of its understanding, and they do not clearly grasp its meaning.

Some one might say: It is merely the lovers' delusion or poetic imagination, which is not based
on any rational reality. But they do not realize that these imaginations, although they are
delusions and notions in the path of sociological life, they exactly turn into realities - and what
realities - in the path of servitude, emanating from the divine love which melts the heart and
distracts the reason; and it does not leave any perception to the man to perceive any other than
his Lord, nor any will to wish except what He wishes.

At this stage, he realizes that even a slight attention to his self or to his desires is a great sin and a
thick curtain, which cannot be raised except by the divine forgiveness. Allah has counted sin as a
curtain for the heart, which prevents man from total attention to his Lord, as He has said: Nay!
Rather, what they used to do has become like rust upon their hearts. Nay! Most surely they shall
on that day be debarred from their Lord (83:14-15).

This is what is understood by the serious discussion in which one does not play with the realities.
Possibly, there may appear, to the friends of Allah who in their servitude proceed on the way of
His love, fine points of sin and subtle aspects of forgiveness, which cannot be reached through
general discussions.

5. Does Censure or Forgiveness Necessarily Mean a Preceding Sin?

If one observes the practice of society's same persons, he finds that their censure or punishment
is based on voluntary responsibilities; and one of the conditions of its correctness is rationality;
and there are other conditions about whose identity, quiddity and limits various societies differ
among themselves, and we are not concerned here with their details.

Our concern here is only with the understanding that differentiates between beauty and ugliness,
beneficial and harmful, good and evil, according to the average condition of the people in their
society. The people, with their sociological outlook, think that there is an active starting point in
man which has this quality; although academic discussion sometimes makes it clear that it is not
one of the natural powers consigned in man, like imagination and memory; rather it is but a trait
which is acquired through conformance of several powers in action, like justice.

The societies, with all their differences, think that responsibility depends on this factor, which is
called understanding; and reward and punishment branch out from it, as the responsibility
springs from it; so a sane person is rewarded for his obedience and punished for his crime.

However, others who lack this understanding, for example, a child, a mad person, an idiot and
other weakened people, they do not deserve any reward or punishment - in their true sense - on
what they do of obedience or disobedience. Yet sometimes they are awarded rewards for their
acts of obedience to awaken their longing, or are held responsible and given disciplinary
punishment vis-a-vis their disobedience. And it is commonly found in all societies, including the
Muslim society.
Actually the above group, seen in the background of the felicity and infelicity, which are earned
through obedience and obedience of the laid down responsibilities in this worldly life, are neither
felicitous nor infelicitous, because no responsibility has been loaded on them; thus they have no
reward (so they should be called felicitous) nor any punishment (so they should be called
infelicitous), although sometimes they are exhorted by good reward or disciplined by evil result.

As for the life of the next world, which the divine religion affirms and then divides the people
into two groups (without their being any third): felicitous and infelicitious, or rewarded and
punished. What the Qur'an describes about it is a vague statement whose details are not
explained, because there is no rational way of identifying their detailed condition after leaving
this world. Allah says: And others are made to await Allah's command, whether He chastise
them or whether He turn to them (mercifully); and Allah is Knowing, Wise (9:106). Also, He
says: Surely (as for) those whom the angels cause to die while they are unjust to their souls, they
shall say: "In what state were you?" They shall say: "We were weak in the earth." They shall
say: "Was not Allah's earth spacious, so that you should have emigrated therein?" So these it is
whose abode is hell, and it is an evil resort; except the weak ones from among the men and the
women and the children who have not in their power the means nor can they find a way (to
escape); so these, it may be, Allah will pardon them, and Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving (4:97-
99).

These verses - as you see - contain the news of pardoning them and returning to them
(mercifully) and there is no forgiveness where there is no sin, and it talks about their punishment,
and there is no punishment on him who is not given any responsibility. However, you have
known that sin, and likewise forgiveness as well as reward and punishment, have many grades:
some of them are related to violation of masterly or rational responsibility; while others are
related to rotten psychological forms and filth of heart which prevent man from his Lord. And
these people, although they are apart from attachment of responsibility (which depends on
reason), yet they are not protected from dirts of the souls and curtains of the hearts, which need
enjoying the bliss of divine nearness and presence in the arena of sanctity in order to remove that
dirt, and for forgiving it, covering it and pardoning it.

Probably, this is the meaning of what has been narrated in some traditions: "Surely Allah will
gather them, then He will create a fire and order them to enter it; so whoever enters it enters the
Garden, and whoever refuses to enter it, enters the Fire." We shall speak about these traditions in
the exegesis of the chapter of "Repentance", God willing; and some details were given in the
chapter of "Women".

Of the use of pardon and forgiveness on occasions other than sin in the divine speech is what has
repeatedly come on the occasion of abolishing an order, as Allah says:... but whoever is
compelled by hunger, not inclining wilfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful (5:3).
A similar verse is in the chapter six, "Cattle". Also, Allah says while abolishing wudu' when
water is not available: and if you are sick, or on a journey:... betake yourselves to pure earth,
then wipe your faces and your hands; surely Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving (4:43). Also, He says
in connection with the mischief makers in the earth: Except those who repent before you have
them in your power; so know that Allah is Forgiving, Merciful (5:34). Likewise, He says relating
to the abolition of the order of jihad from excused persons: ...there is no way (to blame) against
the doers of good; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful (9:91). There are many other such verses.

And Allah says regarding travails and afflictions falling the people: And whatever affliction
befalls you, it is on account of what your hands have wrought, and (yet) He pardons most (of
your faults) (42:30).

It is now clear that the attribute of pardoning and forgiving belong to Him, the Sublime, like the
attributes of mercy and guidance, which are related to the affairs of creation and legislation both.
Thus, Allah, the Sublime, pardons sins and disobediences and erases them from the scroll of
deeds; and He pardons the order, which reason demands its enforcement and erases it by not
legislating it. And He pardons travails and afflictions, whose causes are existent; and erases them
so that they do not afflict the man.

6. Relationship Between Action and Recompense:

We have understood from the preceding discussion that the orders and prohibitions, i.e. the rules
and laws prevalent among the sane persons give rise to fine beautiful effects on its
implementation - which is called reward; and evil effects on its disobedience - which is called
punishment. And that it is like a device which they use for its implementation; so their
arrangement to make good recompense for obedience, is only for encouragement to the
implementer, and the evil recompense on disobedience is only to put the defaulter in fear and
make him cautious against transgression.

It appears from it that the relationship between deed and recompense is a relationship made and
laid down by the society or the ruler; called them to it their pressing need to the action, in order
that they get its benefit and fulfil with it their need. That is why you see them that when they do
not have its need and their requirement of it is fulfilled, they become careless in fulfilling the
promised or threatened reward or punishment.

And that is the reason that you see that the recompense differs in magnitude and paucity, and
emolument changes in power and feebleness, depending on the difference of need to that action.
The more the need to it the more the wages, and the less the need the less the wages. Thus, the
instructor and the instructed, and the commander and the commanded are like the seller and the
buyer both of them give something and take something.
The wage and reward is like the price; and punishment is like the fine imposed on the one who
ruins something and is held responsible for its price, which he has to pay.

In short, it is a matter laid down and considered like all sociological titles, orders and weights, on
which the handmill of human society revolves like chiefship and subordination; order and
prohibition; obedience and disobedience; obligatoriness and prohibition; possession and
property; and sale and purchase, etc. The realities are the existing things found outside
imagination, and the conditions covering them, whose situation does not change with richness
and poverty, honour and humiliation, praise and condemnation like the earth and that which
grows from it, and death and life, health and illness, hunger and satiation, thirst and its
quenching.

This is how the sociological sane people behave. Allah treats us in His speech as one of us treats
others. He has moulded our bliss, to which He guides us through His religion, in the mould of
sociological customs. Thus He ordered and prohibited, exhorted and cautioned, gave good news
and warned, promised reward and threatened punishment; in this way we went on receiving
religion in the easiest manner with which we receive the sociological laws and customs. Allah
says: ...and were it not for Allah's grace upon you and His mercy, not one of you would have
ever been pure,... (24:21).

And Allah has not neglected the matter of educating the soul, which are ready to comprehend the
realities. Accordingly, He has pointed in several verses of His Book that, beyond these religious
cognizance, which the apparent meanings of the Book and the Sunnah contain, there is a factor,
which is greater, and a secret that is more precious and valuable. He says: And this life of the
world is nothing but a sport and a play; and as for the next abode, that most surely is the life, . .
(29:64).

Thus He has counted the life of the world a play, which has no basis except imagination, and
whose only function is to prevent man from what is important for him, and it is the next abode
and eternal felicity of man which is the reality of life. If the life of the world is exactly what we
call life other than the life affairs which are attached to it of property, status, kingdom, honour,
nobility and so on, then its being sport and play with what we see of the realities further
necessitates the life affairs to be sport and play. And if it means the life of the world with all its
attachment, then the matter is clearer.

So, these sociological customs and the objects which are saught with them as honour, status,
property, etc.; then those factors and aims and objects (which are contained in religious
education) to which Allah has guided us through nature, then through messengership, all these
things are like a toy which a reasonable guardian, who brings up a child, puts before the small
child (who does not know his good from his evil), then keeps playing it with him, in order to
exercise his body and refresh his mind, so that he may prepare the child for practical purposes to
make him succeed in it. Thus, the sporting event is for the child a beautiful play, which leads him
to action, and for the guardian it is a serious work full of wisdom, which has nothing to do with
play.

Allah says: And We did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them in sport.
We did not create them both but with the truth, but most of them do not know (44:38-39).

Then Allah explains how this formal upbringing leads to its spiritual aims, in a general
similituate which He has given to the people: He sends down water from the cloud, then water-
courses flow (with water) according to their measure, and the torrent bears along the swelling
foam, and from what they melt in the fire for the sake of making ornaments or apparatus arises a
scum like it; thus does Allah compare truth and falsehood; then as for the scum, it passes away
as a worthless thing; and as for that which profits the people, it tarries in the earth;... (13:17).

The divine speech makes it clear that there is a real relationship between deed and recompense
beyond the laid down and considered relationship which the social people see between them; and
the divine teaching proceeds on the same line.

7. The Deed takes Relationship to the Soul:

Then Allah explained that deed takes this relationship to the soul from the side of the
psychological form, which it acquires through action and the condition, that it leads to. Allah
says: ...but He will call you to account for what your hearts have earned,... (2:225); ... and
whether you manifest what is in your minds or hide it, Allah will call you to account according
to it,... (2:284). And there are other verses of the same meaning.

It becomes clear from it that all the effects which emanate from deeds, whether reward or
punishment, they in reality emanate from what the souls earn by the way of deeds; and that the
actions have no function except mediation.

Then Allah made it clear that what will face them of the recompense of the deeds, it will be the
deeds themselves as a matter of reality; it is not as man puts a deed in his society then follows it
with recompense; rather the deed is preserved near Allah with preservation of the acting soul,
then Allah will manifest it (deed) before it (soul) on the day when hidden things will be made
manifest. Allah says: On the day that every soul shall find present what it has done of good and
what it has done of evil; it shall wish that between it and that (evil) there were a long duration of
time; (3:30). Also He says: Do not urge excuses today; you shall be rewarded only according to
what you did (66:7). The verses are clear and many other verses join them in this meaning.

The best of the verses in indication is the word of Allah: Certainly you were heedless of it, but
now We have removed from you your veil, so your sight today is sharp (50:22). This points to the
station of present recompense, and it counts him heedless of it in the world (because of the
association of the word "today"; and heedlessness does not happen except of a present thing).
Then He mentions removal of the veil from him; and veil necessarily demands something to be
covered. It means that what he faces and sees of the recompense on the Day of Resurrection was
present in the world but it was not manifested.

These verses explain other verses, which are clear about recompense and manifestation of deed
and recompense, because the verses of recompense look at the stage of the laid down
sociological relationship, while these verses look at the stage of the real relationship, as we have
explained. We had touched in short this topic under the exegesis of the divine words: Allah has
set a seal on their hearts... (2:7), in the first volume of this book and whoever wants may refer to
it. And Allah is the Guide.