Blog

Surah Al Maidah In Arabic

Transliteration in English

Bismillaahir Rahmaanir Raheem

1. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo awfoo bil’uqood; uhillat lakum baheematul an’aami illaa maa yutlaa ‘alaikum ghaira muhillis saidi wa antum hurum; innal laaha yahkumu maa yureed
2. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo laa tuhilloo sha’aaa ‘iral laahi wa lash Shahral Haraama wa lal hadya wa lal qalaaa’ida wa laa aaammeenal Baital Haraama yabtaghoona fadlam mir Rabbihim wa ridwaanaa; wa izaa halaltum fastaadoo; wa laa yajrimannakum shana aanu qawmin an saddookum ‘anil Masjidil-Haraami an ta’tadoo; wa ta’aawanoo ‘alalbirri wattaqwaa; wa laa ta’aawanoo ‘alal ismi wal’udwaan; wattaqul laah; innal laaha shadeedul ‘iqaab
3. Hurrimat ‘alaikumul maitatu waddamu wa lahmul khinzeeri wa maaa uhilla lighiril laahi bihee walmun khani qatu wal mawqoozatu wal mutarad diyatu wanna teehatu wa maaa akalas sabu’u illaa maa zakkaitum wa maa zubiha ‘alan nusubi wa an tastaqsimoo bil azlaam; zaalikum fisq; alyawma ya’isal lazeena kafaroo min deenikum falaa takhshawhum wakh shawn; alyawma akmaltu lakum deenakum wa atmamtu ‘alaikum ni’matee wa radeetu lakumul Islaama deenaa; famanidturra fee makhmasatin ghaira mutajaanifil li ismin fa innallaaha Ghafoorur Raheem
4. Yas’aloonaka maazaaa uhilla lahum; qul uhilla lakumuttaiyibaatu wa maa’allamtum minal jawaarihi mukallibeena tu’allimoonahunnamimmaa ‘allamakumul laahu fakuloo mimmaaa amsakna ‘alaikum wazkurus mal laahi ‘alaih; wattaqul laah; innal laaha saree’ul hisaab
5. Alyawma uhilla lakumut taiyibaatu wa ta’aamul lazeena ootul Kitaaba hillul lakum wa ta’aamukum hillul lahum wal muhsanaatu minal mu’minaati walmuhsanaatu minal lazeena ootul Kitaaba min qablikum izaaa aataitumoohunna ujoorahunna muhsineena ghaira musaafiheena wa laa muttakhizeee akhdaan; wa mai yakfur bil eemaani faqad habita ‘amaluhoo wa huwa fil Aaakhirati minal khaasireen (section 1)
6. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo izaa qumtum ilas Salaati faghsiloo wujoohakum wa Aidiyakum ilal maraafiqi wamsahoo biru’oosikum wa arjulakum ilal ka’bayn; wa in kuntum junuban fattahharoo; wain kuntum mardaaa aw’alaa safarin aw jaaa’a ahadum minkum minal ghaaa’iti aw laamastumunnisaaa’a falam tajidoo maaa’an fatayammamoo sa’eedan taiyiban famsahoo biwujoohikum wa aideekum minh; ma yureedul laahu liyaj’ala ‘alaikum min harajinw walaakiny yureedu liyutahhirakum wa liyutimma ni’matahoo ‘alaikum la’allakum tashkuroon
7. Wazkuroo ni’matal laahi ‘alaikum wa meesaaqahul lazee waasaqakum biheee iz qultum sami’naa wa ata’naa wattaqul laah; innal laaha ‘aleemum bizaatis sudoor
8. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamaanoo koonoo qawwaa meena lillaahi shuhadaaa’a bilqist, wa laa yajrimannakum shana aanu qawmin ‘alaaa allaa ta’diloo; i’diloo; huwa aqrabu littaqwaa wattaqul laah; innal laaha khabeerum bimaa ta’maloon
9. Wa’adal laahul lazeena aamanoo wa ‘amilus saalihaati lahum maghfiratunw wa ajrun ‘azeem
10. Wallazeena kafaroo wa kazzaboo bi Aayaatinaaa ulaaa’ika Ashaabul Jaheem
11. Yaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanuz kuroo ni’matallaahi ‘alaikum iz hamma qawmun ai yabsutooo ilaikum aidiyahum fakaffa aidiyahum ‘ankum wattaqullaah; wa’alal laahi fal yatawakalil mu’minoon (section 2)
12. Wa laqad akhazal laahu meesaaqa Banee Israaa’eela wa ba’asnaa minhumus nai ‘ashara naqeebanw wa qaalal laahu innee ma’akum la’in aqamtumus Salaata wa aataitumuz Zakaata wa aamantum bi Rusulee wa’azzartumoohum wa aqradtumul laaha qardan hasanal la ukaffiranna ‘ankum saiyiaatikum wa la udkhilan nakum Jannaatin tajree min tahtihal anhaar; faman kafara ba’da zaalika minkum faqad dalla sawaaa’as Sabeel
13. Fabimaa naqdihim meesaa qahum la’annaahum wa ja’alnaa quloobahum qaasiyatai yuharrifoonal kalima ‘ammawaadi’ihee wa nasoo hazzam mimmaa zukkiroo bih; wa laa tazaalu tattali’u ‘alaa khaaa’inatim minhum illaa qaleelam minhum fa’fu ‘anhum wasfah; innal laaha yuhibbul muhsineen
14. Wa minal lazeena qaalooo innaa nasaaraaa akhaznaa meesaaqahum fanasoo hazzam mimmaa zukkiroo bihee fa aghrainaa bainahumul ‘adaawata walbaghdaaa’a ilaa yawmil Qiyaamah; wa sawfa yunabbi’uhumul laahu bimaa kaanoo yasna’oon
15. yaaa Ahlal kitaabi qad jaaa’akum Rasoolunaa yubaiyinu lakum kaseeram mimmmaa kuntum tukhfoona minal Kitaabi wa ya’foo ‘an kaseer; qad jaaa’akum minal laahi noorunw wa Kitaabum Mubeen
16. Yahdee bihil laahu manit taba’a ridwaanahoo subulas salaami wa yukhrijuhum minaz zulumaati ilan noori bi iznihee wa yahdeehim ilaa Siraatim Mustaqeem
17. Laqad kafaral lazeena qaalooo innal laaha huwal maseehub nu Maryam; qul famany-yamliku minal laahi shai’an in araada ai yuhlikal Maseehab na Maryama wa ummahoo wa man fil ardi jamee’aa, wa lillaahi mulkus samaawaati wal ardi wa maa bainahumaa; yakhluqu maa Yashaaa’; wallaahu ‘alaa kulli shai’in Qadeer
18. Wa qaalatil Yahoodu wan Nasaaraa nahnu abnaaa’ul laahi wa ahibbaaa’uh; qul falima yu’azzibukum bizunoobikum bal antum basharum mimman khalaq; yaghfiru limai yashaaa’u wa yu’azzibu mai yashaaa’; wa lillaahi mulkus samaawaati wal ardi wa maa bainahumaa wa ilaihil maseer
19. Yaaa Ahlal Kitaabi qad jaaa’akum Rasoolunaa yubaiyinu lakum ‘alaa fatratim minar Rusuli an taqooloo maa jaaa’anaa mim basheerinw wa laa nazeerin faqad jaaa’akum basheerunw wa nazeer; wallaahu ‘alaa kulli shai’in Qadeer (section 3)
20. Wa iz qaala Moosaa liqawmihee yaa qawmiz kuroo ni’matal laahi ‘alaikum iz ja’ala feekum ambiyaaa’a wa ja’alakum mulookanw wa aataakum maa lam yu’ti ahadam minal ‘aalameen
21. Yaa qawmid khulul Ardal Muqaddasatal latee katabal laahu lakum wa laa tartaddoo ‘alaaa adbaarikum fatanqaliboo khaasireenn
22. Qaaloo yaa Moosaaa innaa feehaa qawman jabbaareena wa innaa lan nadkhulahaa hattaa yakhrujoo minhaa fa-iny yakhrujoo minhaa fa innaa daakhiloon
23. Qaala rajulaani minal lazeena yakhaafoona an’amal laahu ‘alaihimad khuloo ‘alaihimul baab, fa izaa dakhaltumoohu fa innakum ghaaliboon; wa ‘alal laahi fatawakkalooo in kuntum mu’mineen
24. Qaaloo yaa Moosaaa innaa lan nadkhulahaa abadam maa daamoo feehaa fazhab anta wa Rabbuka faqaatilaaa innaa haahunaa qaa’idoon
25. Qaala Rabbi innee laaa amliku illaa nafsee wa akhee fafruq bainanaa wa bainal qawmil faasiqeen
26. Qaala fa innahaa muhar ramatun ‘alaihim arba’eena sanah; yateehoona fil ard; falaa taasa ‘alal qawmil faasiqeen (section 4)
27. Watlu ‘alaihim naba abnai Aadama bilhaqq; iz qarrabaa qurbaanan fatuqubbila min ahadihimaa wa lam yutaqabbal minal aakhari qaala la aqtulannnaka qaala innamaa yataqabbalul laahu minal muttaqeen
28. La’im basatta ilaiya yadaka litaqtulanee maaa ana bibaasitiny yadiya ilaika li aqtulaka inneee akhaaful laaha Rabbal ‘aalameen
29. Inee ureedu an tabooo’a bi ismee wa ismika fatakoona min As-haabin Naar; wa zaalika jazaaa’uz zaalimeen
30. Fatawwa’at lahoo nafsu hoo qatla akheehi faqatalahoo fa asbaha minal khaasireen
31. Faba’asal laahu ghuraabai yabhasu fil ardi liyuriyahoo kaifa yuwaaree saw’ata akheeh; qaala yaa wailataaa a’ajaztu an akoona misla haazal ghuraabi fa uwaariya saw ata akhee fa asbaha minan naadimeen
32. Min ajli zaalika katabnaa ‘alaa Banee Israaa’eela annahoo man qatala nafsam bighairi nafsin aw fasaadin fil ardi faka annammaa qatalan naasa jamee’anw wa man ahyaahaa faka annamaaa ahyan naasa jamee’aa; wa laqad jaaa’at hum Rusulunaa bilbaiyinaati summa inna kaseeram minhum ba’da zaalika fil ardi lamusrifoon
33. Innamaa jazaaa’ul lazeena yuhaariboonal laaha wa Rasoolahoo wa yas’awna fil ardi fasaadan ai yuqattalooo aw yusallabooo aw tuqatta’a aideehim wa arjuluhum min khilaafin aw yunfaw minalard; zaalika lahum khizyun fid dunyaa wa lahum fil Aakhirati ‘azaabun ‘azeem
34. Illal lazeena taaboo min qabli an taqdiroo ‘alaihim fa’lamooo annnal laaha Ghafoorur Raheem (section 5)
35. yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanut taqul laaha wabtaghooo ilaihil waseelata wa jaahidoo fee sabeelihee la’allakum tuflihoon
36. Innal lazeena kafaroo law anna lahum maa fil ardi jamee’anw wa mislahoo ma’ahoo liyaftadoo bihee min ‘azaabi Yawmil Qiyaamati maa tuqubbila minhum wa lahum azaabun aleem
37. Yureedoona ai yakhrujoo minan Naari wa maa hum bikhaari jeena minhaa wa lahum ‘azaabum muqeem
38. Wassaariqu wassaariqatu faqta’oo aidiyahumaa jazaaa’am bimaa kasabaa nakaalam minal laah; wallaahu ‘Azeezun hakeem
39. Faman taaba mim ba’di zulmihee wa aslaha fa innal laaha yatoobu ‘alaih; innal laaha Ghafoorur Raheem
40. Alam ta’lam annal laaha lahoo mulkus samaawaati wal ardi yu’az zibu many-yashaa’u wa yaghfiru limany-yashaaa’; wallaahu ‘alaa kulli shai’in Qadeer
41. Yaaa ayyuhar Rasoolu laa yahzunkal lazeena yusaa ri’oona fil kufri minal lazeena qaaloo aamannaa bi afwaahihim wa lam tu’min quloobuhum; wa minal lazeena haadoo sammaa’oona lilkazibi sammaa’oona liqawmin aakhareena lam ya’tooka yuharrifoonal kalima mim ba’di mawaadi’ihee yaqooloona in ooteetum haazaa fakhuzoohu wa il lam tu’tawhu fahzaroo; wa many-yuridil laahu fitnatahoo falan tamlika lahoo minal laahi shai’aa; ulaaa ‘ikal lazeena lam yuridil laahu any-yutahhira quloobahum; lahum fid dunyaa khizyunw wa lahum fil Aakhirati’azaabun ‘azeem
42. Sammaa’oona lilkazibi akkaaloona lissuht; fa in jaaa’ooka fahkum bainahum aw a’rid anhum wa in tu’rid ‘anhum falany-yadurrooka shai’anw wa in hakamta fahkum bainahum bilqist; innal laaha yuhibbul muqsiteen
43. Wa kaifa yuhakkimoonaka wa ‘indahumut Tawraatu feehaa hukmul laahi summa yatawallawna mim ba’di zaalik; wa maaa ulaaa’ika bilmu’mineen (section 6)
44. Innaaa anzalnat Tawraata feehaa hudanw wa noor; yahkumu bihan Nabiyyoonal lazeena aslamoo lillazeena haadoo war rabbaaniyyoona wal ahbaaru bimas tuhfizoo min Kitaabil laahi wa kaanoo ‘alaihi shuhadaaa’; falaa takhshawun naasa wakhshawni wa laa tashtaroo bi aayaatee samanan qaleelaa; wa mal lam yahkum bimaaa anzalal laahu fa ulaaa’ika humul kaafiroon
45. Wa katabnaa ‘alaihim feehaaa annan nafsa binnafsi wal’aina bil’aini wal anfa bilanfi wal uzuna bil uzuni wassinna bissinni waljurooha qisaas; faman tasaddaqa bihee fahuwa kaffaaratul lah; wa mal lam yahkum bimaaa anzalal laahu fa ulaaa’ika humuz zalimoon
46. Wa qaffainaa ‘alaaa aasaaarihim bi ‘Eesab ni Maryama musaddiqal limaa baina yadaihi minat Tawraati wa aatainaahul Injeela feehi hudanw wa noorunw wa musaddiqal limaa baina yadaihi minat Tawraati wa hudanw wa maw’izatal lilmuttaqeen
47. Walyahkum Ahlul Injeeli bimaaa anzalal laahu feeh; wa mal lam yahkum bimaaa anzalal laahu fa ulaaa’ika humul faasiqoon
48. Wa anzalnaa ilaikal Kitaaba bilhaqqi musaddiqallimaa baina yadaihi minal Kitaabi wa muhaiminan ‘alaihi fahkum bainahum bimaa anzalal laahu wa laa tattabi’ ahwaaa’ahum ‘ammaa jaaa’aka minal haqq; likullin ja’alnaa minkum shir’atanw wa minhaajaa; wa law shaaa’al laahu laja’alakum ummatanw waahidatanw wa laakil liyabluwakum fee maa aataakum fastabiqul khairaat; ilal laahi marji’ukum jamee’an fayunab bi’ukum bimaa kuntum feehi takhtalifoon
49. Wa anih kum bainahum bimaaa anzalal laahu wa laa tattabi’ ahwaaa’ahum wahzarhum ai yaftinooka ‘am ba’di maaa anzalal laahu ilaika fa in tawallaw fa’lam annamaa yureedul laahu ai yuseebahum biba’di zunoobihim; wa inna kaseeram minan naasi lafaasiqoon
50. Afahukmal jaahiliyyati yabghoon; wa man ahsanu minal laahi hukmal liqawminy yooqinoon (section 7)
51. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo laa tattakhizul Yahooda wan nasaaraaa awliyaaa’; ba’duhum awliyaaa’u ba’d; wa mai yatawallahum minkum fa innahoo minhum; innal laaha laa yahdil qawmaz zaalimeen
52. Fataral lazeena fee quloobihim maraduny yusaari’oona feehim yaqooloona nakhshaaa an tuseebanaa daaa’irah; fa’asallaahu ai yaatiya bilfathi aw amrim min ‘indihee fa yusbihoo ‘alaa maaa asarroo feee anfusihim naadimeen
53. Wa yaqoolul lazeena aamanooo ahaaa’ulaaa’il lazeena aqsamoo billaahi jahda aimaanihim innahum lama’akum; habitat a’maaluhum fa asbahoo khaasireen
54. Yaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo mai yartadda minkum ‘an deenihee fasawfa ya’tillaahu biqawminy yuhibbuhum wa yuhibboonahoo azillatin ‘alal mu’mineena a’izzatin ‘alal kaafireena yujaahidoona fee sabeelil laahi wa laa yakhaafoona lawmata laaa’im; zaalika fadlul laahi yu’teehi mai yashaaa’; wallaahu Waasi’un ‘Aleem
55. Innamaa waliyyukumul laahu wa Rasooluhoo wal lazeena aamanul lazeena yuqeemoonas Salaata wa yu’toonaz Zakaata wa hum raaki’oon
56. Wa mai yatawallal laaha wa Rasoolahoo wallazeena aamanoo fa inna hizbal laahi humul ghaaliboon (section 8)
57. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo laa tattakhizul lazeenat takhazoo deenakum huzuwanw wa la’ibam minal lazeena ootul Kitaaba min qablikum walkuffaara awliyaaa’; wattaqul laaha in kuntum muu’mineen
58. Wa izaa naadaitum ilas Salaatit takhazoohaa huzu wan’w wa la’ibaa; zaalika biannnahum qawmul laa ya’qiloon
59. Qul yaaa Ahlal Kitaabi hal tanqimoona minnaaa illaaa an aamannaa billaahi wa maaa unzila ilainaa wa maa unzila min qablu wa annna aksarakum faasiqoon
60. Qul hal unabbi’ukum bisharrim min zaalika masoobatan ‘indal laah; malla’ana hul laahu wa ghadiba ‘alaihi wa ja’ala minhumul qiradata wal khanaazeera wa ‘abadat Taaghoot; ulaaa’ika sharrum makaananw wa adallu ‘an Sawaaa’is Sabeel
61. Wa izaa jaaa’ookum qaalooo aamannaa wa qad dakhaloo bilkufri wa hum qad kharajoo bih; wallaahu a’lamu bimaa kaanoo yaktumoon
62. Wa taraa kaseeram minhum yusaari’oona fil ismi wal’udwaani wa aklihimus suht; labi’sa maa kaanoo ya’maloon
63. Law laa yanhaahumur rabbaaniyyoona wal ahbaaru ‘an qawlihimul ismaa wa aklihimus suht; labi’sa maa kaanoo yasna’oon
64. Wa qaalatil Yahoodu Yadullaahi maghloolah; ghullat aideehim wa lu’inoo bimaa qaaloo; bal yadaahu mabsoo tataani yunfiqu kaifa yashaaa’; wa la yazeedanna kaseeramm minhum maaa unzila ilaika mir Rabbika tughyaananw wa kufraa; wa alqainaa bainahumul ‘adaawata wal baghdaaa a’ ilaa Yawmil Qiyaamah; kullamaaa awqadoo naaral lilharbi at fa-ahal laah; wa yas’awna fil ardi fasaadaa; wal laahu laa yuhibbul mufsideen
65. Wa law anna Ahlal Kitaabi aamanoo wattaqaw lakaffarnaa ‘anhum saiyiaatihim wa la adkhalnaahu Jannaatin Na’eem
66. Wa law annahum aqaamut Tawraata wal Injeela wa maaa unzila ilaihim mir Rabbihim la akaloo min fawqihim wa min tahti arjulihim; minhum ummatum muqta sidatunw wa kaseerum minhum saaa’a maa ya’maloon (section 9)
67. Yaaa aiyuhar Rasoolu balligh maaa unzila ilaika mir Rabbika wa il lam taf’al famaaa ballaghta Risaalatah; wallaahu ya’simuka minan naas; innal laaha laa yahdil qawmal kaafireen
68. Qul yaaa Ahlal Kitaabi lastum ‘alaa shai’in hattaa tuqeemut Tawraata wal Injeela wa maaa unzila ilaikum mir Rabbikum; wa layazeedanna kaseeram minhum maa unzila ilaika mir Rabbika tugh yaananw wa kufran falaa taasa ‘alal qawmil kaafireen
69. Innal lazeena aamanoo wallazeena haadoo was saabi’oona wan Nasaaraa man aamana billaahi wal yawmil Aakhiri wa ‘amila saalihan falaa khawfun ‘alaihim wa laa hum yahzanoon
70. Laqad akhaznaa meesaaqa Banee Israaa’eela wa arsalnaaa ilaihim Rusulan kullamaa jaaa’ahum Rasoolum bimaa laa tahwaaa anfusuhum fareeqan kazzaboo wa fareeqany yaqtuloon
71. Wa hasibooo allaa takoona fitnatun fa’amoo wa sammoo summa taabal laahu ‘alaihim summa ‘amoo wa sammoo kaseerum minhum; wallaahu baseerum bimaa ya’maloon
72. Laqad kafaral lazeena qaalooo innal laaha Huwal maseehub nu Maryama wa qaalal Maseehu yaa Baneee Israaa’eela u’budul laaha Rabbee wa Rabbakum innnahoo many-yushrik billaahi faqad harramal laahu ‘alaihil jannata wa maa waahun Naaru wa maa lizzaalimeena min ansaar
73. laqad kafaral lazeena qaalooo innal laaha saalisu salaasah; wa maa min ilaahin illaaa Ilaahunw Waahid; wa illam yantahoo ‘ammaa yaqooloona layamas sannal lazeena kafaroo minhum ‘azaabun aleem
74. Afalaa yatooboona ilal laahi wa yastaghfiroonah; wallaahu Ghafoorur Raheem
75. Mal Maseehub nu Maryama illaa Rasoolun qad khalat min qablihir Rusulu wa ummuhoo siddeeqatun kaanaa yaa kulaanit ta’aam; unzur kaifa nubaiyinu lahumul Aayaati summan zur annaa yu’fakoon
76. Qul ata’budoona min doonil laahi maa laa yamliku lakum darranw wa laa naf’aa; wallaahu Huwas Samee’ul ‘Aleem
77. Qul yaaa Ahlal Kitaabi laa taghloo fee deenikum ghairal haqqi wa laa tattabi’ooo ahwaaa’a qawmin qad dalloo min qablu wa adalloo kaseeranw wa dalloo ‘an Sawaaa’is Sabeel (section 10)
78. Lu’inal lazeena kafaroo mim Baneee israaa’eela ‘alaa lisaani Daawooda wa ‘Eesab ni Maryam; zaalika bimaa ‘asaw wa kaanoo ya’tadoon
79. Kaanoo laa yatanaahawna ‘am munkarin fa’alooh; labi’sa maa kaanoo yafa’loon
80. Taraa kaseeram minhum yatawallawnal lazeena kafaroo; labi’sa maa qaddamat lahum anfusuhum an sakhital laahu ‘alaihim wa fil ‘azaabi hum khaalidoon
81. Wa law kaanoo yu’minoona billaahi wan nabiyyi wa maaa unzila ilaihi mattakhazoohum awliyaaa’a wa laakinna kaseeram minhum faasiqoon (End Juz 6)
82. Latajidanna ashad dan naasi ‘adaawatal lillazeena aamanul Yahooda wallazeena ashrakoo wa latajidanna aqrabahum mawaddatal lil lazeena aamanul lazeena qaalooo innaa Nasaaraa; zaalika bi anna minhum qiseeseena wa ruhbaananw wa annahum laa yastakbiroon
83. Wa izaa sami’oo maaa unzila ilar Rasooli taraaa a’yunahum tafeedu minad dam’i mimmmaa ‘arafoo minalhaqq; yaqooloona Rabbanaaa aamannaa faktubnaa ma’ash shaahideen
84. Wa maa lanaa laa nu’minu billaahi wa maa jaaa’anaa minal haqqi wa natma’u ai yudkhilanaa Rabbunaa ma’al qawmis saaliheen
85. Fa asaabahumul laahu bimaa qaaloo Jannnaatin tajree min tahtihal anhaaru khaalideena feehaa; wa zaalika jazaaa’ul muhsineen
86. Wallazeena kafaroo wa kazzaboo bi Aayaatinaaa ulaaa’ika Ashaabul Jaheem (section 11)
87. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo laa tuharrimoo taiyibaati maaa ahallal laahu lakum wa laa ta’tadooo; innal laaha laa yuhibbul mu’tadeen
88. Wa kuloo mimmaa razaqakumul laahu halaalan taiyibaa; wattaqul laahallazeee antum bihee mu’minoon
89. Laa yu’aakhizukumul laahu billaghwi feee aimaanikum wa laakiny yu’aakhizukumul bimaa ‘aqqattumul aimaana a kaffaara tuhooo it’aamu ‘asharati masaakeena min awsati maa tut’imoona ahleekum aw kiswatuhum aw tahreeru raqabatin famallam yajid fa Siyaamu salaasati aiyaam; zaalika kaffaaratu aimaanikum izaa halaftum; wahfazooo aimaanakum; kazaalika yubaiyinul laahu lakum Aayaatihee la’allakum tashkuroon
90. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanooo innamal khamru walmaisiru wal ansaabu wal azlaamu rijsum min ‘amalish shaitaani fajtaniboohu la’al lakum tuflihoon
91. Innamaa yureedush Shaitaanu ai yooqi’a bainakumul ‘adaawata wal baghdaaa’a fil khamri wal maisiri wa yasuddakum ‘an zikril laahi wa ‘anis Salaati fahal antum muntahoon
92. Wa atee’ul laaha wa atee’ur Rasoola wahzaroo; fa in tawal laitum fa’lamooo annamaa ‘alaa Rasoolinal balaaghul mubeen
93. Laisa ‘alal lazeena aamanoo wa ‘amilus saalihaati junaahun feemaa ta’imooo izaa mat taqaw wa aamanoo wa ‘amilus saalihaati summat taqaw wa aamanoo summat taqaw wa ahsanoo; wallaahu yuhibbul muhsineen
94. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo la yabluwannnakumul laahu bishai’im minas saidi tanaaluhooo aideekum wa rimaahukum liya’lamal laahu mai yakhaafuhoo bilghaib; famani’ tadaa ba’da zaalika falahoo ‘azaabun aleem (section 12)
95. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo laa taqtulus saida wa antum hurum; wa man qatalahoo minkum mut’am midan fajazaaa’um mislu maa qatala minanna’ami yahkumu bihee zawaa ‘adlim minkum hadyam baalighal Ka’bati aw kaffaaratun ta’aamu masaakeena aw ‘adlu zaalika Siyaamal liyazooqa wabaala amrih; ‘afal laahu ‘ammaa salaf; wa man ‘aada fayanta qimul laahu minh; wallaahu ‘azeezun zuntiqaam
96. Uhilla lakum saidul bahri wa ta’aamuhoo mataa’al lakum wa lissaiyaarati wa hurrima ‘alaikum saidul barri maa dumtum hurumaa; wattaqul laahal lazeee ilaihi tuhsharoon
97. Ja’alal laahul Ka’batal Baital Haraama qiyaamal linnaasi wash Shahral Haraama walhadya walqalaaa’id; zaalika lita’lamooo annal laaha ya’lamu maa fis samaawaati wa maa fil ardi wa annal laaha bikulli shai’in ‘Aleem
98. I’lamooo annal laaha shadeedul ‘iqaabi wa annal laaha Ghafoorur Raheem
99. Maa ‘alar Rasooli illal balaagh; wallaahu ya’lamu maa tubdoona wa maa taktumoon
100. Qul laa yastawil khabeesu wattaiyibu wa law a’jabaka kasratul khabees; fattaqul laaha yaaa ulil albaabi la’allakum tuflihoon (section 13)
101. yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo laa tas’aloo ‘an ashyaaa’a in tubda lakum tasu’kum wa in tas’aloo ‘anhaa heena yunazzalul Qur’aanu tubda lakum; ‘afallaahu ‘anhaa; wallaahu Ghafoorun Haleem
102. Qad sa alahaa qawmum min qablikum summa asbahoo bihaa kaafireen
103. Maa ja’alal laahu mim baheeratinw wa laa saaa’ibatinw wa laa waseelatinw wa laa haaminw wa laakinnal lazeena kafaroo yaftaroona ‘alallaahil kazib; wa aksaruhum laa ya’qiloon
104. Wa izaa qeela lahum ta’aalaw ilaa maaa anzalallaahu wa ilar Rasooli qaaloo hasbunaa maa wajadnaa ‘alaihi aabaaa’anaa; awa law kaana aabaaa’uhum laa ya’lamoona shai’anw wa laa yahtadoon
105. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo ‘alaikum anfusakum laa yadurrukum man dalla izah tadaitum; ilal laahi marji’ukum jamee’an fayunabbi’ukum bimaa kuntum ta’maloon
106. Yaaa aiyuhal lazeena aamanoo shahaadatu bainikum izaa hadara ahadakumul mawtu heenal wasiyyatis naani zawaa ‘adlim minkum aw aakharaani min ghairikum in antum darabtum fil ardi fa asaabatkum museebatul mawt; tahbi soonahumaa mim ba’dis Salaati fa yuqsimaani billaahi inirtabtum laa nashtaree bihee samananw wa law kaana zaa qurbaa wa laa naktumu shahaadatal laahi innaaa izal laminal aasimeen
107. Fa in ‘usira ‘alaaa annahumas tahaqqaaa isman fa aakharaani yaqoomaani maqaamahumaa minal lazeenas tahaqqa ‘alaihimul awlayaani fa yuqsimaani billaahi lashahaadatunaaa ahaqqu min shahaadatihimaaa wa ma’tadainaaa innaaa izal laminaz zaalimeen
108. Zaalika adnaaa ai ya’too bishshahaadati ‘alaa wajhihaaa aw yakhaafooo an turadda aimaanum ba’da aimaanihim; wattaqul laaha wasma’oo; wallaahu laa yahdil qawmal faasiqeen (section 14)
109. yawma yajma’ul laahur Rusula fa yaqoolu maazaaa ujibtum qaaloo laa ‘ilma lanaa innaka Anta ‘Allaamul Ghuyoob
110. Iz qaalal laahu yaa ‘Eesab-na-Maryamaz kur ni’matee ‘alaika wa ‘alaa waalidatika; iz aiyattuka bi Roohil Qudusi tukallimun naasa fil mahdi wa kahlanw wa iz ‘allamtukal kitaaba wal Hikmata wa Tawraata wal Injeela wa iz Takhluqu minat teeni kahai ‘atit tairi bi iznee fatanfukhu feeha fatakoonu tairam bi iznee wa tubri’ul akmaha wal abrasa bi iznee wa iz tukhrijul mawtaa bi iznee wa iz kafaftu Baneee Israaa’eela ‘anka iz ji’tahum bil baiyinaati fa qaalal lazeena kafaroo minhum in haazaaa illaa sihrum mubeen
111. Wa iz awhaitu ilal hawaariyyeena an aaminoo bee wa bi Rasoolee qaalooo aamannaa washhad bi annanaa muslimoon
112. Iz qaalal hawaariyyoona yaa ‘Eesab na Maryama hal yastatee’u Rabbuka ai yunaz zila alainna maaa’idatam minas samaaa’i qaalat taqul laaha in kuntum mu’mineen
113. Qaaloo nureedu an naakula minhaa wa tatama ‘inna quloo bunaa wa na’lama an qad sadaqtana wa nakoona ‘alaihaa minash shaahideen
114. Qaala ‘Eesab nu Maryamal laahumma Rabbanaaa anzil ‘alainaa maaa’idatam minas samaaa’i takoonu lanaa ‘eedal li awwalinaa wa aakhirinaa wa Aayatam minka warzuqnaa wa Anta khairur raaziqeen
115. Qaalal laahu innee munaz ziluhaa ‘alaikum famai yakfur ba’du minkum fa inneee u’azzibuhoo ‘azaabal laaa u’azzibuhooo ahadam minal ‘aalameen (section 15)
116. Wa iz qaalal laahu yaa ‘Eesab na Maryama ‘a-anta qulta linnaasit takhizoonee wa ummiya ilaahaini min doonil laahi qaala Subhaanaka  maa yakoonu leee an aqoola maa laisa lee bihaqq; in kuntu qultuhoo faqad ‘alimtah; ta’lamu maa fee nafsee wa laaa a’alamu maa fee nafsik; innaka Anta ‘Allaamul Ghuyoob
117. Maa qultu lahum illaa maaa amartanee bihee ani’budul laaha Rabbeee wa Rabbakum; wa kuntu ‘alaihim shaheedam maa dumtu feehim falammaa tawaffaitanee kunta Antar Raqeeba ‘alaihim; wa Anta ‘alaa kulli shai’in Shaheed
118. In tu’azzibhum fa innahum ibaaduka wa in taghfir lahum fa innaka Antal ‘Azzezul Hakeem
119. Qaalal laahu haaza yawmu yanfa’us saadiqeena sidquhum; lahum janaatunn tajree min tahtihal anhaaru khaalideena feehaaa abadaa; radiyal laahu ‘anhum wa radoo ‘anh; zaalikal fawzul ‘azeem
120. Lillaahi mulkus samaawaati wal ardi wa maa feehinn; wa Huwa ‘alaa kulli shai’inn Qadeer (section 16)

Translation

In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.

1. O ye who believe! Fulfil your indentures. The beast of cattle is made lawful unto you (for food) except that which is announced unto you (herein), game being unlawful when ye are on the pilgrimage. Lo! Allah ordaineth that which pleaseth Him.
2. O ye who believe! Profane not Allah’s monuments nor the Sacred Month nor the offerings nor the garlands, nor those repairing to the Sacred House, seeking the grace and pleasure of their Lord. But when ye have left the sacred territory, then go hunting (if ye will). And let not your hatred of a folk who (once) stopped your going to the inviolable place of worship seduce you to transgress; but help ye one another unto righteousness and pious duty. Help not one another unto sin and transgression, but keep your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is severe in punishment.
3. Forbidden unto you (for food) are carrion and blood and swineflesh, and that which hath been dedicated unto any other than Allah, and the strangled, and the dead through beating, and the dead through falling from a height, and that which hath been killed by (the goring of) horns, and the devoured of wild beasts, saving that which ye make lawful (by the death-stroke), and that which hath been immolated unto idols. And (forbidden is it) that ye swear by the divining arrows. This is an abomination. This day are those who disbelieve in despair of (ever harming) your religion; so fear them not, fear Me! This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you, and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam. Whoso is forced by hunger, not by will, to sin: (for him) lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
4. They ask thee ( O Muhammad) what is made lawful for them. Say: (all) good things are made lawful for you. And those beasts and birds of prey which ye have trained as hounds are trained, ye teach them that which Allah taught you; so eat of that which they catch for you and mention Allah’s name upon it, and observe your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is swift to take account.
5. This day are (all) good things made lawful for you. The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them. And so are the virtuous women of the believers and the virtuous women of those who received the Scripture before you (lawful for you) when ye give them their marriage portions and live with them in honour, not in fornication, nor taking them as secret concubines. Whoso denieth the faith, his work is vain and he will be among the losers in the Hereafter.
6. O ye who believe! When ye rise up for prayer, wash you faces, and your hands up to the elbows, and lightly rub your heads and (wash) your feet up to the ankles. And if ye are unclean, purify yourselves. And if ye are sick or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have had contact with women, and ye find not water, then go to clean, high ground and rub your faces and your hands with some of it. Allah would not place a burden on you, but He would purify you and would perfect His grace upon you, that ye may give thanks.
7. Remember Allah’s grace upon you and His covenant by which He bound you when ye said: We hear and we obey; And keep your duty to Allah. Lo! He knoweth what is in the breasts (of men).
8. O ye who believe! Be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity, and let not hatred of any people seduce you that ye deal not justly. Deal justly, that is nearer to your duty. Observe your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is Informed of what ye do.
9. Allah hath promised those who believe and do good works: Theirs will be forgiveness and immense reward.
10. And they who disbelieve and deny Our revelations, such are rightful owners of hell.
11. O ye who believe! Remember Allah’s favour unto you, how a people were minded to stretch out their hands against you but He withheld their hands from you; and keep your duty to Allah. In Allah let believers put their trust.
12. Allah made a covenant of old with the Children of Israel and We raised among them twelve chieftains, and Allah said: Lo! I am with you. If ye establish worship and pay the poor-due, and believe in My messengers and support them, and lend unto Allah a kindly loan, surely I shall remit your sins, and surely I shall bring you into Gardens underneath which rivers flow. Whoso among you disbelieveth after this will go astray from a plain road.
13. And because of their breaking their covenant, We have cursed them and made hard their hearts. They change words from their context and forget a part of that whereof they were admonished. Thou wilt not cease to discover treachery from all save a few of them. But bear with them and pardon them. Lo! Allah loveth the kindly.
14. And with those who say: “Lo! we are Christians,” We made a covenant, but they forgot a part of that whereof they were admonished. Therefor We have stirred up enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection, when Allah will inform them of their handiwork.
15. O People of the Scripture! Now hath Our messenger come unto you, expounding unto you much of that which ye used to hide in the Scripture, and forgiving much. now hath come unto you light from Allah and plain Scripture,
16. Whereby Allah guideth him who seeketh His good pleasure unto paths of peace. He bringeth them out of darkness unto light by His decree, and guideth them unto a straight path.
17. They indeed have disbelieved who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. Say: Who then can do aught against Allah, if He had willed to destroy the Messiah son of Mary, and his mother and everyone on earth? Allah’s is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them. He createth what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things.
18. The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones. Say: Why then doth He chastise you for your sins? Nay, ye are but mortals of His creating. He forgiveth whom He will, and chastiseth whom He will. Allah’s is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and unto Him is the journeying.
19. O People of the Scripture! Now hath Our messenger come unto you to make things plain unto you after an interval (of cessation) of the messengers, lest ye should say: There came not unto us a messenger of cheer nor any warner. Now hath a messenger of cheer and a warner come unto you. Allah is Able to do all things.
20. And (remember) when Moses said unto his people: O my people! Remember Allah’s favour unto you, how He placed among you prophets, and He made you kings, and gave you that (which) He gave not to any (other) of (His) creatures.
21. O my people! Go into the holy land which Allah hath ordained for you. Turn not in flight, for surely ye turn back as losers:
22. They said: O Moses! Lo! a giant people (dwell) therein and lo! we go not in till they go forth from thence. When they go forth from thence, then we will enter (not till then).
23. Then out spake two of those who feared (their Lord, men) unto whom Allah had been gracious: Enter in upon them by the gate, for if ye enter by it, lo! ye will be victorious. So put your trust (in Allah) if ye are indeed believers.
24. They said: O Moses! We will never enter (the land) while they are in it. So go thou and thy Lord and fight! We will sit here.
25. He said: My Lord! I have control of none but myself and my brother, so distinguish between us and the wrong-doing folk.
26. (Their Lord) said: For this the land will surely be forbidden them for forty years that they will wander in the earth, bewildered. So grieve not over the wrongdoing folk.
27. But recite unto them with truth the tale of the two sons of Adam, how they offered each a sacrifice, and it was accepted from the one of them and it was not accepted from the other. (The one) said: I will surely kill thee. (The other) answered: Allah accepteth only from those who ward off (evil).
28. Even if thou stretch out thy hand against me to kill me, I shall not stretch out my hand against thee to kill thee, lo! I fear Allah, the Lord of the Worlds.
29. Lo! I would rather thou shouldst bear the punishment of the sin against me and thine own sin and become one of the owners of the fire. That is the reward of evil-doers.
30. But (the other’s) mind imposed on him the killing of his brother, so he slew him and became one of the losers.
31. Then Allah sent a raven scratching up the ground, to show him how to hide his brother’s naked corpse. He said: Woe unto me! Am I not able to be as this raven and so hide my brother’s naked corpse? And he became repentant.
32. For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah’s Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth.
33. The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;
34. Save those who repent before ye overpower them. For know that Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
35. O ye who believe! Be mindful of your duty to Allah, and seek the way of approach unto Him, and strive in His way in order that ye may succeed.
36. As for those who disbelieve, lo! if all that is in the earth were theirs, and as much again therewith, to ransom them from the doom on the Day of Resurrection, it would not be accepted from them. Theirs will be a painful doom.
37. They will wish to come forth from the Fire, but they will not come forth from it. Theirs will be a lasting doom.
38. As for the thief, both male and female, cut off their hands. It is the reward of their own deeds, an exemplary punishment from Allah. Allah is Mighty, Wise.
39. But whoso repenteth after his wrongdoing and amendeth, lo! Allah will relent toward him. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
40. Knowest thou not that unto Allah belongeth the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth? He punisheth whom He will, and forgiveth whom He will. Allah is Able to do all things.
41. O Messenger! Let not them grieve thee who vie one with another in the race to disbelief, of such as say with their mouths: “We believe,” but their hearts believe not, and of the Jews: listeners for the sake of falsehood, listeners on behalf of other folk who come not unto thee, changing words from their context and saying: If this be given unto you, receive it, but if this be not given unto you, then beware! He whom Allah doometh unto sin, thou (by thine efforts) wilt avail him naught against Allah. Those are they for whom the Will of Allah is that He cleanse not their hearts. Theirs in the world will be ignominy, and in the Hereafter an awful doom;
42. Listeners for the sake of falsehood! Greedy for illicit gain! If then they have recourse unto thee (Muhammad) judge between them or disclaim jurisdiction. If thou disclaimest jurisdiction, then they cannot harm thee at all. But if thou judgest, judge between them with equity. Lo! Allah loveth the equitable.
43. How come they unto thee for judgment when they have the Torah, wherein Allah hath delivered judgment (for them)? Yet even after that they turn away. Such (folk) are not believers.
44. Lo! We did reveal the Torah, wherein is guidance and a light, by which the prophets who surrendered (unto Allah) judged the Jews, and the rabbis and the priests (judged) by such of Allah’s Scripture as they were bidden to observe, and thereunto were they witnesses. So fear not mankind, but fear Me. And My revelations for a little gain. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are disbelievers.
45. And We prescribed for them therein: The life for the life, and the eye for the eye, and the nose for the nose, and the ear for the ear, and the tooth for the tooth, and for wounds retaliation. But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation for him. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are wrong-doers.
46. And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah – a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil).
47. Let the People of the Gospel judge by that which Allah hath revealed therein. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are evil-livers.
48. And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it. So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires away from the truth which hath come unto thee. For each We have appointed a divine law and a traced-out way. Had Allah willed He could have made you one community. But that He may try you by that which He hath given you (He hath made you as ye are). So vie one with another in good works. Unto Allah ye will all return, and He will then inform you of that wherein ye differ.
49. So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires, but beware of them lest they seduce thee from some part of that which Allah hath revealed unto thee. And if they turn away, then know that Allah’s Will is to smite them for some sin of theirs. Lo! many of mankind are evil-livers.
50. Is it a judgment of the time of (pagan) ignorance that they are seeking? Who is better than Allah for judgment to a people who have certainty (in their belief)?
51. O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.
52. And thou seest those in whose heart is a disease race toward them, saying: We fear lest a change of fortune befall us. And it may happen that Allah will vouchsafe (unto thee) the victory, or a commandment from His presence. Then will they repent them of their secret thoughts.
53. Then will the believers say (unto the people of the Scripture): are these they who swore by Allah their most binding oaths that they were surely with you? Their works have failed, and they have become the losers.
54. O ye who believe! Whoso of you becometh a renegade from his religion, (know that in his stead) Allah will bring a people whom He loveth and who love Him, humble toward believers, stern toward disbelievers, striving in the way of Allah, and fearing not the blame of any blamer. Such is the grace of Allah which He giveth unto whom He will. Allah is All-Embracing, All-Knowing.
55. Your guardian can be only Allah; and His messenger and those who believe, who establish worship and pay the poordue, and bow down (in prayer).
56. And whoso taketh Allah and His messenger and those who believe for guardian (will know that), lo! the party of Allah, they are the victorious.
57. O Ye who believe! Choose not for guardians such of those who received the Scripture before you, and of the disbelievers, as make a jest and sport of your religion. But keep your duty to Allah if ye are true believers.
58. And when ye call to prayer they take it for a jest and sport. That is because they are a folk who understand not.
59. Say: O People of the Scripture! Do ye blame us for aught else than that we believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed aforetime, and because most of you are evil-livers?
60. Shall I tell thee of a worse (case) than theirs for retribution with Allah? (Worse is the case of him) whom Allah hath cursed, him on whom His wrath hath fallen and of whose sort Allah hath turned some to apes and swine, and who serveth idols. Such are in worse plight and further astray from the plain road.
61. When they come unto you (Muslims), they say: We believe; but they came in unbelief and they went out in the same; and Allah knoweth best what they were hiding.
62. And thou seest many of them vying one with another in sin and transgression and their devouring of illicit gain. Verily evil is what they do.
63. Why do not the rabbis and the priests forbid their evil-speaking and their devouring of illicit gain? Verily evil is their handiwork.
64. The Jews say: Allah’s hand is fettered. Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so. Nay, but both His hands are spread out wide in bounty. He bestoweth as He will. That which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord is certain to increase the contumacy and disbelief of many of them, and We have cast among them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection. As often as they light a fire for war, Allah extinguisheth it. Their effort is for corruption in the land, and Allah loveth not corrupters.
65. If only the People of the Scripture would believe and ward off (evil), surely We should remit their sins from them and surely We should bring them into Gardens of Delight.
66. If they had observed the Torah and the Gospel and that which was revealed unto them from their Lord, they would surely have been nourished from above them and from beneath their feet. Among them there are people who are moderate, but many of them are of evil conduct.
67. O Messenger! Make known that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord, for if thou do it not, thou wilt not have conveyed His message. Allah will protect thee from mankind. Lo! Allah guideth not the disbelieving folk.
68. Say O People of the Scripture! Ye have naught (of guidance) till ye observe the Torah and the Gospel and that which was revealed unto you from your Lord. That which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) from thy Lord is certain to increase the contumacy and disbelief of many of them. But grieve not for the disbelieving folk.
69. Lo! those who believe, and those who are Jews, and Sabaeans, and Christians – Whosoever believeth in Allah and the Last Day and doeth right – there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve.
70. We made a covenant of old with the Children of Israel and We sent unto them messengers. As often as a messenger came unto them with that which their souls desired not (they became rebellious). Some (of them) they denied and some they slew.
71. They thought no harm would come of it, so they were wilfully blind and deaf. And afterward Allah turned (in mercy) toward them. Now (even after that) are many of them wilfully blind and deaf. Allah is Seer of what they do.
72. They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said: O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hath forbidden paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evil-doers there will be no helpers.
73. They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three; when there is no Allah save the One Allah. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve.
74. Will they not rather turn unto Allah and seek forgiveness of Him? For Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
75. The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how We make the revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away!
76. Say: Serve ye in place of Allah that which possesseth for you neither hurt nor use? Allah it is Who is the Hearer, the Knower.
77. Say: O People of the Scripture! Stress not in your religion other than the truth, and follow not the vain desires of folk who erred of old and led many astray, and erred from a plain road.
78. Those of the Children of Israel who went astray were cursed by the tongue of David, and of Jesus, son of Mary. That was because they rebelled and used to transgress.
79. They restrained not one another from the wickedness they did. Verily evil was that they used to do!
80. Thou seest many of them making friends with those who disbelieve. Surely ill for them is that which they themselves send on before them: that Allah will be wroth with them and in the doom they will abide.
81. If they believed in Allah and the Prophet and that which is revealed unto him, they would not choose them for their friends. But many of them are of evil conduct.
82. Thou wilt find the most vehement of mankind in hostility to those who believe (to be) the Jews and the idolaters. And thou wilt find the nearest of them in affection to those who believe (to be) those who say: Lo! We are Christians. That is because there are among them priests and monks, and because they are not proud.
83. When they listen to that which hath been revealed unto the messengers, thou seest their eyes overflow with tears because of their recognition of the Truth. They say: Our Lord, we believe. Inscribe us as among the witnesses.
84. How should we not believe in Allah and that which hath come unto us of the Truth. And (how should we not) hope that our Lord will bring us in along with righteous folk?
85. Allah hath rewarded them for that their saying – Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide for ever. That is the reward of the good.
86. But those who disbelieve and deny Our revelations, they are owners of hell-fire.
87. O ye who believe! Forbid not the good things which Allah hath made lawful for you, and transgress not, Lo! Allah loveth not transgressors.
88. Eat of that which Allah hath bestowed on you as food lawful and good, and keep your duty to Allah in Whom ye are believers.
89. Allah will not take you to task for that which is unintentional in your oaths, but He will take you to task for the oaths which ye swear in earnest. The expiation thereof is the feeding of ten of the needy with the average of that wherewith ye feed your own folk, or the clothing of them, or the liberation of a slave, and for him who findeth not (the wherewithal to do so) then a three days’ fast. This is the expiation of your oaths when ye have sworn; and keep your oaths. Thus Allah expoundeth unto you His revelations in order that ye may give thanks.
90. O ye who believe! Strong drink and games of chance and idols and divining arrows are only an infamy of Satan’s handiwork. Leave it aside in order that ye may succeed.
91. Satan seeketh only to cast among you enmity and hatred by means of strong drink and games of chance, and to turn you from remembrance of Allah and from (His) worship. Will ye then have done?
92. Obey Allah and obey the messenger, and beware! But if ye turn away, then know that the duty of Our messenger is only plain conveyance (of the message).
93. There shall be no sin (imputed) unto those who believe and do good works for what they may have eaten (in the past). So be mindful of your duty (to Allah), and believe, and do good works; and again: be mindful of your duty, and believe; and once again: be mindful of your duty, and do right. Allah loveth the good.]
94. O ye who believe! Allah will surely try you somewhat (in the matter) of the game which ye take with your hands and your spears, that Allah may know him who feareth Him in secret. Whoso transgresseth after this, for him there is a painful doom.
95. O ye who believe! Kill no wild game while ye are on the pilgrimage. Whoso of you killeth it of set purpose he shall pay its forfeit in the equivalent of that which he hath killed, of domestic animals, the judge to be two men among you known for justice, (the forfeit) to be brought as an offering to the Ka’bah; or, for expiation, he shall feed poor persons, or the equivalent thereof in fasting, that he may taste the evil consequences of his deed. Allah forgiveth whatever (of this kind) may have happened in the past, but whoso relapseth, Allah will take retribution from him. Allah is Mighty, Able to Requite (the wrong).
96. To hunt and to eat the fish of the sea is made lawful for you, a provision for you and for seafarers; but to hunt on land is forbidden you so long as ye are on the pilgrimage. Be mindful of your duty to Allah, unto Whom ye will be gathered.
97. Allah hath appointed the Ka’bah, the Sacred House, a standard for mankind, and the Sacred Month and the offerings and the garlands. That is so that ye may know that Allah knoweth whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth, and that Allah is Knower of all things.
98. Know that Allah is severe in punishment, but that Allah (also) is Forgiving, Merciful.
99. The duty of the messenger is only to convey (the message). Allah knoweth what ye proclaim and what ye hide.’
100. Say: The evil and the good are not alike even though the plenty of the evil attract thee. So be mindful of your duty to Allah, O men of understanding, that ye may succeed.
101. O ye who believe! Ask not of things which, if they were made unto you, would trouble you; but if ye ask of them when the Qur’an is being revealed, they will be made known unto you. Allah pardoneth this, for Allah is Forgiving, Clement.
102. A folk before you asked (for such disclosures) and then disbelieved therein.
103. Allah hath not appointed anything in the nature of a Bahirah or a Sa’ibah or a Wasilah or a Hami, but those who disbelieve invent a lie against Allah. Most of them have no sense.
104. And when it is said unto them: Come unto that which Allah hath revealed and unto the messenger, they say: Enough for us is that wherein we found our fathers. What! Even though their fathers had no knowledge whatsoever, and no guidance?
105. O ye who believe! Ye have charge of your own souls. He who erreth cannot injure you if ye are rightly guided. Unto Allah ye will all return; and then He will inform you of what ye used to do.
106. O ye who believe! Let there be witnesses between you when death draweth nigh unto one of you, at the time of bequest – two witnesses, just men from among you, or two others from another tribe, in case ye are campaigning in the land and the calamity of death befall you. Ye shall empanel them both after the prayer, and, if ye doubt, they shall be made to swear by Allah (saying): We will not take a bribe, even though it were (on behalf of) a near kinsman nor will we hide the testimony of Allah, for then indeed we should be of the sinful.
107. But then, if it is afterwards ascertained that both of them merit (the suspicion of) sin, let two others take their place of those nearly concerned, and let them swear by Allah, (saying): Verily our testimony is truer than their testimony and we have not transgressed (the bounds of duty), for them indeed we should be of the evil-doers.
108. Thus it is more likely that they will bear true witness or fear that after their oaths the oaths (of others) will be taken. So be mindful of your duty (to Allah) and hearken. Allah guideth not the froward folk.
109. In the day when Allah gathereth together the messengers, and saith: What was your response (from mankind)? they say: We have no knowledge. Lo! Thou, only Thou art the Knower of Things Hidden,
110. When Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Remember My favour unto thee and unto thy mother; how I strengthened thee with the holy Spirit, so that thou spakest unto mankind in the cradle as in maturity; and how I taught thee the Scripture and Wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel; and how thou didst shape of clay as it were the likeness of a bird by My permission, and didst blow upon it and it was a bird by My permission, and thou didst heal him who was born blind and the leper by My permission; and how thou didst raise the dead by My permission; and how I restrained the Children of Israel from (harming) thee when thou camest unto them with clear proofs, and those of them who disbelieved exclaimed: This is naught else than mere magic;
111. And when I inspired the disciples, (saying): Believe in Me and in My messenger, they said: We believe. Bear witness that we have surrendered (unto Thee) “we are muslims”.
112. When the disciples said: O Jesus, son of Mary! Is thy Lord able to send down for us a table spread with food from heaven? He said: Observe your duty to Allah, if ye are true believers.
113. (They said:) We wish to eat thereof, that we may satisfy our hearts and know that thou hast spoken truth to us, and that thereof we may be witnesses.
114. Jesus, son of Mary, said: O Allah, Lord of us! Send down for us a table spread with food from heaven, that it may be a feast for us, for the first of us and for the last of us, and a sign from Thee. Give us sustenance, for Thou art the Best of Sustainers.
115. Allah said: Lo! I send it down for you. And whoso disbelieveth of you afterward, him surely will I punish with a punishment wherewith I have not punished any of (My) creatures.
116. And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden?
117. I spake unto them only that which Thou commandedst me, (saying): Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. I was a witness of them while I dwelt among them, and when Thou tookest me Thou wast the Watcher over them. Thou art Witness over all things.
118. If Thou punish them, lo! they are Thy slaves, and if Thou forgive them (lo! they are Thy slaves). Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Mighty, the Wise.
119. Allah saith: This is a day in which their truthfulness profiteth the truthful, for theirs are Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they are secure for ever, Allah taking pleasure in them and they in Him. That is the great triumph.
120. Unto Allah belongeth the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and whatsoever is therein, and He is Able to do all things.

[From Holy Quran Translation by Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall]

Background of revelation and a summary of subjects

This is the initial verse of Surah al-Ma’idah. As agreed upon, Surah al-Ma’idah is a Madani (Madinite) Surah and also the last among all Madani Chapters (Surah) so much so that some revered elders have identified this as the last Surah of the Qur’an itself. On the authority of narrations from Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar and Sayyidah Asma’ bint Yazid (رض) ، it appears in the Musnad of Ahmad that Surah al-Ma’idah was revealed to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) while in travel riding the she-camel named Adba’. As explained in the introduction to this Tafsir in Volume 1, there used to be a sense of being under some heavy weight, extraordinary and unexplained, at a time the Wahy (revelation) came to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . So, this is what happened as customary. When the she-camel could bear the phenomenon of unusual weight no more, he dismounted from her back. This journey is obviously the journey he made to perform his last Hajj as supported by some relevant reports. The Last Hajj took place in the tenth year of Hijrah. After his return from there, his blessed life in the mortal world lasted for about eighty more days. In al-Bahr al-Muhit, commentator Ibn Hayyan has said that some portions of Surah al-Ma’idah were revealed during the journey of Hudaybiyah, some oth¬ers during the journey of the Conquest of Makkah and still others dur¬ing the journey of the Last Hajj. This tells us that Surah al-Ma’idah has been revealed during the final stages of the revelation of the Qur’an – though, it may not be the very last Surah.

Ruh al-Ma’ani on the authority of Abu ` Ubaydh, cites a narration of ibn Habib and ` Atiyyah ibn Qays (رض) in which the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has been reported to have said:

Surah al-Ma’idah is from what has been revealed towards the last stage of the revelation of the Qura’n. So, take what has been made lawful there as lawful forever and take what has been made unlawful there as unlawful forever.

Referring to Mustadrak al-Hakim, Ibn Kathir cites a similar narra¬tion from Sayyidna Jubayr ibn Nufayr in which he has been reported to have called upon Sayyidah ` A’ishah (رض) soon after Hajj. She asked him: “Do you read Surah al-Ma’idah, 0 Jubayr?” He submitted: “I do.” Sayyidah A’ishah (رض) then said: “This is the last Surah of Holy Qur’an. The injunctions about things lawful and unlawful in it are Muhkam (of established meaning). The probability of any abrogation (Naskh) does not exist there. So, be specially particular about them.”

Like Surah Al-Nis-a’, Surah al-Ma’idah too carries many subsidiary injunctions relating to dealings and contracts. Accordingly, Ruh al-Ma` ani notices subject homogeneity in Surah al-Baqarah and Al-‘Imran because both of them mostly feature injunctions relating to Principles, Doctrines, Unicity, Prophethood, Doomsday and similar other basic concerns of importance. As for subsidiary injunctions, they appear there as corollaries. Regarding Surah Al-Nis-a’ and Surah al-Ma’idah, it can be said that they are homogeneous subject-wise because both of them describe subsidiary injunctions. Any description of basic princi-ples appears there by implication. In Surah al-Nisa’, emphasis has been laid on mutual dealings, particularly on rights servants of Allah have on each other (Huquq al-` Ibad). Then, in it, there are details of the rights of the husband and the wife, the rights of orphans and the rights of the parents and other relatives. In the very first verse of Surah al-Ma’idah, there appears the instruction to stand by all dealings made and pledges given. The words of the Verse: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَوْفُوا بِالْعُقُودِ (0 those who believe, fulfill the contracts) command that all such com¬mitments must be met. Therefore, Surah al-Ma’idah is also referred to as Surah al-` Uqud (Al-Bahr al-Muhit).

This Surah, specially its opening verse, has a special bearing on matters relating to mutual dealings and contractual agreements. Therefore, when the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) sent Sayyidna ` Amru ibn Hazm (رض) as the ` Amil (Governor) of Yaman, he gave him a written de¬cree of appointment at the head of which he had this verse written (Al Bahr al-Muhit).

Commentary

The first sentence of the first verse of this Surah is so comprehen¬sive that its proper discussion would deservedly go beyond thousands of pages. In fact, Muslim scholars and jurists have done exactly that. The verse says: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَوْفُوا بِالْعُقُودِ (0 those who believe, fulfill the contracts). Here, the very form of address: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ ( O those who believe …) helps to divert attention to the very crucial nature of the subject for the command being given here is centrally required by one’s faith. Then comes the command: أَوْفُوا بِالْعُقُودِ (fulfill the contracts). The word, ` al-` uqud’, used in the Qur’an is the plural form of al-‘aqd, the literal meaning of which is to tie. A contract which ties two individuals or groups to each other is also known as ` aqd. Thus, al-` uqud takes the meaning of al-` uhud or contracts.

Commentator Ibn Jarir has reported the consensus of revered exe¬getes among the Sahabah and Tabi’in on this approach. Imam al-Jassas explains that ` aqd (contract) or ` ahd (pledge) or Mu` ahadah (pact) are all applied to a transaction in which two parties have placed the responsibility of doing or not doing something on each other and to which both of them agree and are bound by. According to our recognized practice, this is what a contractual agreement is. Therefore, the essential meaning of the sentence is: Take the fulfilling of mutual contracts to be binding and necessary.

Now, we have to determine the nature of contracts meant here. The interpretations of commentators appear to be different, though outwardly only. Some say that it refers to the Covenant of Allah un¬der which His created beings are bound to believe in and obey Him, or they refer to pledges Allah has taken from His created beings regard¬ing His revealed injunctions of things lawful and unlawful. This is what has been reported from Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ۔ (رض) Others say that here it means the contracts people enter into with each other, such as, the Contract of Marriage and the Contract of Buying and Sell¬ing. Commentators Ibn Zayd and Zayd ibn Aslam have taken this very line of interpretation. Still others take contracts to mean sworn alliances and pacts which the tribes of Jahiliyyah entered into with each other for mutual assistance when needed. This is also the posi¬tion taken by Commentators such as Mujahid, RabI’ and Qatadah. But, the truth is that there is no contradiction or difference in what they have said. Instead, all these varied contracts come under the Qur’anic word, “al-` uqud”, appearing in this verse and the instruction to fulfill all of them comes from the Qur’an itself.

Therefore, Imam Raghib al-Isfahani has said that all kinds of contracts and binding agreements are included under the imperative of this word. He further divides these into three kinds as given below:

1. The Covenant which human beings have with their Creator who is Lord of all the worlds, such as, the pledge to believe in Him, to obey Him, or to observe the restrictions imposed by Him on matters and things lawful and unlawful.
2. The vow or promise or commitment one enters into with one’s own self, such as, to commit to fulfill a vow (nadhr) for something, or to bind oneself on oath that something will be done.
3. The contract that one human being enters with another which includes all contracts which bind two persons or two groups or parties or governments.

So, in the light of this verse, strict adherence to all permissible provisions and conditions which have been mutually agreed upon is man¬datory and all parties must observe and fulfill these. This covers all international pacts and treaties between governments, bilateral agree¬ments, all commitments, alliances, charters between groups and parties, also all sorts of contracts and deals between two human beings ranging from marriage, business, partnership, leasing, gift deed to many other bi-partite human dealings. Please note that the restric¬tion of ` permissible’ imposed a little earlier has a reason, for entering into a contract against the dictates of the Shari’ah, or accepting it, is not permissible for anyone.

The Logic of the Lawful

After the initial declaration of the general rule in the first sentence of the verse, its particular details appear in the second sentence where it has been said: أُحِلَّتْ لَكُم بَهِيمَةُ الْأَنْعَامِ (The cattle have been made lawful for you …). The word, ` bahimah’ (بَهِيمَةُ ) used here is applied to animals usu¬ally considered to be devoid of understanding because people usually do not understand their speech which thus remains obscure. Imam al-Sha` rani says: The name ` bahimah’ is not given to an animal just be-cause it has no sense and everything sensible remains obscure for it – as people commonly think. But, the truth is that no animal or beast, not even trees and rocks, can be taken to be devoid of sense as such – of course, subject to the difference in its degrees. They do not have the same measure of sense as human beings do. This is the reason why human beings have been obligated to observe the percepts and injunc¬tions revealed for them. Animals have not been so obligated, other-wise Allah has given to every animal sense and awareness within the limits of its needs – even to all trees and rocks, for that matter. This is why everything glorifies Allah in its own way: وَإِن مِّن شَيْءٍ إِلَّا يُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِهِ : That is, ` there is nothing which does not but glorify Him with His praise’ (17:44). How then, without sense, would it have ever recognized its crea¬tor and master and how would it have, thus, been able to engage in the act of glorifying Allah?

The word, ` al-An` am’, used in the text is the plural form of na’am (grazing livestock). Eight kinds of domestic animals or cattles such as the camel, the cow, the buffalow, the goat which have been described in Surah al-An‘-am are called the An’-am. Since the word, ` bahimah’ (animal) was general, the word, ‘Al-An’-am’ (the cattle) has made it particular. So, the meaning of the verse comes to be that ` eight kinds of domestic animals have been made lawful for you.’ Under the discus¬sion about the word, ` al-` uqud’, you have already read a little earlier that it includes all kinds of contracts. One of these is the pledge Allah Almighty has taken from His created beings that they would observe the restrictions of the lawful and the unlawful. The present sentence is referring to this particular pledge when it says that Allah has made the cattle lawful for you and they can be eaten after having been slaughtered in accordance with the Islamic manner.

Thus believers have been exhorted to obey this injunction by stay¬ing within its limits. They should not take it upon themselves, as do the fire-worshippers and the idolaters, to declare the very slaughter of these animals as absolutely unlawful, for this is raising an objection against the wisdom of the Creator and certainly an open ingratitude for His blessing. Nor should they become like some other meat-eating people who would, totally unfettered, go about eating all sorts of ani¬mals. Rather than do something like that, believers must eat from an¬imals Allah Almighty has made lawful to eat under the Law given by Him. Similarly, they should abstain from animals which have been de¬clared unlawful to eat. The reason is that Allah Almighty is the Crea¬tor of the Universe. He knows the nature and the properties of all ani¬mals and He is also aware of the effects they bring about when in the human body. He, in His grace, makes what is good and pure openly lawful for human consumption, things which leave no ill effects on physical health and moral strength. Similarly, He forbids unclean and impure animals which are either harmful for human health or contrib¬ute metabolically into the generation of evil morals. Therefore, there are a few things exempted from this general rule. These are as follows:

1. The first exemption is contained إِلَّا مَا يُتْلَىٰ عَلَيْكُمْ. It means: Ex¬cept animals which have been declared unlawful in the Qur’an, that is, dead animal or the swine.
2. The other exemption appears in: غَيْرَ‌ مُحِلِّي الصَّيْدِ وَأَنتُمْ حُرُ‌مٌ Quadruped animals are lawful for you and wild game too. But nin the state when you have entered into the garments of Ihram with the intention of doing Hajj or ` Umrah, hunting becomes a crime and sin. Stay away from it.

Living under the Authority and Wisdom of the Creator

Towards the end of the verse, it was said: إِنَّ اللَّـهَ يَحْكُمُ مَا يُرِ‌يدُ which means that Allah Almighty ordains what He wills. Nobody has the right to ask questions or take exception in obeying it. This statement is perhaps indicative of an element of wisdom – that the permission given to human beings to slaughter and eat some animals is no act of injustice. The Creator and Master who has made all these life forms is also the One who has formulated, in His perfect wisdom and insight, the law that the lower form shall be the sustenance of the higher. The soil of the earth is food for trees and trees are food for animals and an¬imals are food for human beings. There is no higher form of creation in this world, therefore, human beings cannot become food for anyone.

Linkage of Verses

The first verse of Surah al-Ma’idah emphasized the fulfillment of contracts. Included among these contracts is the contract or pledge to abide by the restrictions of the lawful and the unlawful as ordained by Allah Almighty. The second verse cited here describes two important articles of this contract. The first relates to the sanctity of the signs, symbols or hallmarks of Allah with the specific instruction to stay away from desecrating them. The second article recommends an even-handed dispension of justice to everyone, your own or not your own, friend or foe, which has been combined with a corresponding prohibi¬tion of any counter injustice inflicted in return for some injustice done.

Background

There are some events which form the background of the revelation of these verses. Let us go to them first so that the subject of the verse becomes fully clear to us. One of these is the event of Hudaybiyah the details of which have been taken up by the Holy Qur’an elsewhere. This relates to the sixth year of Hijrah when the Holy Prophet g and his noble Companions decided to perform ` Umrah.

The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) entered into the Ihram of ` Umrah with more than one thousand of his Companions and left for Makkah al-Mu` azzamah. After having reached Hudaybiyah close to Makkah al-Mu` azzamah, he sent a message to the Makkans that he was coming in with his group to perform ` Umrah and not for any aggressive designs. He requested that they be allowed to perform ` Umrah. The disbeliev¬ers of Makkah, not only that they refused it, they put forward many hard conditions and challenged them to agree to a treaty which stipulated that all Muslims will undo their Ihram they were in at that time and go back. When they come next year to perform their ` Umrah, they would be required to come without any arms, stay for three days only, perform ` Umrah and leave. Besides these conditions, there were many others agreeing to which was obviously very much against the self-respect of Muslims. But, obeying the orders of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) everyone returned in peace. After that, it was in the month of Dhu-al-Qa’dah of the Hijrah year 7 that this missed ` Umrah was performed again with full observance of the conditions imposed under the Treaty.

However, the events at Hudaybiyah and the insulting conditions imposed there had planted seeds of discord in the hearts of the Com¬panions against the disbelievers of Makkah. Then there came up the other incident when Hatim ibn Hind, one of the disbelievers of Makkah, came to Madinah al-Tayyibah with his trading goods. After hav¬ing sold his goods, he left his baggage and his attendant outside Madi¬nah and came to visit the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and expressed his desire to enter the fold of Islam, in all hypocrisy, so that Muslims are satisfied. But, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) had, well before he came to him, told his Companions on the strength of revelation that a man was coming to them who would talk in the words of the Satan. And when he went away, he said that the man came with disbelief and returned with deception and treason. Leaving the company of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، this man went straight out of Madinah where the livestock of the people of Madinah were grazing. He drove them away with him. The noble Companions (رض) came to know about this somewhat late. When they went out after him, he was gone out of their reach. Then it was in the seventh year of Hijrah, when they were going with the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to perform the Qada’ of ` Umrah they had missed at Huday¬biyah, they heard someone reciting Talbiyyah at some distance. When they looked, they discovered that the same Hatim ibn Hind who had decamped with the animals belonging to the people of Madinah was right there going for ` Umrah with the same animals going with him as sacrificial animals. At that time, the noble Companions (رض) thought of attacking him and taking their animals back by killing him off right there.

The third event came to pass in the eighth year of Hijrah when Makkah al-Mukarramah was conquered in Ramadan a1-Mubarak and the entire Arabian Peninsula came under Islamic rule. The disbeliev¬ers of Makkah were set free by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) without any revenge. They went about doing everything they used to do with complete freedom to the extent that they even kept observing their ‘pa¬gan customs of Hajj and ` Umrah too. At that time some noble Compan¬ions thought of taking their revenge for what had happened at Huday¬biyah. These people had stopped them from doing ` Umrah to which they were entitled on all counts, as permissible and justified. Why, they thought, should they now allow their Hajj and ‘Umrah, on any count which were all impermissible and unjustified? Why not attack them, take their animals and finish them off?

These events have been narrated by Ibn Jarir on the authority of ` Ikrimah and al-Suddi. It was on the basis of some of these events that the present verse was revealed. Through it, Muslims were told that holding the signs of Allah in esteem was their own bounden duty. Malice and hostility against an enemy was no reason to disturb this standing rule. This was absolutely impermissible. Even fighting during the sacred months was not permissible. Also not permissible was stopping sacrificial animals from reaching the Haram or taking them away for¬cibly. As for the disbelievers who have donned the Ihram garments and who, in their estimation, have embarked on their pilgrimage to seek the good pleasure of Allah Almighty (though, because of their dis¬belief, this is a mistaken notion, yet) the sanctity of the signs of Allah demands that they should not be confronted in any way. Then there was the case of people who had stopped their ` Umrah. Any effort to avenge their past hostility against Mus¬lims in the form of Muslims stopping Mus¬lims from performing their rites of Ha them was not permissible. This is so because this amounts to Muslims doing an injustice in return for an injustice to them which was not permissible in Islam. We can now go to a detailed explanation of the verse.

Commentary

The first sentence of the Verse says: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تُحِلُّوا شَعَائِرَ‌ اللَّـهِ  (0 those who believe, do not violate [ the sanctity on the Marks of Allah). Here the word, شَعَائِرَ‌ Sha` a’ir has been translated as ` Marks.’ This is the plural form of Sha’irah which means mark, sign or symbol. Therefore, Sha` air and Sha’irah signify things perceptible through the senses which sym¬bolize something. As such the Marks (Sha` a’ir) of Islam would be deeds and actions recognized as symbolic of one’s being Muslim in faith. These are quite common such as Salah, Adhan, Hajj, Circumcision and Beard in accordance with the Sunnah. The Tafslr or explana¬tion of the Qur’ anic expression شَعَائِرَ‌ اللَّـهِ (Sha` a’irullah: The Marks of Al¬lah) as it appears in this verse has been reported in varying words. But, the clearest of them is what has been reported from Hasan al-Basri (رح) and ‘Ata’ on whom both be the mercy of Allah. Imam al-Jassas finds their statement as a compendium of all explanations. According to this statement, “Sha’a’irullah” means all obligations the limits of which have been set forth by the Shari’ah of Islam. In this verse, the essence of the meaning is that one should not violate the sanctity of the marks of Allah. One form of such violation could be a total dismis¬sal of what one has been obligated with. Under the second form, one may act in accordance with these obligations by electing to obey some injunctions and leave out others ending up with a compliance which remains incomplete. A third form could be that one starts transgress¬ing the appointed limits and keeps going farther beyond. The Qur’anic statement: لَا تُحِلُّوا شَعَائِرَ‌ اللَّـهِ (do not violate [ the sanctity on the Marks of Allah) forbids all these three forms.

The Holy Qur’an gives the same instruction elsewhere in a differ¬ent mode as follows:

And whoever exalts the Marks of Allah, then this is from the fear of Allah in hearts. (22:32)

The part of the sentence which follows in the verse under study gives details of a particular kind of the Marks of Allah, that is, the Marks that concern the rites of Hajj.

The text says:

It means: Do not violate its sanctity by fighting and killing during the months in which it is prohibited. This refers to the four months during which mutual fighting was legally prohibited. They are Dhul-Qa’dah, Dhul-Hijjah, Muharram and Rajab. Later on, this injunction was abrogated as agreed under the overwhelming consensus of ` Ulama’. In addition to this, command was given that there should be no violation of the sanctity of sacrificial animals within the Haram of Makkah, specially of the band round their necks placed there as a symbol of sacrifice. One form of violating the sanctity of these animals could be that they are stopped from reaching the Haram or are snatched away. The second form could be that of using the animals for a purpose other than sacrifice, such as using them to ride or milk. The verse has declared all these form as impermissible.

The text then prohibits the violation of the sanctity of those who have left their homes to embark on a journey to al-Masjid al-Haram with the intention of performing Hajj – for their purpose on this jour¬ney is to seek the blessing and pleasure of their Lord. Not violating the sanctity of such people means that they should neither be stopped during their journey nor should any pain be caused to them.

After that it was said: وَإِذَا حَلَلْتُمْ فَاصْطَادُوا . It means: And when you get released from the Ihram, you may hunt. In other words, the limit of the prohibition of hunting during the state of Ihram appearing in the first verse has been declared by saying that your release from the Ihram neutralizes the in-Ihram prohibition of hunting which has now become permissible.

Being delineated in the verse under reference is a particular part of the contract which is operative between every human being and the Lord of all the worlds. Some of it has already been identified upto this point. The first out of these is the instruction to uphold the inviolable dignity of the Marks of Allah as sacrosanct and to guard against any chances of their being desecrated. Then come some details concerning the Marks of Allah which belong to Hajj. Here, the instruction given is that nothing should be done to stop them and that effort should be made to stay away from any action which desecrates them.

The statement which follows after that takes up the second part of the contract in the following words: وَلَا يَجْرِ‌مَنَّكُمْ شَنَآنُ قَوْمٍ أَن صَدُّوكُمْ عَنِ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَ‌امِ أَن تَعْتَدُوا . It means: There were those people who had stopped you from en¬tering Makkah and performing your ` Umrah and after that event at Hudaybiyah, you were returning all sad and angered. Now that you have power in your hands, let things not turn in a way that you start taking revenge for what happened in the past by stopping them from entering the House of Allah and the Sacred Mosque and performing their Hajj – because this is injustice and Islam does not favour aveng¬ing injustice by inflicting counter injustice. Instead of that, it teaches the doing of justice in return for injustice done and upholding it under all odds. It is true that those people, under the sway of their power_ and position at that time, had stopped Muslims from entering the Sa¬cred Mosque and performing ` Umrah, quite unjustly indeed. But, the retaliation for this injustice can hardly be that Muslims now go about using their power to stop them from carrying out their Hajj rites.

The Qur’an teaches that friend and foe should be treated equally on the scale of justice. It commands Muslims to do nothing but justice as a matter of obligation, no matter how deadly the enemy and no matter how serious the pain inflicted. That Islam guards the rights of enemies is certainly one of the peculiar qualities of Islam which does not answer one injustice by another, rather elects to do justice in return.

The Qur’anic Principle of Mutual Cooperation and Assistance

And help each other in righteousness and piety, and do not help each other in sin and aggression. And fear Allah. Sure¬ly, Allah is severe at punishment.

This is the last sentence of the second verse of Surah al-Ma’idah. Here, the Holy Qur’an has given such a wise verdict on an elemental question of human life that it can be confidently taken as the moving spirit behind any reliable world order on which depends the prosperity and survival of all human beings. As such, acting in accordance with the Qur’anic principle of Mutual Cooperation and Assistance is the only way to the betterment of the human beings. Every sensible per-son already realizes that things get done in our world through the cooperative efforts of all human beings. This is how the system keeps running. A solitary person, no matter how smart, powerful or rich, cannot procure what he needs to sustain his life single-handedly. One lone person cannot go through all the stages of growing and processing his ready-to-eat food, nor can he cope up with the countless steps re¬quired in growing cotton, manufacturing cloth and having a dress pre-pared to fit his measurements, nor can he move his things from one place to the other. Thus, it is not difficult to see that every human be¬ing needs hundreds and thousands of others to run his life. This mu¬tual cooperation of theirs is what keeps the whole system going. Inci¬dentally, this cooperation is not limited to the life of the world of our experience, it is also needed in the stages from death to burial – even beyond, when one remains depending upon those he left behind and who may pray for his forgiveness and do things the reward of which keeps reaching him after his death.

Great is the majesty of Allah who, in His perfect wisdom and pow¬er, set up such a formidable system of this world, a system where eve¬ry human being needs the other. The poor man needs the rich while the richest of the rich need the poor worker to handle jobs with labour and skill. The traders need consumers and consumers need traders. The home owner needs a team of technicians having expertise in many areas in order to build a house and they, in turn, need him. If this universal element of need was not there and mutual assistance re¬mained dependant on moral superiority of persons and parties, just imagine who would have been working for whom. The whole thing would have fallen flat for we have been seeing what has happened to common moral virtues and ethical values in this world of ours. Even if this division of labour could have been enforced as some law made by some government or international organization, the fate it would have met would have been no different than the fate of all sorts of laws pro¬liferating the many national and international forums of the world where the law rests at peace in acts while the bazars and offices are run by shadow laws of bribery, nepotism, neglect of duty and apathy of application. We have to salute the framework of doing things given to us by the wisest of the wise, the power of the powers, who placed in the hearts of people of different inclinations to have the ability and desire to run their lives with a particular line of work as its pivot. Had it been otherwise and some international organization or a government chose to assign fields of work among people making someone a carpenter, others iron-mongers or janitors or managers of water and food supplies, who would have become so obedient to such commands from governments and institutions as to sacrifice all personal considerations and jump right into the line of work chosen for them?

So, it is Allah Almighty who has put into man’s heart the inclina¬tion towards and liking for whatever work or role for which He has created him. Now he takes the service he is doing as his lifework without any legal compulsion and it is through this that he earns his living. The end product of this firmly established system is that all human needs are easily satisfied at the cost of small cash. It may be ready-to-eat food or ready-to-wear clothes or ready-to-use furniture or a turn-key home – one can buy all this at some affordable price. Without the benefit of this system, even a billionaire would have failed to acquire a single grain of wheat despite being ready to stake all his wealth. In order to visualize the outcome of this natural system, think of one of your stays in a hotel where you enjoy the benefit of so many things without blinking. Only if you were to analyze how this works, you will notice that the food you eat there is comprised of courses fea¬turing eatables and seasonings from many countries, china and cut¬lery and furniture from many more, and managers, chefs and stewards from still others. The tiny morsel of food which reaches your mouth is the result of the combined contribution of millions of machines, ani¬mals and human beings – and it is only after that, that you have been able to pamper your palate. Take another example. You come out of the house to go to some place a few miles away. You may either cannot walk all that distance or you do not have the time to do so. You find a taxi cab or a bus nearby without realizing that these vehicles have been assembled with components from many parts of the world and with drivers and conductors from as many. What things and what people stand there to wait on you and serve you! Just pay the fare and be on your way! No government has forced them to provide these for you. Working behind this scheme of things is the natural law ingrained into the human heart as a creational imperative by none but the great master of all hearts Himself.

Not far is the example of what the socialist countries did when they did away with this natural arrangement by taking over the func¬tion of telling people what they will do in their lives. In order to do this, they had to, first of all, do away with human freedom through co-ercion and injustice resulting in the killing and imprisonment of thou-sands and thousands of people. Those who remained behind were coerced into working like the parts of a machine, as a result of which, it can be conceded that production did increase at some places, but it must also be granted at the same time that this increase came at the cost of a gross demolition of the free choice of human beings. Thus, the deal did not turn out to be economical. Look at the natural arrange¬ment in contrast. Here, everyone is free and restricted at the same time – restricted in the sense of being devoted to particular jobs and roles on the basis of natural dispension of dispositions. Since this re¬striction or compulsion comes from nowhere but from natural disposi¬tion, nobody feels being coerced. People who would themselves come forward to do the toughest labour or the most menial job, people who would even make efforts to get such jobs, are found everywhere during all times. The same people would, if a government started forcing them to do these jobs, just start running away from it en masse.

In a nutshell, the universal world order revolves round mutual cooperation. But, let us not forget the other side of the picture which is very much there. For example, if this mutual cooperation were to be seriously practiced to carry out activities of crime, theft, robbery, kill-ing and vandalization resulting in big, powerful and organized associa¬tions of thieves and robbers, then, this very mutual cooperation can destroy the whole system. This tells us that mutual cooperation is a two-edged sword which cannot only hurt you but it can also knock out the universal order of things. Since the world we live in a mix of good and bad, it was not unlikely that people would start using the power of mutual cooperation to infest human society with crimes, killings, de¬struction and general loss. Incidentally, this is no more a matter of likelihood, instead, it is an open fact of life for the whole world to see. Thus, it was as a reaction to this situation that theorists of the world laid the foundation of groups and nations based on different ideologies in order to have security for themselves. The idea was to use the pow¬er of mutual cooperation in favour of a particular group or people by offering an allied defence against another group or people who attacked them.

The Formation of Separate Nations

According to ` Abd al-Karim al-Shahristani in Al-Milal-wa-al-Nihal, in the beginning when human population was not much, four nations came into being in terms of East, West, North and South. People liv¬ing in each of these directions started taking themselves as one nation while taking others as other nations. And it was on this basis that they established their mutual cooperation. Later, when the population of the world became larger, the idea of nationalism and multilaterism on the basis of genealogy, family ties and tribal affiliations became a working principle among peoples of all directions. The whole system of Arabia rested on the basis of such tribal and genealogical affinities, so much so that these were sufficient grounds to go to wars against each other. Banu Hashim was one nation, Banu Tamim was another and Banu Khuza` ah still another. Among the Hindus in India, this di-vision on the basis of the high caste and the low caste still persists unchanged.

The modern period of European nations did nothing to retain their genealogical distinction, nor did they give any credence to the genealogical peculiarities of the rest of the world. When they gained ascen¬dency in the world, all genealogical and tribal groupings were elimi¬nated, separate nations were raised on the basis of regions, provinces, homelands and languages – almost by placing a piece of humanity on each such altar. The fact is that this is the form that prevails in most parts of the world. The limit is that Muslims too – of all the peoples the least likely – fell a victim to this modern voodoo of community or¬ganization. As if the division as Arabs, Turks, Iraqis and Sindhis were not enough, they went on dividing and sub-dividing themselves into Egyptians, Syrians, Hijazis, Najdis, Panjabis, Bangalis, and so many others who started identifying themselves as separate nations or na¬tionalities or peoples. Since all affairs of their governments were run on this basis, regional or provincial prejudice went deep into their re¬sponse patterns and peoples of all regions or provinces began relating to each other on this basis – that became their idea of mutual coopera¬tion.

The Teaching of the Qur’an about Nationalism and Universalism

Then came the Holy Qur’an reminding human beings of the lesson they had forgotten. The initial verses of Surah al-Nis-a’ clearly declared that all human beings are the children of one father and mother. The noble Prophet, Sayyidna Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) made this all the more clear when he publicly announced during the famous address of his last Hajj that no Arab is superior to a non-Arab nor a white to a black. Superiority depends on nothing but Taqwa, on the fear of Allah and obedience to Him. It was this teaching of the Qur’an which gave the call of “إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ إِخْوَةٌ ” (Believers are brothers – 49:10) and it was in one stroke that the jet blacks of Ethiopia were related to the reds of Turkey and Byzantium and the lineally less endowed non-Arabs to the Qurayshi and Hashmi Arabs as brothers to each other. The concept of nation and brotherhood was established on the basis that those who believe in Allah and His Rasul are one nation and those who do not so believe are the other. It was this foundation which cut asunder the family ties of Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab from the noble Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) while joining it with Sayyidna Bilal (رض) from Ethiopia and Sayyidna Suhayb (رض) from Byzantium. Finally, came the proclamation of the Qur’an: خَلَقَكُمْ فَمِنكُمْ كَافِرٌ‌ وَمِنكُم مُّؤْمِنٌ (64:2). It means that Allah created all human beings, then, they split in two groups – some became disbelievers and some others became believers. A practical demonstration of this Qur’anic classification was visible during the battles of Badr, Uhud, Ahzab and Hunayn when a blood brother who elected to stay away from the obe¬dience of Allah and His Rasul found that his bond of mutual coopera-tion with his believing brother stood severed and he could no longer escape the stroke of his believing brother’s sword.

Stated in the verse of the Qur’an cited above: وَتَعَاوَنُوا عَلَى الْبِرِّ‌ وَالتَّقْوَىٰ ۖ وَلَا تَعَاوَنُوا عَلَى الْإِثْمِ وَالْعُدْوَانِ is this very principle of mutual cooperation and assis¬tance. Being so reasonable and correct, it exhorts people to cooperate in deeds which are righteous and matters which are motivated by the fear of Allah and forbids them from extending their cooperation to anything sinful and aggressive. Just consider that the noble Qur’an has not suggested here that one should cooperate with Muslim brothers and not with non-Muslims. Instead of that, it declares that righteous¬ness and the fear of Allah are the bases on which cooperation is to be extended for this is the real foundation on which rests any cooperation among Muslims themselves. It clearly means that no help is to be ex-tended even to a Muslim brother if he is acting contrary to truth or is advancing towards injustice and aggression. Rather than help him in what is false and unjust, effort should be made to hold his hands against indulging in the false and the unjust for this, in reality, is helping him at its best – so that his present life as well as his life in the Hereafter is not ruined.

According to a narration from Sayyidna Anas appearing in the Sa¬hih of al-Bukhari and Muslim, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has been reported to have said: اں صراخاک ظالماً او مظلوماً (That is: Help your brother, just or unjust). His Companions (رض) who were soaked in the teaching of the Qur’an were surprised. They asked: ` Ya Rasul Allah (0 Messenger of Allah) as for helping the oppressed brother, that we understand. But, what does helping the oppressor mean? He said: Stop him from doing injustice – this is helping him.

This teaching of the Qur’an helped establish that righteousness بِرّ (birr) and the fear of Allah (Taqwa) are the real criterions on which it raised the edifice of Muslim nationalism and to which it invited the peoples of the world as the common denominator of mutual coopera¬tion and assistance. Contrary to this were sin and aggression (ithm اِثم and عُدوان ` udwan) which were declared to be serious crimes and cooperation in these was prohibited. To describe the positive criterions, two separ¬ate words of Birr and Taqwa were used. According, to a consensus of commentators, the word, Birr at this place means the doing of deeds which are good. This has been translated here as righteousness. The word, Taqwa means abstinence from what is evil. The word, ithm اِثم has been used here in an absolute sense meaning sin and disobedience, whether it relates to rights or acts of worship. As for ` Udwan, it lexi¬cally means the crossing of limits, that is, injustice and aggression.

About cooperating in what is righteousness and the fear of Allah, the Holy Prophet (رض) said: الدلال علی الخیر کفاعلی which means: The reward of the person who shows someone the path of righteousness is very much the same as if it was taken personally. Ibn Kathir has re-ported this hadith with reference to al-Bazzar. In addition to that, it appears in the Sahib of al-Bukhari that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said that whoever invites people to true guidance and righteous conduct shall receive a reward equal to all those who would heed to the call and act right – without the least cut from the reward of such people. As for the one who invites people to the path of error or sin, he or she will be earning the same amount of sin fully equal to the sins of all those who got involved with the filth of sin because of the inviter to sin – without any decrease in the count of such sins.

Citing Tabarani, reports Ibn Kathir: The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said that anyone who joins up with an unjust person to assist him goes out of the fold of Islam. It is on the basis of this guidance that the righteous elders of the community have strictly abstained from accepting any of¬fice or service in the courts of unjust rulers – for this amounts to assist¬ing them in their acts of injustice. Tafsir Ruh al-Ma’ani, while explain¬ing the noble verse: فَلَنْ أَكُونَ ظَهِيرً‌ا لِّلْمُجْرِ‌مِينَ ‘ I will never be a helper for the criminals – 28:17’, has reported a hadith in which the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has said that a call will go forth on the Day of Judgment citing the oppressors and the unjust and their helpers, so much so that all those who have handled chores even as insignificant as setting up the pens and inkpots of the unjust and the oppressive will all be rammed into a steel coffin and thrown into the Hell.

This is the teaching of the Qur’an and Sunnah which aimed at spreading the virtues of righteousness, justice, sympathy and good mannerliness throughout the world by presenting every single individ¬ual of the community as a living herald and model of the truth. And conversely, in order to eradicate crimes, injustices and oppressions, the same teaching had converted every member of the community into a kind of soldier who was bound to do his duty under all circumstanc¬es, whether watched or unwatched – because of the fear of Allah in his heart. The whole world saw the outcome of this wise teaching and grooming during the blessed period of the noble Companions (رض) and their Successors. Even in our day, when war threatens a certain country, departments of civil defence are established which impart some level of training for all its citizens.

But, nothing of the sort gets done when it comes to the eradication of crimes, to making people promoters of good and blockers of evil. It is obvious that an objective like this can-not be achieved by military parades or civil defence exercises. This is the ultimate art of living which can only be learnt and practiced in ed¬ucational institutions which, unfortunately, seem to have become strangers to spiritual and social refinements. This is very much true about the great qualities of righteousness and the fear of Allah which seem to be all banned in modern day educational institutions while the admittance of sin and high-handedness is all too open. What can the police do when a whole people throw away the concerns of the law-ful and the unlawful and the right and the wrong on their backs and turn crime-oriented? Today we see the graph of crime rising high – theft, robbery, sexual offences, killings and destructions are taking place everywhere. That the legal machinery can do nothing to root out these crimes is because of their failure to take advantage of the Qur’anic solution suggested above, that is, the governments are far removed from this Qur’anic system, and that they, particularly those who hold power into their hands, demur from adopting the principle of righteousness and the fear of Allah as the aim of their life – even though they have to face a thousand other hardships as a result of such avoidance. It may be interesting if such deviationists would swallow their pride at least for once, even if this be on a trial basis. Let them, then, witness the spectacle of the power of Allah and how it blesses them and their people with good life filled with the best of peace and comfort.

On the other side, there were the masses of people who took it for granted that the eradication of crimes is the exclusive responsibility of the government. In fact, they have become used to keeping crimes cov¬ered up. The idea of coming up with true witnesses to confirm truth and eliminate crime is no more a favoured practice among them. Such people must understand that covering up the crime of the criminal and avoiding to put their witness on record is an, abetment of crime which, according to the Holy Qur’an, is Haram (unlawful) and a grave sin in-deed. Furthermore, it is also a flagrant disobedience of the Divine com¬mand: وَلَا تَعَاوَنُوا عَلَى الْإِثْمِ وَالْعُدْوَانِ (And help each other in righteousness and piety, and do not help each other in sin and aggression) (5:2).

Commentary

This is the third verse of Surah al-Ma’idah where a number of fun damental and subsidiary injunctions and rulings have been described. The first problem relates to lawful and unlawful animals. As for ani¬mals whose meat is harmful for human beings – whether physically, to it may pose the danger of disease in the human body, or spiritually, for it may hold the danger of spoilage in human morals or its many emotional states – these the Qur’an has classed as evil declaring them to be unlawful. Then there are animals which have no physical or spir¬itual harmfulness, these the Qur’an has declared to be good, pure and lawful.

The first prohibition in this verse is that of dead animals. These refer to animals which die without having been slaughtered, either be-cause of some sickness or because of their natural death. The meat of such dead animals is extremely harmful for human consumption, not simply ` medically’, but spiritually as well.

However, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has exempted fish and locust as reported in Ahadith narrated in the Musnad of Ahmad Ibn Majah, Darqutni and al-Baihaqi and elsewhere.

The second thing declared unlawful in this verse is blood. By say¬ing: أَوْ دَمًا مَّسْفُوحًا (Or, flowing blood – 6:145) in another verse of the Holy Qur’an, it was made clear that blood here means blood which flows. For this reason, liver and spleen, despite being blood, stand exempted from the purview of this injunction. The Hadith referred to a little ear¬lier where fish and locust have been exempted from the purview of ‘Maitah’ or carrion also carries the exemption of liver and spleen from the definition of blood.

The third thing declared unlawful is the flesh of swine. ‘Lahm’ or flesh means the whole body of the swine which includes fat, ligaments, everything.

The fourth prohibition is that of an animal which has been invoked upon with (a name) other than that of Allah (dedicated in this manner, or slaughtered). And, at the time of slaughtering it as well, the act of invoking any name other than that of Allah will amount to flagrant Shirk, which is the ascribing of partners, sharers or associates in the pure divinity of Allah. This animal, thus slaughtered, shall fall under the injunction of a dead animal with the consensus of Muslim jurists. This is what was done by the disbelievers of Arabia when they slaugh¬tered animals invoking the name of their idols, or as some ignorant people would do when they would slaughter animals in the name of some saint or savant. It is also possible that someone does invoke the name of Allah at the time of slaughtering but actually offers it for one other than Allah making that sacrifice for the pleasure of whatever that non-Allah is. If so, this too, according to a consensus of Muslim jurists, is unlawful under the injunction of مَا أُهِلَّ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ بِهِ (what has been invoked upon with [ a name ] other than that of Allah).

The fifth category made unlawful is that of an animal which has been strangulated to death, or which has choked itself to death while struggling out of some trap. Though Munkhaniqah مُنْخَنِقَةُ (dead by strangu¬lation) and Mawqudhah مَوْقُوذَةُ (dead by blow) are included under the broad Qur’anic term of مَيْتَةُ ‘Maitah’ (carrion), but they have been mentioned here particularly because the people of Jahiliyyah took them to be permissible.

The sixth category of animals is Mawqudhah مَوْقُوذَةُ (dead by blow). It means an animal which has been killed by some hard blow, the kind of blow that comes from being hit by a staff, rod or rock. Should an ar¬row strike and kill its game in a manner that the arrow does not hit it with the sharp arrow head but does end up killing it just the same from the force of the blow itself, then, this too will be counted as Mawqudhah and will, as such, be unlawful. Sayyidna ibn Hatim (رض) said to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ` There are times when I hunt with an arrow heavy in the middle. If the game is killed with this ar¬row, can I eat it?’ He (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: ` If the animal has been killed by a blow from the heavy side of the arrow, it is included under Mawqudhah – do not eat it (and if it has been hit by the sharp-edged point and it has wounded the game, then, you can eat it). Al-Jassas has reported this narration in Ahkam al-Qur’an citing his own chain of authorities.

Here, the condition is that the arrow should have been released from the bow after having said Bismillah.

The game killed by a gun bullet has also been ruled by Muslim Jurists as included under the category of ‘Mawqudhah’ and is, therefore, unlawful. Imam al-Jassas reports from Sayyidna ‘Abdullah ibn ` Umar (رض) that he used to say: المقتولۃ بلبندقۃ تلک الموقوذہ which means that an ani¬mal killed by gunshot is the ‘Mawqudhah’; therefore, it is unlawful. Imams Abu Hanifah, Shafi’i, Malik and others رحمۃ اللہ علیہم are all in agreement with this view (al-Qurtubi).

The seventh category is called مُتَرَ‌دِّيَةُ ‘al-Mutaraddiyah’ (killed by a fall). It means that an animal which dies by falling from a mountain, mound or a high building, or which dies by falling into a well or some similar depth is also unlawful. Therefore, says a report from Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn Masud (رض) : If you see a game standing on top of a mountain and you shoot your arrow at it after reciting Bismillah and the hit of the arrow causes the game to fall down and die, then, do not eat it.

Because, here too, the probability exists that the animal did not die with a hit from the arrow. May be, it died from the shock of the fall – if so, it will be counted under the category of ‘Mutaraddiyah’ (dead by a fall). Similarly, if an arrow is shot at a bird and it falls down in water, its eating has also been prohibited for the same reason that probability exists that the hunted bird had died by drowning (al-Jasss).

It should also be noted that Sayyidna ` Adiyy ibn Hatim (رض) too has reported the same ruling from the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) – (a1-Jasss).

The eighth category is that of النَّطِيحَةُ An-Natihah’ (dead by goring). It re¬fers to an animal which has died in some collision such as by bumping against a train or vehicle, or it has been gored by butting against another animal.

The ninth category is of an animal which died when torn apart by some beast.

After describing the unlawfulness of these nine categories, an ex¬ception has been mentioned. It was said: إِلَّا مَا ذَكَّيْتُمْ. It means: If you find any of these animals alive and you slaughter it properly, then, it becomes lawful – eating it is permissible.

This exemption cannot be applied to the first four categories, because in Maitah (carrion) and Dam (blood), the very possibility does not exist; and as for Khinzir (swine) and what falls under وَمَا أُهِلَّ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ ma uhilla li-ghayrillah (what has been invoked upon with [ a name ] other than that of Allah), they are unlawful in themselves – slaughter¬ing or not slaughtering them is equally irrelevant. Therefore, there is a consensus of Sayyidna ` Ali, Ibn ` Abbas, Hasan al-Basri, Qatadah and other righteous elders on the view that this exemption applies to cate-gories after the first four, that is, to the ‘Munkhaniqah’ (dead by stran¬gulation) and what comes after it. So, it comes to mean that, should the animal be found alive under all these circumstances with common¬ly discernable signs of life, and slaughtered with the name of Allah while in the same condition, then, it is lawful – whether dead by stran¬gulation, dead by blow, dead by a fall, dead by goring or that which a beast has eaten. Any of these slaughtered while sensing signs of life in it shall become lawful.

Under the tenth category, an animal which has been slaughtered at an altar is unlawful. The altar refers to slabs of rocks placed around the Ka’bah which the people of Jahiliyyah took as objects of worship and they would bring animals near the altars and sacrifice them dedi¬cated to these rock slabs. They thought it was worship.

The people of Jahiliyyah used to eat all these kinds of animals, ani¬mals which are evil. The Holy Qur’an declared all of them to be unlaw¬ful.

The eleventh practice declared unlawful in this verse is the determining of shares with arrows: al-istiqsam bi al-azlam. The Arabic word, ‘al-azlam’ used in the Qur’an is the plural of zalam. This was an arrow used to determine shares during the days of Jahiliyyah. They were seven in number. One would have ‘yes’ and the other would have ‘no’ or some similar words written on them. These arrows were kept in the custody of the keeper of the Ka’bah.

When someone wanted his fortune told or wished to find out whether doing something in the future will be beneficial or harmful, they would go to the keeper of the Ka’bah, present money gift to him in anticipation of his service, who would, then, take out these arrows from the quiver one by one. If the arrow so drawn turned out to be the one with the word ‘yes’ on it, they thought that doing what they want¬ed to do was beneficial; and if, the arrow drawn had a ‘no’ on it, they drew the conclusion that they should not do what they wanted to do. The reason why this has been mentioned in the context of unlawful animals is that small groups of pagan Arabs used to have a joint slaughter of a camel or some other animal but, rather than divide up shares from the meat to all participants in accordance with the num-ber of shares originally subscribed to, they would decide it by drawing these arrows. Obviously, by doing that, someone would remain totally deprived, someone else would get too much and there would be someone getting less than what was his right. Therefore, the unlawfulness of this procedure was explained alongwith the unlawfulness of animals.

.` Ulama’ say that all methods used to divine future happenings or to find out what is ‘Ghayb’ (Unseen) – whether divination through num¬bers (` ilm al.-Jafr or Jafar), or palm-reading, or the taking of omen – fall under the injunction of ‘determining shares with arrows.’

The Arabic term for ‘determining shares with arrows’ is sometimes used for Qimar or gambling as well wherein rights are determined by the methods of lots or lottery. This too is Haram (unlawful) on the au¬thority of the Qur’an which prohibits it under the name, ‘Maisir’ (gambling). Therefore, righteous early elders Said ibn Jubayr, Mujah¬id and Al-Sha` bi said that the way the pagan Arabs used arrows to de¬termine shares, people of Persia and Asia Minor used chessmen and pieces of backgammon for the same purpose. They all fall under the injunction about arrows.

After explaining the unlawfulness of determining shares with ar¬rows al-Tafsir al-Mazhari has particularly pointed out that the Qur’anic statement: ذَٰلِكُمْ فِسْقٌ (This is sin) which follows immediately after this injunction means that this method of divination or determin¬ing of shares is an act of sin which leads people astray. After that, it was said:

Today those who disbelieve have lost hopes of (damaging) your faith. So do not fear them, and fear Me.

This verse was revealed to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) on the day of ` Arafah of the Last Hajj in the tenth year of Hijrah. This was a time when the conquest of Makkah and almost of all Arabia was com¬plete. Islamic law prevailed all over the Peninsula. Thereupon, refer-ence was made to the assessment of disbelievers that Muslims were much lower in number as against them and that they were weak too based on which they planned to eliminate them. Now that they do not have those ambitions any more nor do they have the power to pose a challenge, Muslims have been asked to feel secure against them and go on to spend their energy in obeying and worshipping their Lord:

Today, I have perfected your religion for you, and have com¬pleted My blessing upon you, and chosen Islam as Din for you.

The combination of circumstances in which this verse was revealed is special. Imagine. This is the day of Arafah, the foremost day out of the days of the entire year and by chance this ` Arafah fell on a Jumu’ah (Friday) the merits of which are well-known. The place is nothing less than the plain of Arafat, close to the Mount of Mercy (Jabl ar-Rahmah) which, on the day of ` Arafah, is the chosen spot of the in¬cessant descent of Mercy from Allah Almighty. The time is after Asr, which is a blessed time even during normal days, specially so on Friday wherein comes the hour when prayers are answered as confirmed by many authentic reports and this is the time for it. Then, this being the day of Arafah as well, it is all the more likely that prayers shall be answered particularly at this hour and time.

This is the largest and the first great gathering of Muslims for their Hajj. Participating in it are some one hundred and fifty thousand noble Sahabah, the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all. And present with his Companions is the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) who is the very mercy of all universes sitting on his mount, the she-camel Adba’ under the legendary Mount of Mercy busy with his Wuquf in ` Arafat, now a great basic rite of Hajj.

It is under the canopy of these blissful merits and blessings and mercies that this verse is being revealed to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . Spot witnesses to this spectacle, the noble Companions said: When this verse came in the mode of Wahy (revelation) to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) what happened was what had transpired earlier too: The weight released by the descending Revelation could be perceived as the she camel was crouching under that weight, so much so that she was com¬pelled to sit down.

Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas (رض) says that this verse is almost the last verse of the Holy Qur’an; no verse dealing with Ahkam (Injunctions) was revealed after that. The only exception here is that of some verses of persuasive nature which have been identified as having been re¬vealed after this verse. After the revelation of this verse, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) lived in this mortal world for only eighty one days, for this verse was revealed on the ninth day of Dhil-Hijjah in the Hijrah year 10 and it was on the twelfth day of the month of Rabi’ al Awwal in the eleventh year of Hijrah that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) depart¬ed from this mortal world.

That this verse was revealed in such elegant setting with a very special concern has its secret in the message it conveys which is a great news, a solemn reward and an abiding hallmark of distinction for Islam and Muslims and for the Ummah at large. In a nutshell, the message is that the ultimate standard of True Faith and Divine Bless¬ing which was to be bequeathed to human beings in this world has reached its perfection on that great day. This is, so to say, the climax of the divine blessings in the shape of a True Faith which began with Sayyidna Adam (عليه السلام) and continued in later times when the chil¬dren of Adam in every period and every area kept receiving a part of this blessing in proportion to their prevailing conditions. Today, that Faith and that Blessing in its final form has been bestowed upon the Last of the Prophets, the Rasul of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and to his Ummah.

It goes without saying that this bestowal primarily highlights the excellence and distinction of the last and the foremost Prophet, Sayyidna Muhammad al-Mustafa (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) among the community of prophets, messengers and apostles. But, it also proves that the Ummah has a distinct status among other Traditional Communities.

This is why some Jewish scholars came to Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) and told him: Your Qur’an has a verse which, if it was revealed to Jews, would have given them an occasion to celebrate its revelation through a festi¬val. Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) asked: Which verse is that? They, in response, recited this very verse الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ. Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) said: Yes, we know where and when this verse was revealed. The hint was that the particular day was a day of doubled rejoicing (Eid) for Muslims, one for ‘Arafah and the other for Jumu’ah (Friday).

The Islamic Principle of Celebrating Festive Occasions

This reply given by Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) also carries a hint towards a cardinal Islamic principle which, of all peoples and religions of the world, is the hallmark of Islam alone. It is common knowledge that peoples from every nation and every religious group commemorate their particular historical events conditioned by their respective self-view. Such days which return each year acquire the status of a major festival with them.

Somewhere the celebration is about the birth or death anniversary of a great person. Elsewhere, it would be a day of coronation, or the day of the conquest of some country or city, or some acclaimed histori¬cal event. The net outcome of all such celebrations is no more than increasing the image of particular individuals. Islam is against the cult of personality. It has bypassed the customs of the age of ignorance by eliminating the commemoration of persons and by introducing the commemoration of principles and objectives as standard practice.

Sayyidna Ibrahim, (عليه السلام) the patriarch of prophets, was given the title of “Friend of Allah.” The Holy Qur’an paid tributes to him on his success against trials. The verse: وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ رَ‌بُّهُ بِكَلِمَاتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ (and when his Lord put Ibrahim to a test with certain Words! And he fulfilled them) (2:124) means exactly this. But, no anniversary of his birth or death was ever celebrated, nor that of his son, Ismail (عليه السلام) ، nor that of his mother, nor any kind of memorial was established to perpetuate their memory.

Of course, there were things of significance in their deeds, things related to the objectives of religion and faith. This legacy was worth the best of preservation and commemoration and this legacy was not only preserved but made mandatory for all succeeding generations as an obligatory part of their religion and faith. Sacrifice. Circumcision. Running between the hills of Safa and Marwah. Throwing pebbles at three places in Mina. All these are living, ever-reminding monuments to the deeds of the same righteous elders which they performed by sac¬rificing their personal desires and natural needs aiming for nothing but the pleasure of Allah Almighty. Right there, in these deeds, there is a lesson for all peoples of all times that human beings should sacri¬fice everything, even the dearest of the dear, for the good pleasure of Allah.

So, this was how Islam abstained from celebrating days devoted to the birth and death of prominent men, or women, no matter how great, or the days highlighting their personal lives and times. Cele¬brated instead, were days centered around their deeds, especially those pertaining to some particular act of worship, for example, Laylatul-Bara’ ah (the Night of Deliverance from Sin), Ramadan al-Mubarak (the Blessed Month of Ramadan), Laylatul-Qadr (the Night of Power), Yowm al-Arafah (the Day of Arafah), Yowm al-Ashura (the Day of ` Ashura) etc. As for the well-known Muslim Festival of Rejoicing, it was limited to only two and that too was made purely religious in na¬ture. The first ` Id (` Idul-Fitr) was set in between at the end of the month of Ramadan al-Mubarak and at the beginning of the Hajj months while the second ` Id (` Idul-Adha) was appointed to be celebrated after the completion of the Hajj pilgrimage.

To sum up, let us return to the reply given by Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) which so succinctly declared that ` Ids in Islam do not follow historical events as among Jews and Christians. This was the custom of Jahiliyyah, the first age of ignorance when the passing of some major his¬torical event would be turned into a festival. Now, as witnesses to the modern Age of Ignorance, we can see how wide-spread this urge to celebrate has become. The limit is that Muslims themselves have started imitating other nations indulging in practices contrary to their way.

Christians started celebrating a Festival commemorating the birth of Sayyidna With their example before them, some Mus¬lims introduced another ` Id, the Festival of the birth of the Holy Proph¬et (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، may peace be upon him, and the blessings of Allah. Devoting a day to take out processions on streets with activities neither reasonable nor valid and filling a night with displays of lamps and lights, they took this to be an act of worship. For this there is no basic justification in the words and deeds of the Sahabah, the noble Companions, or the Tabi` in, the Successors to the Companions, or the large body of the righteous elders of the Muslim Community.

The truth of the matter is that this practice of celebrating days would pass with nations which lack individuals with superior merits and achievements. When lucky, they would find a couple or few suita¬ble enough with a record of something special they may have done and commemorating them would become a matter of national pride for them.

If this custom of celebrating days were to be practiced in Islam, we would have to begin with more than one hundred and twenty thousand prophets each of whom has a big roster of wonderful achieve¬ments to his credit. Celebrating the birthday of and commemorating the achievements of each would be very much in order. After past prophets, peace be upon them, let us move to the Last of them (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and look at his pure and pristine life. When you do that there would not remain even one day which could turn out to be devoid of one or the other achievement which deserves to be celebrated. From his childhood to his youth, he was an epitome of moral perfections (or a para¬digm of virtues, as termed by some modern Muslim writers in the West) whereby he was considered the most trustworthy person in the whole country of ` Arabia. Are these embellishments not worthy enough for Muslims to celebrate? Then, there is the Revelation of the Holy Qur’an, the event of Hijrah, the Battle of Badr and Uhud, and Khandaq, and Hunayn, and Tabuk, and the Conquest of Makkah. Add to these all other battles in which the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) par¬ticipated. Each deserves a celebration. Similarly, there are thousands of his miracles; each one of them needs commemoration. One needs insight to look at the life of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) which would bring an honest person to come to the conclusion that his good life – not just a day from it, rather every hour in it – is most worthy of being commemorated, celebrated and rejoiced in.

After the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، think of some one hundred and twenty thousand of his noble Companions each one of whom is really a living miracle of their master. Would it not be unjust to ig¬nore them and avoid celebrating their achievements? If we pursue this practice still further on, we shall be looking at those who followed after the noble Companions – righteous elders, men of Allah, scholars, masters and guides – whose number would shoot up to millions. If com¬memorative days have to be celebrated, how could one leave them out? Would it not be an injustice to them? Or, a failure to recognize intellec¬tual merit or spiritual excellence? And if, left with not much choice, Muslims were to decide to celebrate memorial days for everyone, they would have a calendar of activities all full of celebrations with no day free – in fact, they would have to celebrate several commemorations, festivals and ‘Ids every hour of every day!

No wonder the Prophet of Islam and all his Companions ignored this custom as outmoded pagan practice from the days of Jahiliyyah! Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) ، the second Khalifah of Islam, may Allah be pleased with him, alludes to this very approach in his policy statement made before the Jews.

Understanding Important Meanings of the Verse

This Verse carries the good news that Allah has given to the noble Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and his Community three rewards: Perfection of Faith, Com¬pletion of Divine Blessing and the Shari’ah of Islam as the Chosen Way for the Muslim Community.

1. Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas (رض) ، and others with him, explain that Perfection of Faith refers to the perfection of all limits, obliga¬tions, injunctions and refinements in personal and social behaviour as necessary for the True Faith. Now there is no need to add to it, nor there remains any probability of a shortfall (Ruh a1-Ma` ani). For this rea¬son, no new injunction from among the total corpus of injunctions was revealed after this. As already pointed out earlier, the few verses which were revealed later on carry either some subjects of persuasion or were a reiteration of injunctions already revealed.

What has been said here is not contrary to the function of the most-authentically qualified jurists of Islam (Mujtahid Imams through which they could explicate and elaborate injunctions of the Shari’ ah related to new and unprecedented events and circumstances as based on their highest possible effort and judgement (Ijtihad). The reason is simple – because the Holy Qur’an which has laid down the limits and obligations of religious injunctions has also, at the same time, determined the principles of Ijtihad. Pursuant to this authority, all rules and regulations deduced by Ijtihad right through the Last Day will be considered as if they are, in a way, the very injunctions of the Qur’an itself – because they are subordinate to the principles given by the Qur’an.

To sum up, we can say that ‘Perfection of Faith’, as explained by Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas (رض) ، is the perfection of all injunctions of the Faith. It needs no addition, while the probability of any shortfall through abrogation just does not exist – because, soon after, the ongo¬ing process of Wahy (revelation) was to be discontinued following the passing away of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) from this mortal world; and no injunction of the Holy Qur’an can be abrogated without a Divine revelation (Wahy). As for the apparent multiplicity of sub-injunctions that generated from jurists under the principle of Ijtihad was, in reality, no multiplicity as such. It was, rather, the explication and elaboration of the Qur’anic injunctions.

2. ‘Completion of Blessing’ means the rise of Muslims and the fall of their antagonists – which was manifested through the Conquest of Makkah, the eradication of the customs of Jahiliyyah and through the absence of all disbelievers from the 1Iajj that year.

The words of the Qur’an used here show that ‘Ikmal’ (perfection) has been coupled with ‘DIn’ (Faith) while the word ‘Itmam’ (Completion) goes with ‘Ni` mah’ (blessing) – though both words are ob¬viously synonymous and are generally used interchangeably. But, in fact, there is a difference in the sense they both carry. This has been explained by Imam Raghib al-Isfahan’ in his Mufradat al-Qur’an by saying that the ‘Ikmal and TakmIl’ (Perfection) of something means that the purpose and objective behind it has been accomplished (perfection of something carries exactly the same sense in English, specially at a time when spoken of, as ‘al-yowm’ (today) in the verse al-ready indicates). The other word, ‘Itmam’ (Completion) means that nothing else is needed any more. Thus, ‘Perfection of Faith’ tells us that the purpose of sending Divine Law and the injunctions of Faith into this world stands fulfilled and perfected today; and ‘Completion of Blessing’ means that Muslims do not have to depend on anyone any-more. Allah has Himself given them supremacy, power, authority. They can use these to promulgate and implement the imperatives (AM am, Injunctions) of this True Faith.

Also noteworthy here is the arrangement in the Verse where دِین ‘Din’ (Faith) has been attributed to Muslims while the attribution of ‘Ni’mah’ (Blessing) is towards Almighty Allah. This is because ‘Din’ (Faith) is demonstrated by what the members of the Community do while the consummation of ‘Ni’mah’ (Blessing) is directly from Al-mighty Allah (Ibn al-Qayyim, Tafsir).

The meanings as established here also clarify that the Perfection of Faith ‘today’ does not mean that, earlier, the Faith of the blessed prophets was imperfect. Quite contrary to that, the ‘Din’ (Faith) of every prophet and messenger was perfect and complete in terms of the relevant period of time (Tafsir al-Bahr al-Muhit with reference to al-Qaffal al-Marwazi). In other words, it means that the period in which a Law or Faith was sent by Allah to a prophet, it was in itself perfect and com¬plete for that period and for the people who belonged to it. But, the fu-ture projection, that the Faith quite perfect for that period and its peo¬ple will not remain perfect for later periods and peoples, was already there in the ultimate Knowledge of Almighty Allah – He knew that it would be abrogated and another Faith and Law will take its place. This is contrary to the case of the Shari’ah of Islam which was sent last of all since it is perfect from all sides and angles. It is neither specified for any particular time nor is it restricted to any particular area, country or people. Instead of all that, Islam is a Shari’ ah which is perfect and complete for every period and every area and every peo¬ple for all times to come right upto the Last Day.

3. The third reward which has been bestowed upon the Muslim Community through this Verse is that Allah has, by His creational prerogative, authority and wisdom, chosen the Faith of Islam for this Ummah which is perfect and complete in all its aspects – and on which depends the ultimate Salvation.

Certainly great was the message this Verse gave to the Muslim Community which was thus blessed with the finest gift they could ever dream of: the gift of the Din of Islam – the last and the most perfect Faith, after which there is no Faith to come and in which there shall be no addition or deletion. When this Verse was revealed, Muslims had good reason to be jubilant about Allah’s mercy which descended upon them in that manner. But, Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) was found in tears. The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) asked him the reason for his tears. He replied: This Verse seems to indicate that now your stay in this world is very short, because with the perfection of Islam, the need of a Rasul to be present also stands fulfilled! The Holy Prophet                صلى الله عليه وسلم agreed with him (Tafsir ibn Kathir and al-Bahr al-Muhit). Time showed that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) departed from this mortal world only after eighty one days this event took place.

Unlawfulness of Animals: Exception under Compulsion

Towards the end of the Verse, the statement: فَمَنِ اضْطُرَّ‌ فِي مَخْمَصَةٍ (But, whoever is compelled by severe hunger with no way out) relates to ani¬mals the unlawfulness of which has been mentioned in the earlier part of the Verse. The purpose of the sentence is to exclude a particular condition from the general rule. If a person is subjected to severe hun¬ger to a point where death becomes likely, then, under this condition, were he to eat a little from unlawful animals mentioned in the Verse, there will be no sin on him. But, the condition is that the purpose of – such eating should not be to have one’s fill or to enjoy it. Instead of do-ing that, one should eat just about what would remove the state of compulsion.

This is exactly what the words: غَيْرَ‌ مُتَجَانِفٍ لِّإِثْمٍ (having no inclination to sin) following immediately mean, that is, this act should be free from any inclination to commit a sin. Contrary to that, the purpose should only be limited to get relief from the excruciating state of compulsion. Towards the end of the Verse, the statement: فَإِنَّ اللَّـهَ غَفُورٌ‌ رَّ‌حِيمٌ to (Allah is Most-Forgiving, Very-Merciful) makes a pointed reference to the fact that these unlawful things are still unlawful as they already were, but only such a person has been given leave because of the state of compul¬sion he may be in.

Lawful and unlawful animals were mentioned in preceding verses. An answer to a question on the same subject appears in the present verse. Some Companions had asked the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) about the rule governing hunting with the help of a trained dog and falcon. Giv¬en in this verse is an answer to that question.

Commentary

To make an animal lawful when hunted through a dog or falcon, four conditions have been mentioned in the question and its answer appearing above. These are:

1. The dog or falcon should be taught, trained and disciplined. The functional principle given here is that the dog should have been groomed in a manner that it should, when released at the prey, catch it and bring it back to you – not that it starts eating it. As for a falcon, the rule set was that it should immediately return when called by you, even if it was chasing the prey. When so trained, it will prove that these beasts of prey hunt for you and not for themselves. Now the ani¬mal hunted by these beasts of prey will be considered your own. And if they act against this training once in a while, for example, the dog itself starts eating the prey, or the falcon does not return at your call, then, this game is not yours anymore, therefore, eating it is not per¬missible.
2. The second condition is that you should release the dog or falcon immediately at your choice and will, not that they dash after some game and hunt it on their own. In the verse under discussion, this condition has been made to come out clearly by the use of the word, “Mukallibin.” Lexically, this word is a derivation from ‘Taklib’ which basically means the training of dogs. Later, it also came to be used in the sense of training beasts of prey and releasing them after the game. The author of the famous Tafsir Jalalayn explains it in the sense of ‘Irsal’ (send after) which means releasing after the game. This view has been reported in Tafsir al-Qurtubi as well.
3. The third condition is that the beasts of prey do not themselves start eating the game – instead, they should bring it to you. This con¬dition has been explained through مِمَّا أَمْسَكْنَ عَلَيْكُمْ : (what they hold for you).
4. The fourth condition is: When you release the dog or the falcon after the game, do it after saying ‘Bismillah’ (With the name of Allah).

When these conditions stand fulfilled, the game – if dead before it reaches you – will still be lawful with no need to slaughter. If other-wise, it will not be lawful for you unless slaughtered.

With Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ، there is a fifth condition as well: That this beast of prey should have also wounded the game. A hint towards this condition is embedded in the word, الْجَوَارِ‌حِ “Al-Jawarih” (birds and beasts of prey) which also means animals which wound or injure.

Ruling: This injunction covers wild animals out of one’s possession and control. In case a wild animal has been captured, it will not become lawful without having been properly slaughtered.

Finally, at the end of the verse, there comes the instruction that hunting through a beast of prey has no doubt been made lawful by Al-mighty Allah, but, it is not permissible to ignore Salah and other neces¬sary religious obligations for the sake of having fun chasing game.

Commentary

In the first verse of Surah al-Ma’idah, the lawfulness of domestic animals such as the goat, cow and buffalo has been described. The third verse has a detail of nine kinds of unlawful animals. From that detail to the opening sentence of the present verse, we come to know in summation the essentials of the lawfulness and unlawfulness of animals as well as its operating standard and rule.

The verse opens with the words: الْيَوْمَ أُحِلَّ لَكُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ (This day, good things have been made lawful for you). Here, ‘this day’ means the day on which this verse and those before it have been revealed, that is, the Day of ` Arafah in the Last Hajj of Hijrah 10. The sense is that the way your Faith has been made perfect and the blessing of Allah stands completed for you on this day, very similarly, good things from Allah which were already lawful for you have been allowed to stay lawful forever. The probability that the injunction could be withdrawn does not exist anymore because the ongoing process of revelation was to be discontinued.

This sentence mentions the lawfulness of good things. But, another verse (7:157): يُحِلُّ لَهُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتِ وَيُحَرِّ‌مُ عَلَيْهِمُ الْخَبَائِثَ (Made lawful for them are good things and made unlawful for them are evil things). Here, by placing At-Tayyibat’ (good things) against Al-Khaba’ith’ (impure things), the reality of both words has been made clear. Lexically, things good, pure, clean and delightful are called ‘At-Tayyibat’; and in contrast, ‘Al-Khabaith’ is used to denote things which are evil and dis¬gusting. Therefore, this sentence of the verse stresses that everything good, pure and beneficial has been made lawful for human beings and everything disgusting and harmful has been made unlawful. The rea¬son is that human beings are not like animals whose purpose of life is limited to eating, drinking, sleeping, waking – being no more than a sort of live-die cycle. Nature has made them the master of the uni¬verse for some special purpose and that cannot be achieved without having high and pure morals. Therefore, immoral human beings would really not deserve to be counted as human beings.

That is why the Holy Qur’an has said about such people: بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ : that is, they are like cattle, rather more astray. Now if we accept that the ‘humanity’ of human beings depends on the betterment of their morals, it will become necessary to concede that they must be made to totally abstain from everything which leads to the corruption of hu¬man morals. Everyone knows how environment and society affect hu¬man morals. When things outside can do that to human morals, just imagine what would be the effect of things which go inside the human body for what becomes a part of the human body must affect its ethical behaviour. Therefore, caution must necessarily be observed in all foods and drinks. And let us keep in mind that unlawful income from theft, robbery, bribery, interest, gambling and evils like that, once it becomes part of anyone’s body, will inevitably remove one farther from humanity and nearer to ‘satanic nature.’

Hence, says the Holy Qur’an: يَا أَيُّهَا الرُّ‌سُلُ كُلُوا مِنَ الطَّيِّبَاتِ وَاعْمَلُوا صَالِحًا (O’ Mes¬sengers, eat from good things [ made lawful as sustenance ] and do righteous deeds – 23:51). Here, the command to be righteous in deeds refers itself back to the command to eat from what is Halal (lawful) because without eating Halal, righteous deeds cannot be imagined. This consideration is very important specially in the case of meat which be-comes an integral part of the human body. One has to be most cau¬tious and guard against the possibility of non-Halal meat entering his system through food and go on to spoil his morals. Similar is the case of meat which is physically harmful for human beings as the carrier of bacteria causing disease and death. Everyone knows that abstention from such meat is necessary. As for things declared evil by the Sha¬ri’ah of Islam, these are definitely agents of corruption for the human body or the soul or both. Since they are dangerous for human life and morals, they were made unlawful. As opposed to this, good things, the ‘Tayyibat’ contribute to the nurture and flowering of the human body, soul and morals – so, they were made lawful. In this way, this brief sentence of the Qur’an has given to us the philosophy and ground rules of the lawful and the unlawful, so to say, in a nutshell.

Now, as to which things are pure, beneficial and desirable and which others are impure, harmful and disgusting, the real decision of the matter lies with the desire and aversion of one’s inherent good taste. This is the reason why animals declared unlawful by Islam have been considered impure and disgusting by people of good taste during every period of time – for instance, carrion and blood. -Never¬theless, there come occasions when custom-based ignorance overpow¬ers good taste and when the fine line between good and bad fades out. Or, the evil in some things is concealed. In such situations, the deci¬sion of the prophets, peace be on all of them, is the guiding and bind¬ing authority for everyone. The reason is that the noble prophets are the foremost in commonsense, decency, goodness and taste among hu¬man beings. They were specially gifted by Almighty Allah with an intrinsically sound and balanced nature and He Himself took the re¬sponsibility of their nurture and grooming. One might say that they rose to be what they were under a Divine security shield manned by angels which saw to it that their minds and hearts and morals would never be affected by any evil environment. So, things they took as evil are really evil; and what they found to be good is really good.

In Hujjatullah al-Balighah, Shah Waliyyullah says that all animals declared unlawful by the Shari’ ah of Islam, when observed closely, will all fit compactly under two principles: one – an animal is evil by its na¬ture and disposition; two – the method of slaughtering the animal is wrong, as a result of which it will be considered ‘dead’ ( ‘Maitah’ – car¬rion), not slaughtered.

In the third verse of Surah al-Ma’idah, things called unlawful are nine in number. Out of these, the ‘swine’ is part of the first kind; the rest of the eight are in the second. By saying: وَيُحَرِّ‌مُ عَلَيْهِمُ الْخَبَائِثَ (He allows them as lawful what is good [ and pure ] and prohibits them from what is bad [ and impure ] – 7:157 – AYA, revealed, Madinah) the Holy Qur’an declares the general rule that all evil animals are unlawful. For de-tails, the Holy Qur’an points out to some clearly, for instance, ‘ the flesh of swine’ and ‘flowing blood’… The enumeration of the rest was entrusted to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . One sign of an animal being evil he gave was that a people could have been punished by having been transformed (Maskh) into the form of an animal. This indicates that the particular animal is evil by its very nature as divine wrath transformed it into an animal. For example, says the Holy Qur’an: وَجَعَلَ مِنْهُمُ الْقِرَ‌دَةَ وَالْخَنَازِيرَ‌ which means that some peoples have been transformed into swines and monkeys as punishment. This proves that both these kinds of animals are evil by nature – they, even if slaughtered, would still not become lawful. Then there are animals whose very doings and likings are sufficient for people of natural disposition to sense the evil inside them. For instance, there are beasts who live by injuring, tear¬ing and eating other animals – a hard-hearted lifestyle indeed.

Therefore, when someone asked about a wolf from the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) he said: “Can a human being eat it?” Similarly, there are many animals among crawlers and fliers whose very nature is to hurt or snatch away things, for instance, the snake, scorpion, house-lizard, fly, or a kite and falcon and others like them. So, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) set the rule that animals among beasts which tear animals apart with teeth, such as the lion and the wolf and others of their kind, and animals among birds such as the falcon and the hawk and others of their kind which hunt with their claws, are all unlawful; or, animals which are by nature mean and low or get them-selves befouled with impurities, such as the rat or animals which eat carrion, or the donkey and similar others, all fall under the category of animals the physical properties and harmfulness of which is readily sensed by any human being with a normal mind and temperament.

To recapitulate, we can say that the animals which have been made unlawful under the Shari` ah of Islam are of two kinds: Those in¬trinsically evil and those which are not evil by themselves but they have not been slaughtered following the method of slaughtering ani-mals ordained by Almighty Allah. This includes all other options such as the animal was not slaughtered at all – but was killed by shock or blow – or the act of slaughtering did take place, but rather than pro¬nounce the name of Allah on it, a name other than that of Allah was recited, or just no name was pronounced by knowingly omitting the name of Allah at the time of slaughter. Such Dhibih or slaughter is equally untrustworthy and invalid in view of the Shari’ah. In fact, this is very much like having ‘killed’ an animal without proper slaughter.

Something worth attention here is that everything one eats and drinks comes to him as a blessing from Allah, but, excepting the ani¬mals, no restriction has been imposed on cooking or eating anything from them other than that which would make it necessary for you to say Allahu-Akbar’ or ‘Bismillah’ invariably before cooking and eating, as if, that food would not be lawful without it. At the most, the saying of ‘Bismillah’ at the time of eating and drinking anything has been classified as desirable or recommended (‘Mustahabb’ : acts the neglect of which is not punished by Allah, but the performance of which is rewarded). Contrary to this is the matter of animals, for it has been made necessary (‘W ajib’ ) that the name of Allah be invoked while slaughtering them – and if, anyone were to leave out the name of Allah at the time of the slaughter, the animal was declared to be carrion, and unlawful:         at is the wisdom behind it?

A little deliberation makes it clear that the lives of all living beings are equal in a way. Therefore, the act of one life form whereby another life form is slaughtered and exterminated should, obviously, be not permissible. Now, for those it has been made permissible, it is a major reward from Allah. That is why the realization of the presence of this Divine blessing and the expression of gratitude for it has been made necessary at the time of slaughtering the animal. This is contrary to the case of things like grains and fruits – their very growth is for the sole purpose that human beings use them up to fulfill their needs. Therefore, the saying of ‘Bismillah’ only whenever used has been placed at the level of being desirable (‘Mustahabb’ ) – it has not been made necessary (‘W ajib’: a duty which, if not done, brings punishment).

There is yet another reason. There was a lingering custom from the days of Jahiliyyah that disbelievers used to pronounce the names of their idols while slaughtering animals. The Shari’ah of Islam transformed this un-Islamic custom into a wonderful act of worship by mak¬ing it necessary to invoke the name of Allah instead. This was func¬tionally the most appropriate strategy that some correct name instead of the false one be proposed, otherwise it would have been difficult to wean people away from ongoing customs and habits.

The slaughter of the people of the Book

The second sentence of the Verse is: وَطَعَامُ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ حِلٌّ لَّكُمْ وَطَعَامُكُمْ حِلٌّ لَّهُمْ (and the food of the people of the Book is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them … ). According to the consensus of Sahabah and Tabi` in (the Companions and their Successors), the word طعام ‘Ta` am’ (food) at this place means ‘properly slaughtered animals’ (Dhabihah). This is what has been reported from Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas, Abu ad-Darda’, Ibrahim, Qatadah, al-Suddi, Dhahhak and Mujahid, may Allah be pleased with them all (Ruh a1-Ma` ani and al-Jassas) – because, in foods of all other kinds, the people of the Book and the idolaters and all other disbelievers are just the same as bread, flour, lintels, beans, rice, fruits and similar other eatables need no slaughtering. For Muslims, eating that kind of food, of course, when procured by any lawful means, is permissible – and conversely, when they procure it from Muslims, it is lawful for them. Thus, the essence of the sentence is that the Dhabi¬hah (properly slaughtered animal) of the People of the Book is lawful for Muslims and the Dhabilhah (properly slaughtered animal) of Mus¬lims is lawful for the People of the Book.

At this point, there are some issues which should be considered. First of all, who are the People of the Book in the terminology of the Qur’an and Sunnah? What does ‘Book’ mean? And, is it also neces¬sary that, in order to be regarded as the People of the Book, these peo¬ple believe in and act according to their Book, correctly and faithfully? Here, it is obvious that the Book cannot be taken in its literal sense, that is, any written page. It can only mean a particular Book which has come from Allah. Therefore, there is a consensus of Muslim Um¬mah that ‘Book’ could only mean a particular Scripture about which there exists a certitude that, confirmed by the Holy Qur’an, it is the Book of Allah, for instance, the Torah, Evangel, Zabur (Psalms) and other scriptures of Sayyidna Musa and Ibrahim (علیہما السلام) . Therefore, peoples and nations which believe in some book and claim for it the status of a Divine Revelation – and which does not stand proved through the cer¬tain sources of the Qur’an and Sunnah – shall not be included under the term of the People of the Book, for example, the disbelievers of Makkah, the Magicians or the Zoroastrians, the idol-worshipping Hin¬dus, the Buddhists, Aryans, Sikhs and many others.

This tells us that the Jews and Christians who are believers of the Torah and the Evangel are included within the Qur’anic terminology of The People of the Book. The Sabians, a third people, cannot be iden¬tified precisely. Those who think that they believed in the Psalms of David (Zabur) are inclined towards including them too among The Peo¬ple of the Book. Those who were convinced that they had nothing to do with the Psalms, take them to be star-worshippers. They group them together with the idolaters and Magians. However, the Jews and Christians are the ones who are called The People of the Book by universal agreement. Now, we can return to the gist of the Qur’anic injunction, that is, the Dhabihah (slaughter) of Jews and Christians is Halal for Muslims and the Dhabihah of Muslims is Halal for them.

As for the need to first determine the basis of calling and understanding the Jews and Christians as the People of the Book, one may ask: Is it bound with the condition that they should genuinely believe in the original Torah and Evangel and act in accordance with these? Or, even those who follow the altered Torah and Evangel and those who ascribe to Sayyidna ` Isa and Sayyidah Maryam, may Allah bless them both, partnership in the Divinity of God, shall be deemed as in¬cluded among the People of the Book? The answer is that it is quite evident from the many clarifications of the Qur’an that for a people to be from ‘The People of the Book’, it is quite enough that they accept and believe in a Scripture and claim to follow it – irrespective of how much astray they may have gone while following it.

Those to whom the Holy Qur’an gave the title of The People of the Book were also those about whom it said at several places that these people distort their Scriptures: يُحَرِّ‌فُونَ الْكَلِمَ عَن مَّوَاضِعِهِ (5:13). It also said that the Jews took Sayyidna ‘Uzayr (عليه السلام) as the son of God and the Christians did the same to Sayyidna Masih (عليه السلام) وَقَالَتِ الْيَهُودُ عُزَيْرٌ‌ ابْنُ اللَّـهِ وَقَالَتِ النَّصَارَ‌ى الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ اللَّـهِ (9:30). When, despite what they were and what they did, the Holy Qur’an insisted on calling them The People of the Book, it becomes evident that – unless the Jews and Christians were to aban¬don Judaism and Christianity totally – they shall continue to be the people of the Book, no matter how involved in false beliefs of their re¬ligion and dark doings they may be.

Imam al-Jassas (رح) reports in Ahkam al-Qur’an that during the Khila¬fah of Sayyidna ` Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, one of his gov¬ernors wrote to him for advice. He said that there were some people in his area who recited the Torah and observed the Sabbath like the Jews but they did not believe in Qiyamah (the Last Day). He wanted to know how he was supposed to deal with such people. Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) wrote back telling him that they will be taken as a sect of The People of the Book after all.

Atheist Jews and Christians are not the People of the Book:

These days a very large number of people in Europe (and else-where) who are listed in the Census records as Jews and Christians do not really believe in the existence of God and, for that matter, do not subscribe to any institutionalized religion. They do not accept the To-rah and Evangel as Scriptures, nor do they have faith in Sayyidna Musa and ` Isa (Moses and Jesus), may peace be upon them, as proph¬ets or messengers of Allah. It is obvious that such people cannot be counted as included under the injunction governing the People of the Book simply because their names are listed as Jews and Christians in the Census records.

When Sayyidna Ali (رض) said that the slaughter of some Chris¬tians of Arabia is not Halal, he gave a reason. He said that those people believe in nothing but drinking. His words as reported by Ibn al-Jauzi are being cited below:

‘Do not eat from the animals slaughtered by the Christians belonging to Bani’ Taghlib for they have taken nothing from the Christian faith except the drinking of wine (narrated by Al-Shafi` i with sound authority – al-Tafsir al-Mazhari, p. 34, v. 3, al-Ma’idah)

Sayyidna Ali (رض) prohibited the slaughter of the Christians of Bani Taghlib because, according to his information, they were liber¬tines, not Christians. However, the majority of Sahabah and Tabi’in found out that these people too were like common Christians and had never rejected their Faith. Therefore, they ruled that the slaughter of these people was also lawful. Al-Qurtubl says in his commentary:

The majority of the Muslim jurists are of the opinion that the Dhabiha of Christians is lawful, whether from Bani Taghlib or from some other tribe or group. Similarly, the Dhabiha of every Jew is also lawful. (Tafsir al-Qurtubi)

In short, Christians about whom there is confirmed and certain in-formation that they do not believe in the very existence of God or do not accept Sayyidna Musa and ` Isa (عليه السلام) as prophets, will not be in¬cluded under the injunction governing the People of the Book.

What does the ‘food’ of the People of the Book mean?

Literally, طعام ‘Ta’ am’ means what is eaten which, in the Arabic lexicon, includes all kinds of eatables. But, the majority of the scholars of the Muslim Ummah hold that Ta` am’ at this particular place refers to the meat of the animals slaughtered by the People of the Book because there is no distinction between the People of the Book and other disbe¬lievers in eatables other than meat. Dry eatables like wheat, chick peas, rice and fruit are open commodities and are lawful when re¬ceived from a disbeliever of any shade. Nobody differs about that. As for food which goes through human handling, the cautious practice is to avoid it since the purity (Taharah) of utensils and hands used by the disbelievers is not reliable. It is better not to use it without the urgen¬cy of need. But, this is a situation in which the probability of impurity is the same among idolaters and the People of the Book.

To sum up, it can be said that the only possible legal difference in the ‘food’ of the People of the Book and other disbelievers is in the meat they slaughter. Therefore, in the present verse, it is a consensus of the Ummah that the ‘food of the People of the Book’ means their properly slaughtered animal. In his famous Tafsir, al-Qurtubl writes:

The word, ‘Ta’am’ is used for whatever is eaten, included within which are slaughtered animals as well – and here it has been used for slaughtered animals particularly. According to the view of the majority of exegetes of the Qur’an, whatever is unlawful from the ‘food’ of the People of the Book is not in¬cluded in this generality of address (Qurtubi p. 77, v. 6).

Later, al-Qurtubi gives a detailed comment as follows:

There is no difference of view among scholars that it is lawful to eat what requires no slaughter such as fruit and wheat for its being owned (by a non-Muslim) does not bring any damage to the eatable. However, ‘food’ which requires effort has two kinds: First of these is the one in which one makes or produc¬es something which has nothing to do with religion, such as, making bread from dough or pressing oil from olives – in this case, if a Muslim were to abstain from the outcome of the ef¬fort of a disbelieving citizen of an Islamic state (Dhimmi (, that would be an abstention simply based on temperamental dis¬taste. The second kind needs the purifying process of slaugh¬tering an animal properly which, in turn, requires Faith and Intention. In that case, the normal assumption would have required that the act of slaughter performed by a disbeliever should have not been acceptable very much like his acts of worship and prayer. But, Allah Almighty made their slaugh¬tered animals specially lawful for the Muslim Community. This situation has been excepted by the express provision of the Holy Qur’an from the general rule, as mentioned by Ibn ` Abbas رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہما (Qurtubi – Surah al-Ma’idah, p. 77, v. 6)

The gist is that the ‘food’ of the People of the Book as it appears in this verse, means – with the agreement of scholars of Tafsir – food the lawfulness of which depends upon religion and belief: that is, the Dha¬bihah (the slaughter). Therefore, special treatment was meted out to the People of the Book in the case of this form of ‘food’ – because they too claim to believe in Books and Prophets sent by Allah, though their textual alterations invalidated their claim with the result that they got involved in disbelief and in ascribing partners to Allah. This was contrary to the position of disbelieving idolators who did not even claim to believe in any Scripture or Prophet or Messenger and the books or persons they believe in are neither books sent by Allah nor prophets or messengers as proved by any Word of Allah.

The Wisdom behind the Lawfulness of the slaughter of the People of the Book

The third question about the present verse is why the slaughter of the Jews and the Christians, as well as marrying their women, is made lawful for the Muslims, while all other non-Muslims have no such privilege. According to most of the Sahabah, Tabi` in and other exe¬getes of the Holy Qur’an, the answer to this question is very simple. Although the Jews and Christians had distorted their original religion by making many alterations therein, yet their faith regarding these two aspects matched with the Islamic injunctions. That is, they con¬sider it necessary to invoke the name of Allah on their slaughter as an article of faith and take an animal to be impure and unlawful as carri¬on without that due process.

Similar is the case in marriage – the list of the women of prohibited degree (marriage with whom is not lawful) is the same in their religion as in Islam. Also, the way it is necessary in Islam that marriage be pronounced openly, and in the presence of two witnesses, so it is with them – even in their present religion, the same injunctions continue.

The great commentator, Ibn Kathir has reported this very position taken by most hahabah and Tabi’in. His words are as follows:

Ibn ` Abbas, Abu Ummah, Mujahid, Said ibn Jubayr, ` Ikrimah, Hasan, Makhhul, Ibrahim al-Nakh’ii, Suddi and Mugatil ibn Haan have explained the food of the People of the Book’ as their ‘Dhaba’ih’ (properly slaughtered animals). These are lawful for Muslims because they consider slaughtering ani¬mals for anyone other than Allah as unlawful and do not in-voke any name other than that of Allah on animals they slaughter – even if they believe in things about Almighty Allah from which the great Creator is free and far above (Ibn Kathir, Surah al-Ma’idah, p. 19, v. 3).

This statement of Ibn Kathir tells us two things: One, that all Companions and their Successors mentioned above take the ‘food of the People of the Book’ to mean their properly slaughtered animals (Dhaba’ih) and that there is a consensus of the Ummah that they are lawful. And the second point made clear here is that the reason why the Dhaba’ih of the People of the Book are lawful in the view of these revered authorities is that the issue of Dhabihah with the Jews and Christians still stays valid in accordance with the Shari` ah of Islam despite the many alterations in their religion – as they too take an ani¬mal slaughtered in the name of someone other than Allah as unlawful and that they deem it necessary to invoke the name of Allah upon the animal being slaughtered. However, it is a different matter that they fell into the polytheistic belief in Trinity whereby they started equat¬ing Allah and Mash son of Maryam as one and the same. The Holy Qur’an alludes to this in the following words:

Certainly, gone infidel are those who say, “God is the Masih son of Maryam (Jesus son of Mary).

The outcome is that all verses of the Qur’an concerning Dhabihah – which appear in Surah al-Baqarah and Surah al-An` am, and in which the animal slaughtered in a name other than that of Allah, as well as the animal upon which the name of Allah was not invoked – declare both being equally unlawful. All these verses have permanent legal effect and must be acted upon for all times to come. The verse of Surah al-Ma’idah which declares the food of the People of the Book as lawful is also no different from the injunctions appearing in these verses because the very reason of making the food of the People of the Book lawful is no other than that their present religion also maintains that an animal slaughtered by invoking the name of someone other than Allah upon it, and the animal upon which the name of Allah was not invoked, are both unlawful. Even today, the current copies of the Torah and the Evangel do have injunctions of slaughter and marriage almost similar to those of the Qur’an and Islam, details of which will appear a little later.

However, the possibility is there that some ignorant people act in a manner which goes against this injunction of their own religion – very similar to many ignorance-based customs which have found currency among uninformed sections of Muslim masses as well: but, these can-not be called the religion of Islam. Noticing this behaviour of the ig¬norant masses among the Christians of that time, the revered Tabi` in (the successors to the Companions) took the position that Allah, when He made the food of the People of the Book lawful, already knew what they did with their slaughtering of animals. Some would invoke the name of Masih or ` Uzayr upon it while others would invoke no name at all. So, we see that the verse of Surah al-Ma’idah, which declares the ‘food’ of the People of the Book as lawful, acts as a particularizer or a sort of abrogator of the verses of the Surahs al-Baqarah and al-An’-am on the subject of the slaughter of animals, verses in which the slaugh¬tering of animals in a name other than that of Allah or slaughtering them without invoking the name of Allah has been declared unlawful.

According to the view of great ` Ulama’, the respected Tabi` in, who declared that an un-named slaughter of an animal, or of one upon whom a name other than that of Allah was invoked were lawful, also knew that the original religion of the People of the Book was not dif¬ferent from what Islam enjoined and it was only the ignorant section of their masses which made such errors. Despite this, these revered elders did not exclude the ignorant masses of the People of the Book from the general rule governing the People of the Book. They upheld, in matters relating to the slaughter of animals and to marriage, the same injunction which governed their forefathers and the followers of the original religion, that is, the slaughter of animals by them and the marriage with their women was permissible.

In Al-Ahkam al-Qur’an, Ibn al-Arabi says that he asked his teacher, Abu al-Fath al-Maqdisi about the Christians of his time who slaugh¬tered an animal invoking a name other than that of Allah upon it – for example, they invoked the name of Masih or ‘Uzayr at the time of slaughter – how could their Dhabihah become lawful, he wondered.

The reply given by Al-Maqdisi was:

The injunction that governs them is like that of their forefa¬thers. This condition (of the People of the Book) was already within the knowledge of Almighty Allah, but, He has made them subordinate to their forefathers. (Ahkam, Ibn al-` Arabi, p.229, v. 1)

In recapitulation, it can be said that in the sight of the learned eld¬ers of the Muslim Community who have permitted the consumption of animals slaughtered by the People of the Book – those upon which the name of Allah was not invoked, rather, invoked thereupon was a name other than that of Allah – it was clear that these things are an integral part of the real faith of the People of the Book and are equally unlaw¬ful there. But, these learned elders allowed the erring masses also to be governed by the injunction which applies to the original People of the Book. It was for this reason that they allowed the animals slaugh¬tered by the People of the Book to be taken as lawful. On the other side, the majority of the Sahabah, Tabi` in and Mujtahid Imams noticed that the animals slaughtered by the misled masses among the People of the Book, whether in a name other than that of Allah or without the name of Allah, were after all against the Islamic injunction but, in ad¬dition to that, the practice was against the current faith of the Chris¬tians themselves. Therefore, what they do should not affect the stand¬ing injunctions. So, they gave the verdict that the animals slaughtered by such people are not included under ‘the food of the People of the Book’ and, as such, there is no reason to support its lawfulness. Also, the act of going by the saying that their own wrong doing had caused particularization or abrogation in the verses of the Qur’an is not cor¬rect in any manner whatsoever.

Therefore, all leading authorities in Tafsir – Ibn Jarir, Ibn Kathir, Abu Hayyan and others – are unanimous in holding that there was no abrogation (Naskh) in the verses of Surah al-Baqarah and Surah al. An’-am. This is also the favoured position of the majority of Sahabah and Tabi` in as cited earlier with reference to Ibn Kathir and as men¬tioned in Tafsir al-Bahr al-Muhit in the following words:

And they believe: If a Kitabi (of the People of the Book) were to omit the name of Allah while slaughtering an animal, or were to invoke upon it a name other than that of Allah, it is not permissible to eat it. And this is the saying of Abu ad-Darda’, ` Ubadah ibn Samit and a group of the Sahabah. And this is also the belief of Abu Hanifah, Abu Yusuf, Muhammad, Zafar and Malik. However, An-Nakh` ii and Ath-Thawri rule the eat¬ing of it as Makruh (reprehensible). (Al-Bahr al-Mu, p. 431, v.5)

The drive of comments made this far is to establish that the Sahabah, the Tabi` in and the pious elders of the Ummah had no differ¬ence of opinion among them about the understanding that during the period of the revelation of the Qur’an the original faith of the People of the Book also ruled that an animal, upon which a name other than that of Allah was invoked, or was omitted deliberately, was unlawful. The same was the case with the lawfulness and unlawfulness of mar¬riage – the original code of the People of the Book right upto the present times is in accord with the Shari’ ah of Islam in most elements. Whatever was found to be contrary with the People of the Book was simply a matter of errors made by their uninformed masses. This is not their faith.

Existing copies of the Torah and Evangile available world-wide in many languages also confirm this view. Please refer to the Old Testa¬ment which is equally acceptable to contemporary Jews and Chris¬tians. Given below are injunctions about slaughtered animals:

1. “And the fat of the beast that death/died of itself, and the fat of that which is torn with beasts, may be used in any other use: but ye shall in no wise eat of it.” (Leviticus 7:24)
2. “Notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates, whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, according to the blessing of the LORD thy God which He bath given thee: the unlcean and the clean may eat thereof, as of the roebuck, and as of the hart.” (Deuteronomy 12:15)
3. “That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.” (Acts 15:29)
4. “But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacri¬fice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils.” (I Corinthians 10:20, 21)
5. “We have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.” (Acts 21:25)
6. These statements of the Torah and Evangel are from what is wide¬ly circulated by contemporary Bible Societies in which, despite hun¬dreds of alterations and revisions, these things have lingered on and are almost similar to the injunctions of the Holy Qur’an. For instance, Verse 3 of Surah al-Ma’idah says:

7. Prohibited for you are: the carrion, the blood, the flesh of swine, and what has been invoked upon with (a name) other than that of Allah, and the animals dead by strangulation, dead by blow, dead by a fall, dead by goring, and that which a beast has eaten – unless you have properly slaughtered it – and that which has been slaughtered before the idols …

This verse has declared that the carrion, the blood, the flesh of swine, and what has been invoked upon with (a name) other than that of Allah, and animals dead by strangulation, dead by blow, dead by a fall, dead by goring, and that which has been torn by a beast are all unlawful. In the statements of the Torah and Evangel cited above, all these have also been ruled as unlawful, except the ‘flesh of the swine.’ Though, the details of the animals dead by blow or dead by a fall or dead by goring have not been specifically mentioned there, but they almost all) are included under the injunction for those naturally dead (carrion) or dead by strangulation.

Similarly, the Holy Qur’an has stressed upon the invoking of the name of Allah when slaughtering an animal: فَكُلُوا مِمَّا ذُكِرَ‌ اسْمُ اللَّـهِ عَلَيْهِ (Eat out of what the name of Allah has been recited upon – 6:118) and it has prohibited an animal upon which the name of Allah has not been recited: وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا مِمَّا لَمْ يُذْكَرِ‌ اسْمُ اللَّـهِ عَلَيْهِ (Do not eat out of what the name of Allah has not been recited upon – 6:121). The quotation No. 2 from the Bible places a similar stress on slaughtering an animal by invoking the name of Allah.

So it is with most matters relating to marriage as well where the faith of the People of the Book corresponds to the Shari’ ah of Islam. Please see Leviticus (6-19) which gives a long list of prohibitions most of them being what the Holy Qur’an has declared to be unlawful. So much so that it clearly states the unlawfulness of combining two sis¬ters جمع بین الاختین in the bond of marriage at the same time and the un¬lawfulness of intercourse during menstruation as well. In addition to that, the Bible also says that marriage with idolaters and disbelievers is not permissible. The words of the present Torah are:

“Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give upto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.” (Deuteronomy 7:3)

The Rationale of the Lawfulness of Animals Slaughtered by Jews and Christians: A Gist

The only reason why the animals slaughtered by the People of the Book and marriage with their women has been made lawful and the animals slaughtered by other disbelievers and marriage with their women has been made unlawful by the Qur’an is that in both these cases the true and original faith of the People of the Book is in accord with the Law of Islam even today. Anything contrary to that found among their masses is no more than an ignorant practice – it has nothing to do with their original religion. Therefore, the majority of the Sahabah, the Tabi` in and the Mujtahid Imams maintain that there is no contradiction, or abrogation, or particularization in all the verses of Surah al-Baqarah and Surah al-An’-am. No doubt, some scholars of Tabi` in have taken this ignorant practice to be under the rules govern¬ing the People of the Book (holding that their slaughter, even against the injunctions of their original religion, is permissible), and have tak¬en the view that verses of Surah Al-An’-am and Surah Al-Baqarah are abrogated or qualified by the present verse. But this view of theirs is based on the saying of the Christians: إِنَّ اللَّـهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْ‌يَ Allah is Jesus son of Mary – 5:72). It means that even if they were to say the name of Allah, they would invariably be alluding to Jesus the son of Mary. Therefore, when they slaughter an animal, the saying of the name of Allah and saying the name of Jesus upon it becomes equal. This was the ground on which the revered group of Tabi` in had permitted the use of animals slaughtered by the People of the Book. Ibn al-` Arabi has elaborated this aspect of the subject in his Ahkam al-Qur’an (Ibn al-Arabi, Ahkam, p. 229, v. 1).

The Most Sound and Preferred View

But the stand taken on this question did not find acceptance with the learned majority of the Muslim Ummah as mentioned earlier with citation from Ibn Kathir and Tafsir al-Bahr al-Muhit while Tafsir Mazhari, after reporting various positions on the subject, concludes as follows:

And the most sound and preferred view with us is the very first one, that is, the animals slaughtered by the People of the Book on which the recitation of the name of Allah has been left out intentionally, or they have been slaughtered in a name other than that of Allah, are not lawful – if it becomes certain that the name of Allah was not recited upon them, or a name other than that of Allah was taken, or this becomes the common habit of the People of the Book. And elders who have prohibited the eating of animals slaughtered by the Chris-tians of Arabia had this very objective behind their saying. Similarly, when Sayyidna ` Ali said that eating from the ani¬mals slaughtered by the Christians of Bani’ Taghlib was not permissible because they took nothing from the religion of Christianity but the drinking of wine, the justification of his saying so lies in the likelihood of his having the proof that people from the tribe of Bani’ Taghlib do not invoke the name of Allah upon animals they slaughter, or else, they invoke a name other than that of Allah. The same injunction holds good for Christians belonging to areas outside the Arabian Peninsula, that is, if it becomes a matter of habit with them that they would slaughter an animal in a name other than that of Allah, then, it is not permissible to eat from what they slaughter. As for the contemporary Christians, they just do not ‘slaughter’ to begin with – instead, they generally kill the animal by stunning or shocking it. Therefore, their Dhab’hah is not lawful. (Tafsir Mazharl, p.37, v. 3)

Mufti ` Abduh of Egypt and His Error of Judgement

Details of this debated issue have been reported here at some length because, at this point, the well-known ` Alim of Egypt, Mufti ` Abduh has made a grave error of judgment about which there is no doubt that it is wrong and squarely against the Qur’an and Sunnah and the consensus of the Muslim Ummah. In his Tafsir Al-Manar, the learned author has made a twofold mistake at this juncture.

First, he has inflated the sense of the People of the Book to the lim¬it that it has come to include the disbelievers, the Magians, the Hin¬dus, the Sikhs and others, within it, making it so general that the very differentiation between disbelievers, the People of the Book and those other than the People of the Book which spreads out all over the Holy Qur’an turns out, God forbid, to be without meaning and substance.

The second error, still greater, was that he expanded the sense of ‘the Food of the People of the Book’ to accommodate every ‘food’ of the People of the Book, and which he ruled as lawful without any condi¬tion – whether they slaughter the animal, or not; and whether they in¬voke the name of Allah upon it, or not. Taking the circumstances and methods of their eating an animal as the criterion, he made it all Halal (lawful) for the Muslims.

When this Fatwa of his was published in Egypt, the religious schol¬ars of Egypt itself, and those all around the whole world, lost no time in rejecting it as erroneous. Articles and treatises were written. Public demands were universally made that Mufti ` Abduh should be removed from his Office of Ifta’. On the other side, the disciples of the learned Mufti along with some Westophiles joined in with counter debates because this Fatwa was a panacea of their problems. It opened a flood-gate through which Westernized people could feel comfortable with eating every ‘food’ which came from the Jews and Christians of Eu¬rope, even from the atheists, as Halal for them.

It is a great miracle of Islam that the hearts of Muslims at large are never satisfied with an act against the Shari’ah, no matter how great was the ` Alim or religious scholar who committed it. This hap¬pened here too. Muslims all over the world took a stand against this error. The issue, however, did subside at that time. But, the players of the issue still exist as modern deviators or secularists who would love to prepare a new edition of Islam in which every European-oriented absurdity could be accommodated. Claiming to address the ma¬terial desires of the younger generation, they have revived the same debate in the name of modernity and recension with the airs of personal research. Unfortunately, they are repeating Mufti ` Abduh. It was for this reason that this debate was taken up in some details. Allham¬dulillah, what was necessary has been said here. Full details, if need¬ed, may be seen in my treatise, ‘Islami Dhabihah’.

The lawfulness of the ‘food’ of the Muslims for the People of the Book: at does it mean?

There is another issue here which needs to be resolved. The Qur’an says that the ‘food’ of the People of the Book is lawful for Muslims. This is obvious. But, there is the other part of the injunction, that is, the ‘food’ of the Muslims is lawful for the People of the Book – what does that mean? The People of the Book who just do not believe in what the Qur’an says would hardly care for what is lawful, or unlaw¬ful. What, then, is the use of saying it?

In Tafsir Al-Bahr al-Muhit and elsewhere, it has been pointed out that this injunction too is intended for Muslims themselves whereby they are being told that the animals slaughtered by them are lawful for the People of the Book. Therefore, if they were to feed a non-Muslim from the People of the Book out of an animal slaughtered by them, it would be no act of sin. In other words, they can give to a Kitabi (one of the People of the Book) a part of the animal they have sacri¬ficed. Had their Dhabiha been unlawful for the People of the Book, it would have not been permissible for Muslims to have them eat it. Thus, this injunction which apparently seems to relate to the People of the Book is, in reality, addressed to Muslims themselves.

Yet another basis for such intent appears in Ruh al-Ma’ani on the authority of al-Suddi. It says that some animals, or some parts there-of, were made unlawful in the religion of Jews and Christians belong¬ing to the People of the Book, as punishment. Therefore, that animal, or its parts, are obviously not included in the ‘food’ of the People of the Book. But, this sentence of the verse makes it quite clear that an ani¬mal lawful for Muslims – though not accepted as lawful by the People of the Book – shall remain lawful for Muslims, if it comes to them after having been slaughtered by the People of the Book. A hint towards it has been made in the words: وَطَعَامُكُمْ حِلٌّ لَّهُمْ :(and your food has been made lawful for them) appearing in the verse. So, looking at the meaning from this angle as well, the connection of the sentence with Muslims becomes clear once again.

At this point, the author of Tafsir al-Mazhari adds that the sen¬tence has actually spelled out the difference that exists between two matters of importance – that of animals slaughtered and marriages made. There is a difference here. Animals slaughtered are lawful both ways – the Dhabihah of the People of the Book for Muslims and the Dhabihah of Muslims for the People of the Book. But, the matter of the marriage of women does not work in that manner for the women from the People of the Book are lawful for Muslims while Muslim women are not lawful for the People of the Book.

Dhabiah of Apostates

The third problem relates to a Muslim who, God forbid, becomes a Jew or Christian. He will not be included under the definition of the People of the Book – instead, he is a Murtadd or apostate. An animal slaughtered by him is unlawful in accordance with the consensus of the Muslim Ummah. Similarly, a Muslim who has become a Murtadd because of rejecting any of the essentials and absolute beliefs of Islam – even though, he claims to believe in the Qur’an and the Rasul of Allah – will also be a Murtadd. An animal slaughtered by him will not be lawful. Simply reading the Qur’an or claiming to be acting in accor¬dance with it will not entitle him to be counted as one of the People of the Book. However, if someone from another religion or community were to abandon his religion or community and become a Jew or Chris¬tian, he or she would be included under the category of the People of the Book – and an animal slaughtered by him or her would be consid¬ered lawful.

Marriage : Major Points of Guidance for Muslims

The third sentence of this verse reads as follows:

… and [ it is lawful for you to marry ] good women from among believers, and [ also ] good women from among those given the Books before you, provided you give them their dowers, bind¬ing yourself in marriage, not going for lust, nor having paramours.”

Here, the word “al-Muhsanat” appears at both places (translated as ‘good women’ ) which, according to the Arabic usage, could have two meanings: One, free women as opposed to bondwomen; two, chaste women. Lexically, both meanings can be taken at this place.

Therefore, out of the exegetes, Mujahid has taken the sense of free women while explaining “al-Muhsanat” which would mean that free women from among the People of the Book are lawful for Muslims – bondwomen are not. (Mazhari)

But, in the sight of the majority of the learned Sahabah and Tabi` in, “al-Muhsanat” at this place means chaste women and the verse means that the way marriage with chaste Muslim women is lawful, so too is the marriage with chaste women from among the People of the Book. (Ahkam al-Qur’an, Jassas & Mazhari)

However, there is a consensus of the majority of authentic scholars that the restriction of ‘chaste women’ here does not mean that the very marriage with non-chaste women is unlawful. In fact, this restriction serves a purpose. It provides motivation to take a better and more ap¬propriate course in marriage (Mazhari & others). One can marry a Muslim woman or a woman from among the People of the Book, both are law¬ful; but one should never lose sight of the approach that marriage when entered into should be with a chaste woman. Joining up with sinning women in the bond of marriage is not what a good Muslim would elect to do. The truth is that marrying a vice-prone and unrelia¬ble woman amounts to ruining one’s life in this world and in the Here-after both. This should be avoided.1 So, the restriction of ‘the People of the Book’ in this verse proves that marrying women from among non-Muslims, who are not included under the definition of ‘the People of the Book,’ is not lawful, and on this there is a consensus of the Muslim Ummah.

1. However, if an unchaste woman repents from her life truly, she will be included in ‘good women’ and marrying her is not only permissible, but also a commendable act (Editor).

Marriage with other Non-Muslim Women

As said earlier, out of all groups of non-Muslims in this period of time, the Jews and the Christians are the only two religious communi¬ties which can be counted as ‘The People of the Book.’ None of the rest belonging to present religions are included within ‘The People of the Book.’ This general rule applies to fire-worshipping Magians, idol-worshipping Hindus, or Sikhs or Aryans or Buddhists and to others similar to them. This is so because the term, The People of the Book, refers only to those who profess to believe in a Book, the veracity of which as Heavenly Scripture and Divine Revelation stands proved on the basis of definite texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Obviously, these are no others but the Torah and Evangile, the followers of which still exist in this world and in this time. As for the Zabur (The Book of Psalms) and the Suhuf (Scriptures; plural of Sahifah) of Sayyidna Ibra¬him (عليه السلام) they are neither preserved nor have people who claim to follow them. In so far as ‘sacred books’ of other religions like the Ve¬das, the Granth, the Book of Zartusht and similar others are con-cerned, the proof of their being some Scripture or Revelation on valid religious grounds does not exist. The probability that the teaching of Buddha or the books mentioned above could be transformed corollaries of Zabur or the Suhuf of Sayyidna Ibrahim (عليه السلام) are no more than ab¬stract assumptions not based on solid proof. Thus, with the full con¬sensus of the Muslim Ummah, it stands established that, out of differ¬ent faiths present in this age, the women from among the Jews and Christians are the only ones Muslims can marry lawfully. Marriage with a woman from any group or faith other than the two – unless she becomes a Muslim – is unlawful.

The verse of the Holy Qur’an: وَلَا تَنكِحُوا الْمُشْرِ‌كَاتِ حَتَّىٰ يُؤْمِنَّ (2:221) is there to confirm this implication. It means: ‘And do not marry the Mushrik women unless they come to believe’ – and all nations and peoples other than The People of The Book are included under the identity of “al-Mushrik at” (disbelieving women).

So, here we have two verses of the Qur’an which bring this subject in a clear focus. One of them, cited immediately above, says that mar¬riage with disbelieving women is not lawful unless they become believ¬ing Muslims. The second verse is from Surah al-Ma’idah, the one we are talking about right now. This tells us that marriage with women from among the People of the Book is lawful.

Therefore, the learned among the Sahabah and the Tabi` in determined the unambiguous sense of the two verses by saying that the marriage of a non-Muslim woman with a Muslim man should just not take place as a matter of principle. But, this verse of Surah al-Ma’idah has exempted the women of The People of the Book from this generality. As such, the marriage of a Muslim with a woman from any community other than that of the Jews and Christians will not be valid unless she becomes a Muslim.

The Problem in Marrying Jewish and Christian Women

As for marrying Jewish and Christian women, that is, women from among the People of the Book, even this is not permissible in the sight of some noble Companions of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) .

This happens to be the understanding of Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar (رض) when someone asked him about it, he would say: What Allah Almighty says in the Holy Qur’an is clear: ‘Do not marry disbelieving women until they become Muslims’ – and I am not aware of a greater Shirk (associating others in the Divinity of Allah) than that of a person who openly declares Jesus son of Mary or some other created servant of Allah as her Rabb, Lord or God. (Ahkam al-Qur’an, Jassas)

There was an occasion when Maimun ibn Mihran asked Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar (رض) ‘We live in a country with a larger pop¬ulation of The People of the Book. Can we marry their women and eat from the animals they slaughter?’ In his reply, Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar (رض) simply recited these two verses, firstly the one which prohibits marriage with disbelieving women, and then, this very verse of Surah al-Ma’idah which declares the lawfulness of marriage with women from The People of the Book.

Maimun ibn Mihran said: ‘ I too read these two verses in the Qur’an and I know them. But, my question is: In view of these two, what relig¬ious ruling do I follow? In reply to this question, Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar (رض) once again recited these very two verses before him, and said nothing on his own. This has been interpreted by the ` Ulama of the Ummah that Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar (رض) was not at peace with himself even in this matter of marriage being lawful with women from among the People of the Book.

Though, in the view of the majority of the Sahabah and the Tabi` in, marriage with women from among the People of the Book is lawful in itself as in the Qur’an, but marrying them is not free of the many con-sequential disorders for one’s own person, his children, rather for the whole Muslim Community, which would necessarily emerge as borne by experience. This was the basis on which they too considered mar¬riage with women from among the People of the Book as Makruh (reprehensible).

Following a narration from Shaqiq ibn Salmah, al-Jassas reports in Ahkam al-Qur’an: When Sayyidna Hudhayfah ibn Yam-an (رض) came to Mada’in, he married a Jewish woman there. When Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) عنہ       found out about it, he wrote a letter to him asking him to divorce the woman. Sayyidna Hudhayfah wrote back: ‘ Is she unlawful for me?’ Then, in reply, Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) wrote: ‘ I am not saying that she is unlawful, but women from these people do not generally have chastity, therefore, I apprehend lest immodesty finds entry into your homes through this channel.’ And Imam Muhammad ibn Hasan (رح) has, in Kitab al-Athar, reported this event from Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) . He says when Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) wrote another letter to Sayyidna Hudhayfah (رض) his words were:

I hereby put you on oath that you would, before you put down this letter from your hands, divorce and release her, because I fear other Muslims start following you and begin choosing women from among the People of the Book because of their beauty, (bypassing Muslim women in the process). What greater trial could there be for Muslim women? (Kitab al-Athar, p. 156)

After reporting this event, Muhammad ibn Hasan (رح) has said that this is the view the Hanafi jurists take when they do not ac¬tually rule such marriage as unlawful but, because of other disorders and drawbacks, do take it to be Makruh (reprehensible). And ` Allamah Ibn Humam has reported in Fath al-Qadir that an event similar to that of Sayyidna Hudhayfah (رض) also came to pass with Talhah and Ka’b ibn Malik – they married women from The People of the Book on the basis of the verse in Surah al-Ma’idah. When Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) ، heard about it, he became very angry and ordered them to divorce these women (Mazhari).

As for the age and time of Sayyidna ` Umar al-Faruq, the great Kha¬lifah of Islam, may Allah be pleased with him, it was the best of ages. At that time, any probability, that a Jewish or Christian woman would succeed in hatching some conspiracy against Islam and Muslims by entering into the life of a Muslim as his wife, was simply unimagina¬ble. The only danger that lurked before them during those days was to the moral insulation of their families and homes which could be ad¬versely affected by taking in women of doubtful integrity as wives, or that people start preferring them because of their beauty as a result of which Muslim women would be thrown in deep trouble. But, here is the Faruqian farsightedness which keeps track of dangling disharmo¬nies in Muslim lives and compels people of such stature to divorce the women they had taken as wives. Had they been anywhere closer to the current scenario, just imagine the kind and extent of his reaction! The problem with these people is that of dubious identity. Such people would not mind if their names are registered in the census records as Jewish or Christian, but there are many among them who take Juda¬ism or Christianity to be a nuisance in their personal view of things and ideas. They do not believe in the Torah or the Evangel, nor do they attest to the prophethood of Moses and Jesus, may peace be upon them. In matters of belief, they are totally secular, even atheistic. That they let themselves be called Jews and Christians is no more than some communal, societal or formal convenience.

It is obvious that women from people of such background are not lawful for a Muslim under any circumstances. And even if they happen to adhere to their religion, still, accommodating them in the midst of a Muslim family amounts to bringing material and spiritual ruination on it. The conspiracies mounted against Islam and Muslims through this inroad during the later period, and which are not uncommon even today, have a tragic lesson of their own. A woman succeeding as a ter¬minator of Muslim national power is no fiction. Such eventuality is within the realm of possibility. How can any sensible person go, irre¬spective of the considerations of the lawful and unlawful, even close to taking such a step?

Conclusion

According to the Qur’an and Sunnah, and the conduct of the noble Sababah of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، it is incumbent upon Mus¬lims that they should totally abstain from marrying contemporary Ki¬tabi (Jewish and Christian) women. Towards the end of the verse, in¬structions have also been given that should anyone has to have a woman from among the People of the Book, then, this should be done by entering into a proper marriage contract, by keeping the woman as wife and by paying dower and fulfilling other rights. Keeping them as paramours or mistresses or indulging in open fornication with them is forbidden (Haram).

Commentary

The subject of the first of the three verses given above has ap¬peared earlier in Surah al-Nis-a’ in almost the same words. The only   difference is that the arrangement of words there (4:135) was: كُونُوا قَوَّامِينَ بِالْقِسْطِ شُهَدَاءَ لِلَّـهِ while, here (5:8), it has been said: كُونُوا قَوَّامِينَ لِلَّـهِ شُهَدَاءَ بِالْقِسْطِ (be steadfast for Allah as witnesses for justice). A delicate reason for the alternation in words appearing earlier and later in these two verses has been given by Abu Ha-an in his Tafsir Al-Bahr al-Muhit a gist of which is given below.

There are usually two causes which hold people back from doing justice and then make them do the unjust and the oppressive. The first one is taking the side of your own self, or that of your friends and relatives. Enmity with someone is the other cause. The verse in Su-rah al-Nis-a’ is addressing itself to the first subject while this verse of Surah al-Ma’idah is oriented to the other.

Therefore, the words which follow this sentence in Surah Al-Nisa’ وَلَوْ عَلَىٰ أَنفُسِكُمْ أَوِ الْوَالِدَيْنِ وَالْأَقْرَ‌بِي that is, ‘even though against yourselves or the parents, and the kinsfolk …’ After the sentence of Surah al-Ma’idah cited above, the words which follow in this verse are: وَلَا يَجْرِ‌مَنَّكُمْ شَنَآنُ قَوْمٍ عَلَىٰ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا that is, And malice against a people should not bid you to not doing justice …’ So, the essential message of this verse of Surah al-Nisa’ is: When it comes to doing justice, let nothing affect you, neither your own self, nor your parents, nor your relatives. If the de¬mand of justice happens to be against them, stay with nothing but jus¬tice. The essence of this verse from Surah al-Ma’idah is that hostility against an enemy should not affect your sense of justice to the limit that you start working against the demands of justice to harm your enemy.

This is the reason why, by placing ‘al-qist’ (justice) first in the verse of the Surah al-Nisa’, it was said: كُونُوا قَوَّامِينَ بِالْقِسْطِ شُهَدَاءَ لِلَّـهِ… be upholders of justice, witnesses for Allah … ) and, by placing ‘lillah’ (for Allah) first in the verse of Surah al-Ma’idah, it was said: كُونُوا قَوَّامِينَ لِلَّـهِ شُهَدَاءَ بِالْقِسْطِ… be steadfast for Allah as witnesses for justice ) – though, both these modes serve the same purpose end-wise. It is obvious that a person who stands for justice will stand for none but Allah, and one who stands for none but Allah will do nothing but justice. But, when it comes to protecting personal interest or favouring friends and rela¬tives, one may be tempted to justify the thought that the act of caring for relationships here is also for Allah. Therefore, by bringing in the word, ‘al-qist’ (justice) first at that point, the message given was that the concession which is contrary to justice cannot be for Allah. And in Surah al-Ma’idah, where the purpose was to enjoin justice with ene¬mies, the word ‘lillah’ (for Allah) was brought in first, which took away the chances of sentimental attachments overpowering human nature. The point is, when you stand for Allah, the inevitable outcome should be an equal justice with enemies as well.

In short, both these verses of Surah Al-Nisa’ and Surah al-Ma’idah carry two elements of guidance. The first commands full adherence to justice whether dealing with friends or foes. No weakness should be shown on account of any relationship, friendly or hostile. The second instruction given in these two verses is that no one should avoid recording true evidence and stating what is the truth in honesty with Allah, so that the decision makers face no difficulty in arriving at the true, sound and just decision.

The Holy Qur’an has stressed upon this subject in several verses with various angles telling people not to drag their feet and be tardy in appearing as true witnesses. Verse 2:283 from Surah Al-Baqarah car¬ries a very clear command: وَلَا تَكْتُمُوا الشَّهَادَةَ ۚ وَمَن يَكْتُمْهَا فَإِنَّهُ آثِمٌ قَلْبُهُ (And do not conceal the testimony. And whoever conceals it, his heart is, surely, a sinner) which proves that to give a true evidence is an obligation and its concealment, a grave sin.

But, the Holy Qur’an has also kept in sight the impediments to the fulfillment of such duty. The central obstacle is that a witness is made to appear in the courts repeatedly where he is subjected to absurd cross-examinations aimed at breaking the witness and invalidating his testimony. The result is that anyone marked to be a witness is actual¬ly marked out for trouble. Kept away from what he does for living, he becomes a target of all sorts of inconveniences just for nothing. Therefore, when the Holy Qur’an says that the giving of true evidence is nec¬essary (Wajib), it also says: وَلَا يُضَارَّ‌ كَاتِبٌ وَلَا شَهِيدٌ ( And neither scribe nor witness should be made to suffer – 2:282 ).

A carefully investigated view of the courts and cases today will re-veal that spot witnesses and true witnesses are almost extinct. Any sensible person who happens to see something unusual taking place somewhere would instinctively run away from there lest he gets grabbed as a witness. The police fills out its case report with made-up witnesses the result of which could hardly be any different than what is being observed day in and day out. Not even five, or ten percent cases can be decided on the basis of truth and justice. Courts too can-not do anything about it. The kind of witnesses they receive are the only basis on which they have to arrive at their conclusions and decide cases.

But, no one seems to notice the initial error being made in this matter. If witnesses are treated nicely and they are not harassed time and again, good people would not hesitate to come forward to reg¬ister their testimony as required under the teachings of the Qur’an. But, what is happening here is that the first investigation of a case is handled by the police and it is, by itself, enough to drive a witness crazy by his repeated appearances at the station. Once a witness, he would never be a witness again, not even on his dead body. Then the case goes to the court, if it does. And if it does, there comes the prob¬lem of dates, one after the other, they keep coming, next and next. But, the witness becomes the victim who has to undergo the punish¬ment of a crime he never committed when he comes to record his pres-ence on every such new date. This long-hauled rule of procedure, a sick vestige of the British colonist, has corrupted our courts and judi¬cial departments. One naturally tends to compare it with the form of simple and speedy justice provided in modern-day Hijaz and elsewhere in which the number of pending cases cannot become so large, nor would they prolong so continuously, nor does it cause any harassment to witnesses while fulfilling their religious duty.

To sum up, the blessings of an Islamic legal system can be seen even today by simply restructuring the law of evidence, and its attend¬ing rule of procedure, in accordance with the teachings of the Qur’an which require the knowers of truth to testify and which also command that they should not be put to any inconvenience and that they should be free to go within the shortest possible time after recording their tes¬timony.

Some forms of testimony

Finally, at this point, it is important to know that the sense of wit¬ness and testimony in current usage has become limited to testifying before a judge or Committee hearing suits and disputes. But, in the terminology of the Qur’an and Sunnah, the word ‘Shahadah’ (testimony) has a much broader sense. For instance, the medical cer¬tificate given to a sick person which states that he is unable to report on duty, or that he should be retired on medical grounds, is also a tes¬timony. If the statement made in it was contrary to the actual condi¬tion of the sick person, it will turn into a false evidence and become a grave sin.

Similarly, checking student papers and marking them out during tests and examinations is also an act of testifying. If any increase or decrease in the marks allotted in them was done knowingly or careless¬ly, that too shall be a false evidence, which is unlawful, and a grave sin.

Certificates and testimonials awarded to successfully graduating students bear a witness that the awardee has the capability of doing what his or her documents say. But, should it be that the person con¬cerned is, in fact, not so capable, then, everyone who has signed on that certificate or testimonial stands charged with the crime of false attestation.

Correspondingly, casting a vote in favour of a candidate seeking election to assemblies, councils and public bodies is also a testimony in which the voter bears witness that, in his or her knowledge and esti¬mation, the particular candidate is worthy of becoming a representa¬tive or spokesperson of the country and its people, both in terms of his ability and merits and in terms of his honesty and trustworthiness as well.

Now, figure out how many of our representatives are there about whom this ‘evidence’ would prove to be true and correct? But, there is little that can be said about our electorate which seems to take this ex¬ercise of voting as some game where one either wins or loses. That, to them, is all there is to it. Yet, the right of vote is sold for money, or cast under pressure, or thrown away for fickle friends and shady promises. Leave others alone, even educated and observing Muslims fail to realize while voting for undeserving people that they were invit¬ing the curse and punishment of Allah by putting their false evidence on record.

There is yet another way of looking at the casting of votes to elect representatives in accordance with the Holy Qur’an. This is called ‘Shafa` ah’ (recommendation or Sifarish). It means that the voter ap¬proves of the candidate of his choice and recommends that he should be elected as a representative. The injunction of the Holy Qur’an rele¬vant to this situation has appeared earlier in the words given below:

Whoever makes a good recommendation, there shall be for him a share from it (in the Hereafter). And whoever makes a bad recommendation, there shall be for him a share from it – (4:85).

It means that anyone who makes a good, true and justified recom¬mendation, then, he too will get a share from the good deed of the per-son he has recommended. And a person who makes a bad recommen¬dation, that is, favours someone undeserving and bad to succeed through his recommendation, then, he too shall get a share from the bad deeds of the person he has recommended. Thus, when a candidate like this will, during his tenure of office, go on doing what is wrong and impermissible, it is obvious that the curse of his evil doings will fall on the voter as well.

The vote has a third status in the sight of the Shari` ah of Islam – that of advocacy (Wakalah). This is, as if, the voter makes the candi¬date his representative and agent on his or her behalf. But, had this agency been connected with one of his personal rights and the gain or loss from it would have affected his person alone, then, he would have been responsible for it personally. However, that situation does not prevail here, because this agency concerns rights which the entire na¬tion shares with him. Therefore, should a person contribute to the success of an undeserving candidate by voting for him as his represen¬tative, then, the sin of bulldozing the rights of the entire nation rests on his shoulders.

To recapitulate, our vote has a three-pronged status: Shahadah (evidence), Shafa` ah (Recommendation) and Wakalah (Advocacy or rep¬resentation in common rights). Under all three conditions, voting for a good and deserving person brings great reward the fruits of which are bound to reach the voter. Similarly, voting for someone undeserving and uncouth is false evidence, unjustified recommendation and imper¬missible advocacy all in one, so, the evil fruits of his thoughtless voting shall stand recorded in the voter’s log of deeds.

Therefore, it is the duty of every Muslim, man and woman, that he or she must fully investigate into the background of the candidate be¬ing voted for well before the vote is cast. Let them make sure that the candidate is deserving, capable and honest – and not otherwise. Negli¬gence, apathy and heedlessness are poor reasons to go about commit¬ting such grave crimes. If done for no reason, it is absurdity at its worst.

Commentary

In the seventh verse of Surah al-Ma’idah which appeared earlier Allah Almighty has asked Muslims to remember the pledge taken from them to which they professed belief and obedience:

And remember Allah’s favour upon you and His Covenant that He has taken from you when you said, “We have listened and obeyed.” And fear Allah … (5:7)

This pledge is the pledge of obedience to Allah and His Messenger and the pledge of practical adherence to the Shari` ah of Islam. This is technically known as the Kalimah or the statement of creed and which is:

(La ilaa il-lal-la-hu Muhammadur-Rasu-lul-lah:

“There is no god worthy of worship but Allah Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.”

Every Muslim who says this Kalimah is bound by this pledge. In the verse which follows (5:8), some important articles of the pledge, that is, particular religious injunctions have been described. These enjoin eq¬uity and justice for friend and foe alike and teach justice and tolerance – not revenge – for enemies once overpowered. This pledge is, in itself, a great blessing of Allah, therefore, it has been made to begin with:

(And remember Allah’s favour upon you …).

By beginning the present verse (5:11) with the same sentence : اذْكُرُ‌وا نِعْمَةَ اللَّـهِ عَلَيْكُمْ (And remember Allah’s favour upon you), the objective is to tell Muslims that as long as they remained faithful to their pledge, Al-mighty Allah blessed them with power and excellence in the present world and with high ranks for the Hereafter, shielding them all along against their enemies, in war and in peace.

This verse particularly mentions how enemies conspired to destroy Muslims and kill their Prophet on so many occasions, but Almighty Al¬lah foiled all their plans and put them to disgrace – ‘some people planned to lay their hands on you, and He kept their hands away from you.’

Speaking generally, there are innumerable events on the annals of the history of Islam when the plans made by disbelievers were seen rolling in dust by Divine grace. But, there are some special events as well which our learned commentators have pinpointed as the substan¬tiation of this verse – for example, in the Musnad of ` Abd al-Razzaq, a report from Sayyidna Jabir (رض) عنہ says:

In a Jihad, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and his Companions  رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہم stopped to rest at one stage. The noble Companions scattered out to rest at various spots. The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) stopped by a tree, all by himself. He hung his weapons on a branch of the tree. A villager from among the enemies pounced on this occasion, dashed in and took pos¬session of the sword of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . Then, taking it out from the sheath, he threatened him by saying: مَن یَّمنَعکَ مِنِّی (That is, ‘now tell me who can save you from my hand?’ ).

Undaunted, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: ‘Allah (the Mighty, the Exalted) ‘. The villager repeated what he had said earlier, that is, ‘now tell me who can save you from my hand?’ Once again, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said with the same composure: ‘Allah

After two or three exchanges in this manner, it was the awe of some unseen power which forced the challenger to put the sword back in its sheath. At that point, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) called the Companions (رض) in and narrated what had transpired. The villager was still sitting by his side. He said nothing to him. (Ibn Kathir).

As part of an explanation of this verse, reports from some Compan¬ions (رض) say that there was an occasion when Ka’b ibn Ashraf, a Jew, had invited the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to his house with the intention of killing him. Allah Almighty told him about this evil intention which foiled his conspiracy (Ibn Kathir). Also reported from Mujahid, ` Ikrimah and others is that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) once went to Yahud ibn Nudayr to talk about a matter of concern. He asked him to sit un¬der a wall, engaged him in a conversation while secretly he appointed ` Amr ibn Jahsh to scale the wall from behind and throw down a rock from the top of the wall over him. Allah Almighty let His Messenger, may he remain blessed and protected forever, know about their hos¬tile intention and he immediately rose and moved away from there (Ibn Kathir).

There is no contradiction about these events. All of them can be taken to be substantiating the present verse where, after mentioning the unseen protection provided to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and to Muslims in general, it was said: وَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ وَعَلَى اللَّـهِ فَلْيَتَوَكَّلِ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ (And fear Al¬lah. And in Allah the believers should place their trust).

First of all, what is being said here is that this blessing from Allah is not restricted to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) rather, the real cause of this Divine support and protection is the quality of Taqwa (the fear of Allah) and Tawakkul (Trust in Him). Any nation, or individual who lives by these two virtues, in any time and in any place, will have the support and protection from Almighty Allah in the same manner. How well this was put in two lines by poet Iqbal:

Create the atmosphere of Badr, for your help the angels could descend from the heavens, file after file, even now!

It is also possible to refer this sentence back to the set of previous verses where Muslims have been commanded to treat their worst ene¬mies with courtesy and justice. If so, the sentence would indicate that the teaching of courtesy and tolerance in the case of such avowed ene¬mies may amount to making a political error which may put them back on their feet. Therefore, in this sentence, Muslims were warned that this tolerance and courtesy will bring absolutely no harm to them only if they continue being the kind of people who fear Allah and trust in Him. In fact, instead of giving the enemies the courage and oppor¬tunity to renew their hostility against them, this behaviour of theirs will become the cause of bringing them closer to Islam into the Muslim area of influence. Besides, Taqwa or the fear of Allah is the only factor which can compel a person to abide by a pledge both physically and spiritually. Wherever this quality of Taqwa remains missing, pledges get readily broken as commonly witnessed these days. So, the earlier verse (5:8) which mentions a pledge, also directed to وَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ , (Fear Allah) towards the end. The same assertion was repeated here. Finally, this whole verse gives a clear hint that a Muslim victory with Divine support does not simply depend upon outward logistics and hardware, instead of that, the secret of their real power lies in Taqwa (the fear of Allah) and Tawakkul (trust in Him).

After the present verse has mentioned the pledge taken from Mus¬lims and rewards it would bring when fulfilled, the second verse brings into focus another side of the issue. It clarifies that this taking of pledges is not something special to Muslims. Similar pledges were also taken earlier, from other communities as well. But, they failed to fulfill them. Therefore, various punishments were sent upon them. It is said in the verse that Almighty Allah had taken a pledge from the Bani Isra’il (The Children of Israel). The pledge was taken in a partic¬ular form. The people from Bani Isra’il were divided over twelve tribes. One chief from each such tribe was chosen to represent them. Every chief from each of the twelve tribes declared on his behalf and on be-half of his whole tribe that they would adhere to this Divine Covenant. Thus, these twelve chiefs took that responsibility on behalf of the en-tire people of Bani Isra’il which entailed that they would themselves adhere to this pledge as well as make their tribe do so.

Worth noting at this point is the cardinal principle of Islam in mat¬ters of honour, merit, office and recognition which, in the words of the Persian poet, Jami, is:

You have become a servant in love, forget about your lineage, 0 Jami!

For, on this highway, so and so the son of so and so means nothing.

The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) had declared this in full clarity when delivering his historic Address on the occasion of his Last Hajj by saying that Islam does not recognize any dividing line between Ar¬abs and non-Arabs, black or white, high caste or low caste. Whoever enters Islam becomes a brother to all Muslims. The distinctions of status, lineage, colour, country and language were the idols and icons of the Days of Ignorance – Islam has broken them all. But, it does not mean that one should not consider family background when harnessed to establish order and efficiency in administrative matters.

It is but natural that people of a tribe or family are more likely to trust a known member of their group as compared to others. Such a person is expected to understand and accommodate the feelings of his group much better because he knows their psychological reflexes in de-tail. When a pledge was taken from the twelve tribes of Bani Isra’il, it was based on this very strategy whereby one chief from each of the tribes was made responsible for its compliance.

The same consideration of administrative expediency and a peace¬ful resolution of possible conflict was made when the Bani Isra’il were highly agitated about a shortage of water. Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) prayed to Allah and as commanded by Him he struck his staff against a rock. Then, Almighty Allah made twelve streams flow from this rock for each of the twelve tribes. Allah Almighty has mentioned this great favour in the Holy Qur’an (Surah al-A` raf, 7:160) in the following words: وَقَطَّعْنَاهُمُ اثْنَتَيْ عَشْرَ‌ةَ أَسْبَاطًا أُمَمًا (And We divided them into twelve tribes, as separ¬ate communities) and: فانبَجَسَتْ مِنْهُ اثْنَتَا عَشْرَ‌ةَ عَيْنًا (So, twelve springs gushed forth from it [ one for each tribe ]). As for this figure of twelve, it is rather unusual and lends to popular interpretations.

When the Ansar of Madinah came to invite the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to their city, he took a pledge from them in the form of Bay’at. In this pledge also, the twelve chiefs of the tribes of Ansar, acting on behalf of their tribes, gave their hands in the blessed hands of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) giving a solemn pledge of adherence popularly known as Bay’at (or Bay’ah in its pausal form).

Three of these chiefs were from the tribe of ‘Aws and nine from the tribe of Khazraj (Ibn Kathir).

According to another narration from Sayyidna Jabir ibn Samurah appearing in al-Bukhari and Muslim, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is reported to have said that people and their needs shall stay covered until such time that twelve Khulafa’ (ruling authorities) will be lead¬ing them. After having reported this narration, Ibn Kathir has com¬mented that no word from this hadith proves that these twelve Imams or Khulafa’ would rule one after the other, continuously. On the con¬trary, they could also appear spaced out from each other with breaks in between. Thus, there were four Khulafa’ – Sayyidna Abu Bakr (رض) ، Sayy idna ` Umar al-Faruq (رض) ، Sayyidna ` Uthman al-Ghani (رض) and Sayyidna Ali al-Murtada (رض) – succeeding in that order. After the passage of sometime in between, Sayyidna ` Umar ibn ` Abdul-` Aziz was accepted by the consensus of the Ummah as the fifth righteous Khallfah’ of Islam.

Now, returning back to the pledge taken from the Bani Isra’il, it will be recalled that Allah had made the twelve chiefs from their twelve tribes responsible for them and to them He said: اِنِّی مَعَکُم (I am with you). It means if they fulfilled the pledge themselves and re-solved to make others do the same, Divine support shall be with them. After that, the verse enumerates some articles of this pledge, then refers to the breach of trust committed by the Bani Isra’il and the subse¬quent punishment that descended upon them.

Thus, the sentence: ‘ اِنِّی مَعَکُم (I am with you) which appears before mentioning the articles of the pledge is there to tell two things. First¬ly, if they stood by the pledge, Divine support will be with them which they would witness on every step they take. Secondly, they must real¬ize that Allah is with them everywhere, all the time. He is watching over this pledge. Nothing that they intend, think, plan and do will remain outside the reach of His knowledge. He sees and hears what they conceal and He is also aware of their intentions and plans. They cannot escape His grip by breaking the pledge. Then come the articles of the pledge, the first being ‘the establishment of Surah’ followed by ‘the paying of Zakah properly.’ This tells us that the people of Sayyid¬na Musa (عليه السلام) were also obligated with the duties of Salah and Zakah much before Islam. Other Qur’anic hints and authentic reports prove that these duties were not peculiar to Bani Isra’il alone. In fact, they have been enjoined by every prophet and every Shari’ ah.

The third article of the pledge is that they should believe in all prophets and messengers sent by Allah and help them achieve their objective of spreading true guidance. Since many messengers were to come to the Bani Isra’il, they were the ones particularly charged to do this. Though, the status of basic Iman or faith comes ahead of actual acts such as Salah and Zakah, yet, in this pledge, what was to be actu¬ally done was what was placed first. Prophets and messengers who were to come, would be coming later. Since the matter of believing in them and helping them in their mission was to happen later, that part was placed later in the text.

The fourth article of the pledge is: أَقْرَ‌ضْتُمُ اللَّـهَ قَرْ‌ضًا حَسَنًا (…and advance to Allah a goodly loan …). “Qardan Hasana” (a goodly loan) means that it should be with absolute sincerity without any worldly expedien¬cy behind it. When spending in the way of Allah, one should spend what one holds dear – never trying to get away by giving out of the spare, the extra and the worthless. Spending in the way of Allah has been expressed as ‘the giving of loan’ because the return of a loan is taken as due legally, customarily and morally. So, one should spend in the way of Allah believing that it will be returned definitely.

Since the obligatory Zakah has already been mentioned at its place, the introduction of Qard Hasan here indicates that it is referring to Sadaqat and Khayrat (charities) other than Zakah. It also tells us that Muslims are not done with all financial responsibilities by simply paying off the Zakah due on them. There are other financial rights to be fulfilled, such as, making a Masjid where needed. When governments do not initiate or support religious education for children and adults, the responsibility of establishing and running institutions devoted to imparting religious education rests on none but Muslims themselves. The difference between the two is that Zakah is Fard Ayn (absolute ob¬ligation on every individual) while the kind of charities mentioned above are Fard Kifayah (an obligation of sufficiency as explained below).

Fard Kifayah means: should some individuals or a group from the Muslim community take care of such needs, other Muslims are released from the burden of responsibility; and, should no one come forward to do so, everyone becomes a sinner. How terrible are the cir-cumstances in which schools for religious education are operating in our time is known and braved by only those who have made it a mis¬sion of their lives to keep serving their Faith through these institu¬tions of religious learning. As for paying Zakah, Muslims know that it is an obligation on them. It is strange that, despite this knowledge, there are very few who pay their Zakah – and there are still fewer who take the trouble of paying the full Zakah due on them after a full accounting. And even those who rarely pay out the full amount of Zakah due on them, think that they have done all they were supposed to do and that there is nothing more due on them. Go to them about some urgent need of a Masjid and they will come up with Zakah money. The same thing happens with religious institutions – they too hardly get any financial support other than Zakah. Although, these are duties, other than Zakah, which Muslims have to fulfill – this has been made clear in this verse of the Qur’an and in many other verses similar to it.

Towards the end of the verse, after enumerating the articles of the pledge, it was also clarified that the fulfillment of the pledge on their part will be amply rewarded, even their past sins will be forgiven and they will have the eternal comfort and security of Paradise. But, finally they were given to understand that should any of them elect to ig. nore such clear statements and go on to the limits of rejection and re¬bellion, they should know that they have left the straight path only to their self-appointed ruin.

Commentary

The first verse is telling us that Bani Isra’il were heedless to clear instructions given to them. Then, they broke the pledge for which they were punished. There were two kinds of punishment which visited Bani Isra’il because of their misdeeds and contumacy:

1. Manifest and perceptible, like the hail of stones and rocks or the overturning of land mass, which find mention in several verses of the Qur’an.
2. Intellectual and spiritual, as if their very minds and hearts were transformed in punishment for their contumacy which made them incapable of thinking and feeling and they went on sinking deeper in the curse of their sins.

The verse opens with the words: فَبِمَا نَقْضِهِم مِّيثَاقَهُمْ لَعَنَّاهُمْ وَجَعَلْنَا قُلُوبَهُمْ قَاسِيَةً. It means that it was because of their contravention of the solemn pledge that Allah made them far-removed from His mercy (that is, from its effects, which is the reality of ‘La` nah’ or curse – Hadrat Thanavi) and made their hearts hardened against any penetration of truth. This re¬moval from mercy and the hardening of hearts has been likened to “Ra-‘n ” (stain or rust) by the Holy Qur’an in Surah al-Mutaffifin: كَلَّا ۖ بَلْ ۜ رَ‌انَ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِم مَّا كَانُوا يَكْسِبُونَ. It means that the reason why they reject open verses of the Qur’an and all too manifest signs is that the stain of sins has settled down on their hearts. In a hadith, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ` said: When someone commits a sin for the first time, a black dot gets stamped on the heart. He feels the pinch of this evil presence all the time. It is like a black stain on a white cloth which is a constant sore of the eye. Now, if he gets chastened, repents and resolves not to do it again, that dot is erased; and should he become care-free and start a spree of other sins, a black dot for each subsequent sin will keep add¬ing up, so much so, that the clean slate of his heart will turn jet black with these dots of stain. At that stage, the state of his heart will be-come very much like a pot placed upside down in which nothing goes in but to come out instantly. Therefore, nothing good settles down in his heart for he has fallen into a state of moral inertia – to him nothing good is good and no evil is evil. Rather, the opposite becomes his more likely approach – he starts taking defect as merit, vice as virtue and sin as reward. Thus armed with his crooked thinking, he goes on rid¬ing high in his rebellion and contumacy. This is a cash and spot pun¬ishment of his sin which he gets right here in this mortal world.

Some respected elders have said: اِن من جزاء الحسنۃ الحسنۃ بعدھا وان من جزاء السیٔۃ السیٔۃ بعدھا ، that is, the cash reward of a good deed is that one gets the Taufiq (the ability given by Allah) of doing another good deed. Simi¬larly, the cash reward of a sin is that one’s heart starts being attracted by other sins soon after the first. Thus, obedience and disobedience both have a pull of their own – one good invites another good and one evil attracts other evils and sins.

Referring back to the breach of trust committed by the Bani Isra’il, it can be said that the cash punishment due against it was that they were removed from Divine mercy – which is the greatest medium of salvation. And their hearts became so hardened that they stooped to the level of ‘moving words away from their places’ which means that they alter the Word of God – in words or meanings or recitation – all of which have been described in the Holy Qur’an and the books of Alha¬dith, some of which have been acknowledged by European Christians as well (Tafsir Usmni).

The result of the intellectual and spiritual punishment mentioned above was that they forgot to take advantage of the good counsel given to them: فَنَسُوا حَظًّا مِّمَّا ذُكِّرُ‌وا بِهِ. Then, this punishment stuck glued to them: وَلَا تَزَالُ تَطَّلِعُ عَلَىٰ خَائِنَةٍ مِّنْهُمْ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِّنْهُمْ ۖ that is, the Prophet of Islam would keep knowing about one or the other breaches, deceptions and treacheries committed by them. The exception is indicated in: إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِّنْهُمْ (but a few) which re¬fers to people like Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn Sal-am and others who were followers of the faith of the People of the Book before they became true Muslims.

Upto this point, the description of the misconduct of the Ban’ Isra’il was obviously demanding enough that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) should hold them in contempt and never allow them to come to him. Therefore, in the last sentence of this verse, the instruction given to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was فَاعْفُ عَنْهُمْ وَاصْفَحْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُحْسِنِينَ (So for-give them and forego. Indeed, Allah loves the good-in-deed). It means that, despite their peculiar condition being what it is, it is better that the Prophet of Islam abstains from doing what is otherwise quite natu¬ral. In other words, he should not treat them with contempt or hatred because after knowing what they are – hardhearted and cold – the chances that any good counsel would affect them are very remote. Granted. But, toleration and civility of morals are wonder virtues which could probe out some sense and sensibility from out of such in-sensate people. Even if this effort to drive some sense into them fails, something worth doing still remains – keeping one’s own matters and morals correct is, after all, quite necessary. Allah Almighty likes what is done with good grace – and it will definitely bring Muslims closer to Him.

From the first verse, 5:13, which dealt with the breach of trust by Jews and their punishment for it, we now move to the next verse, 5:14, which refers to Christians: وَمِنَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّا نَصَارَ‌ىٰ. In this verse, the punish¬ment described for Christians is mutual dissension. Being for their breach of trust, this wi11 continue right upto the Last Day.

Looking at the contemporary scene, one may have doubts about Christians who seem to be united. The answer is that the present statement covers genuine Christians, observing and abiding. As for those who have moved away from their own religion turning into non-conformist, secular or atheistic individuals or groups, they are, for all practical purposes, out of the list of Christians – even though, they may count them as Christians among the nationalities of a country. If, among such people, that religious dissension and mutual hostility does not exist, it would not be contrary to this verse – because the conflict was based on religion, once the religion is not there, conflict too would not be there. As said earlier, this verse describes people who profess and practice the religion of Christianity – and their division is well-known.

Given below is a brief reference from Taysir in the marginal notes of commentator, al-Baydawi which reports that there were three sects among Christians originally:

1. Fisturyah (Nestorians) who took Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) (Jesus) as the son of God.
2. Ya’qubiyah (Jacobites) who believed in Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) (Jesus) himself as one with God.
3. Malka’iyah (Malkites) who believed in Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) (Jesus) as one of the Trinity.

And it goes without saying that in the presence of such major divi¬sions in matters of belief, mutual malice is inevitable.

Commentary

Refuted here in this verse is only one saying of the Christians – which is the belief of a sect among them – that Sayyidna Masih (عليه السلام) is God. But, the argument employed in the refutation virtually covers the false beliefs of all sects against the inalienable principle of Tauhid, that is the Oneness of Allah. This may be a belief in a son of God or a belief in one of the three Gods – the argument refutes all of them.

That Sayyidna Masih (عليه السلام) and his blessed mother have been mentioned here jointly could be because of two wise considerations. Firstly, it is the humility of Sayyidna Masih before Allah Ta` ala that he could never think of saving himself against the will of Allah, or his mother whose care and service a good son considers dearer than his own life. Second¬ly, by doing so, the view of the sect which takes Sayyidah Maryam as one of the three Gods also stands refuted.

Also noteworthy at this point is the mention of the death of Sayyid¬na ` Isa (عليه السلام) and Sayyidah Maryam, peace be upon both of them, as a suppo¬sition – although, the death of Sayyidah Maryam was no supposition at the time of the revelation of the Qur’an; it had already occured, in fact. The reason for this may either be the superimposition (Taghlib) of the desired subject, that is, since the real intent here was to describe the death of Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) as a supposition, the mention of his blessed mother was also made as a corollary of the same subject, even though, her death had already occurred – or, it can also be said that the expres¬sion means: The way We have made death take away Sayyidah Maryam, it lies within Our power to make it overtake Sayyidna Masih (عليه السلام) and the rest of the creation as well. And the statement: يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَاءُ (He creates what He wills – 5:17), is there to refute this particular base which Christians use to deify Sayyidna Masih (عليه السلام) because they reason out that his birth came to pass, against all rules of nature operative in this world, without a father and from the mother alone – had he too been a human being, he would have been born through a mother and father both, very much in accordance with the natural law.

This one sentence answers the reasoning by saying that Allah has the most perfect and the most comprehensive power to create what He wills and how He wills. The same doubt has been removed in the verse: إِنَّ مَثَلَ عِيسَىٰ عِندَ اللَّـهِ كَمَثَلِ آدَمَ (Surely, the case of ` Isa, in the sight of Al¬lah, is like the case of Adam – 3:59) where it has been established that the creation of Sayyidna Masih (عليه السلام) as separate from the habitual law of nature cannot become an argument in favour of his being taken as God.

The reason lies in pondering that Allah Ta` ala did create Sayyidna Adam (عليه السلام) without a father and mother both. He has the power, all power, over everything. He is the Creator and the Master and the most worthy of worship. No one else can be associated with His Divini¬ty as a partner or sharer.

Commentary

The word, “fatrah” in:    عَلَىٰ فَتْرَ‌ةٍ مِّنَ الرُّ‌سُلِ (after a gap between Messengers) literally means to slacken, to become dormant or to suspend or to terminate an activity. Leading authorities in Tafsir have given this very meaning of fatrah in this verse. It signifies the suspension of the coming of prophets for a certain interval of time which is the period of time in between Sayyidna ` Isa     and the Last of the Prophets, Sayyidna Muhammad al-Mustafa (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) .

Verification of the Gap

According to Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas (رض) there is a pe¬riod of one thousand and seven hundred years between Sayyidna Musa and Sayyidna ` Isa (عليهم السلام) . During this whole period, prophets kept coming with their missions without any gap. To Bani Isra’il alone, one thousand prophets were sent during this period – not included in which are prophets who appeared among peoples other than Bani Isra’il. Then comes the period of only five hundred years between the birth of Sayyidna (عليه السلام) and the appearance of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as the Last Prophet. During this period, the usual chain of prophets remained discontinued. Therefore, this period is known as Fatrah or Gap. Before this, a longer period has never remained unvisited by prophets. (Qurtubi, with some explanation from the author)

There are other reports regarding the period of time between Sayy¬idna Musa and Sayyidna ` Isa (عليهم السلام) ، and that which is between Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) and the Last Prophet, Sayyidna Muhammad al-Mustafa (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . The period of time indicated in these reports is either more, or less, but that does not affect the real purpose.

Imam a1-Bukhari (رح) reports on the authority of Sayyidna Salman al-Farisi (رض) عنہ      that there was a period of six hundred years between the time of Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) and the Last among Prophets (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) .

During this entire period, no prophet was sent as confirmed by a Hadith in Mishkat, appearing there with reference to the Sahibs of al-Bukhari and Muslim, which reports that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: اَنا اَولَی النَّاس بِعِیسٰی that is, ` Among people, I am the closest to ` Isa.’ He explained the meaning of his remark later in the Hadith when he said:  لیسَ بَیننَا نَبِیُّ that is, ` No prophet was sent between the two of us.’

As for the three messengers mentioned in Surah Ya Sin (36), they were messengers sent by Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) who have been’ called messengers (bearers of a message) in the literal sense.

About the appearance of Khalid ibn Sinan al-` Arabi during this gap as reported by some chroniclers, Tafsir Ruh al-Ma’ani says with refer¬ence to Shihab that his being a prophet is correct, but the period in which he came was earlier than Sayyidna ` Isa, (عليه السلام) not after him.

Rulings concerning the Gap

Obviously, the verse seems to indicate the fate of the group of peo¬ple who were not visited by any messenger or prophet or their depu¬ties, nor did they have the religious laws of past prophets preserved with them; such people will be considered excusable and will deserve no punishment on the condition that such people should have not com¬mitted Shirk, the grave sin of ascribing partners in the Divinity of Al¬lah. Therefore, Muslim jurists differ about rulings which apply to the people of Fatrah (gap), particularly about whether or not they will be forgiven.

The majority tilts towards the hope that they will be forgiven if they had kept adhering to the religion which had survived with them as originating from Sayyidna Musa or Sayyidna ‘Isa (عليهم السلام) irrespec¬tive of its authenticity – again, subject to the condition that they had not been hostile to the principle of Tauhid, the Oneness of Allah, and had nothing to do with the practice of Shirk. The reason is that the Principle of Tauhid needs no reported proof. Any human being who ponders over it could himself reason it out.

A Question and its Answer

A question may arise here that the Jews and Christians, the people of the Book, who are being addressed in this verse did have the Torah and the Evangel and their sages and scholars with them even if no messengers reached them during this gap. How then could they come up with the excuse on the Day of Judgment that they had received no guidance? The answer is that by the time of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) the original Torah and the Evangel had gone extinct. There were altera¬tions in texts and additions of false narratives. Thus, the availability of non-original scriptures were no better than its extinction. The likeli¬hood of an original manuscript surviving at some unknown place with someone would not be contrary to the assertion made. In fact, some scholars including Ibn Taymiyyah have written that the original cop¬ies of the Torah and Evangile were present at some places.

The Unique Perfection of the Last among Prophets (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

When, by addressing the people of the Book in this verse, it was said that ` Our Messenger, Muhammad al-Mustafa (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has come after a long gap,’ there emerges a subtle hint towards the need that people who have been honoured with his presence among them should consid¬er this as a matchless blessing and a supreme asset because the line of prophets had remained suspended since a long time and it has been opened for them once again.

Yet another indication given here is towards the fact that the world has been blessed with his presence in an age and at a place which lacked the light of knowledge and faith. The creation of God had lost its link with God only to be immersed in the worship of self-made idols. In the backdrop of a time such as this, the mission of reviving a people so lost was no easy task. This time was the notorious Jahiliyy¬ah, commonly identified as the Age of Ignorance, and the people from it who were entrusted with the Prophet of Islam were spoiled, self-centered and uncompromising. Yet, such was the bliss of his company and so bracing was the light of his mission that this very set of people became, in a very short time, role models and teachers for the whole world in all departments of life – in knowledge, deed, morals, dealings, social living, to name only a few. This, then, becomes a widely wit¬nessed and authentically verified proof that he was a Prophet and Messenger of Allah and that his prophetic teachings were the most ef¬fective and the most surpassing among those coming from all past prophets. Imagine the mission of a physician who treats a hopeless pa¬tient and does it at a place which lacks medical instruments, and med¬icines too, yet he succeeds in his effort to treat the patient to the limit that this patient, not simply that he rises from his death-bed to be-come a healthy person, but that he goes way ahead and himself turns into an expert physician and healer as well – if so, who can doubt the perfection of the master healer!

With this in view, we can see that following the long gap when dis¬belief in and disobedience to God reigned supreme everywhere, his teaching and training spread out the kind of universal light which re-mains unparalleled by any age previous to it. In short, out of all mira¬cles, this one miracle alone could compel human beings to have faith in him.

Commentary

Previous to the verses cited above, a pledge was mentioned in which the Bani Isra’il were bound to obey Allah and His Messenger. Mentioned along with it was their customary breach of trust, and its punishment. Taken up in the verses appearing above there is a partic¬ular event which shows such a breach.

That event goes back to the time when Pharaoh and his army were drowned in the sea and Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) and his people, the Bani Isra’il, once delivered from the slavery of the Pharaoh, became the masters of Egypt. Then, to bless them with His added reward, and to let them repossess their ancestral land of Syria, Allah Ta` ala commanded them through Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) that they should enter the Holy Land, that is, Syria, with the intention of Jihad. And along-with it, they were given the good news that victory will be all theirs in this Jihad – as Allah had made that holy land their destiny and they were bound to have it. But, the Bani Isra’il had their peculiar traits of character. They saw the blessings of Allah with their own eyes, they saw the spectacle of the drowning of Pharaoh and the conquest of Egypt, yet they failed, once again, to stand by the solemn pledges they had given and elected to sit out the Jihad of Syria squarely against this Divine command. The punishment they received for it was in the form of a forty-year confinement to a limited area where, strangely enough, there were no walls or fences around them, nor were they in chains. Instead, they were free to move in an open area and actually travelled every day, right from the morning through the evening, with the intention of returning to Egypt, their homeland. But, when came the evening, they would find themselves exactly at the spot from where they had started in the morning. During this period, Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) and Sayyidna Harun (عليه السلام) left this mortal world and these people kept wandering in the wilderness of Tih. It was after that, that Allah Ta` ala sent other prophets for their guidance.

Thus, after the passage of full forty years, those who survived from among them resolved to take up the Jihad of Syria and Baytul-Maqdis under the leadership of the prophet of their time and the promise of Allah that the Holy Land had been destined for them was thus ful-filled. This is a summary of the event referred to in the verses cited above. Let us now see its details in the words of the Qur’an.

When Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) received the instruction to call his people to Jihad in order to conquer Baytul-Maqdis and Syria, he acted very much in accordance with his prophetic wisdom so crucial in giv¬ing good counsel. Therefore, before announcing the Divine command to his people, he reminded them of the many blessings bestowed upon them upto that time. He said:

O my people, remember the blessings of Allah upon you when He made prophets from among you, made you kings and gave you what He did not give to anyone in the worlds.

Recounted here are three blessings. The first of these is a spiritual blessing, that is, many prophets were sent to them continuously, a spiritual honour which can hardly be matched. It has been reported in Tafsir Mazhari that no other community has had such a large number of prophets as compared to Bani Isra’il.

Hadith authority, Ibn Abi Hatim, reports on the basis of a narra¬tion from A’mash that in only one single period, the last period of the people of Bani Isra’il which extends from Sayyidna Musa   عليه السلام to Sayyidna ‘Isa (عليه السلام) one thousand prophets were sent to Ban’ Isra’il. The second blessing mentioned in the verse quoted immediately above is a material blessing, that is, they were made masters and wielders of power. The hint given here is that the people of Bani’ Isra’il who were the oppressed slaves of the Pharaoh and his people for many ages saw how Allah Ta` ala destroyed their enemies and how they themselves were made masters and kings. Noteworthy here is the statement about prophets where it was said: جَعَلَ فِيكُمْ أَنبِيَاءَ (He made prophets from among you) which carries the sense that the whole people were not prophets, and this is the truth as prophets are only a few while the large body of people follows them. But, when it comes to the subject of temporal power on countries and states, said there was: وَجَعَلَكُم مُّلُوكًا (and made you kings) the outward sense of which is that they (all) were made kings. The Arabic word, ` muluk’ used in the text is the plural of Malik which means a king in common usage. Obviously, when a whole people cannot be all prophets, no people of a country can be all kings.

What happens is that authority in a country rests in the hands of an individual or some individuals while the rest of the people are subordi¬nate to them. But, here the words of the Qur’an are attributing king-ship to all of them.

One reason for this is what has been stated by Maulana Ashraf ` Ali Thanavi (رح) with reference to some righteous elders in his Tafsir Bayan al-Qur’an, that is, the sovereignty of the ` king’ of a country is customarily attributed to his entire people, for example, during the middle centu¬ries of Islam, the government was called as that of Ummaiyyids and ` Abbasids. Similarly, the rule of Ghaznavis and Ghauris, then, that of Mughals, and after that, the rule of the British in India was attributed to all individuals of entire people of that country. Therefore, a whole people having a ruler are known (by proxy) to be rulers of that coun¬try.

It was according to this usage that the Qur’an has attributed king-ship to the whole people of Bani Isra’il. In this, there may be a hint that an Islamic state is really run by a government of the people. It is the people who have the right to elect their Amir (Imam, leader or rul¬er) and it is once again, the right of the people who can, by their collec¬tive will, remove the holder of that office. Therefore, when seen out¬wardly, a ruler rules as one individual, but, in reality, that rule is that of the people.

The second reason as reported from some elders by Ibn Kathir, Ma¬zhari and others is that the sense of ` malik’ is more general than that of a king. In common usage, this word is also applied to a person who is well-to-do, has a home, owns property and employs help. In the light of this sense, that was a time when every individual from the Bani Isra’il was like a king of his castle. That explains the attribution of kingship to the entire Bani Isra’il.

The third blessing mentioned in this verse is a combination of both, the spiritual and the material. It was said: وَآتَاكُم مَّا لَمْ يُؤْتِ أَحَدًا مِّنَ الْعَالَمِينَ that is, they were given the kind of blessings which were not given to any-one else in all the worlds. Included under these blessings is spiritual distinction highlighted by the station of prophethood and, along with it, the more obvious temporal power, authority, domain and wealth too. However, a question may arise here regarding the belief that the Muslim Ummah, the large body of believers in the Last among Proph¬ets (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is the most distinct among all Communities as supported by the textual authority of the Holy Qur’an, such as: كُنتُمْ خَيْرَ‌ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِ‌جَتْ لِلنَّاسِ (You are the best Ummah raised for mankind – 3:110) and: جَعَلْنَاكُمْ أُمَّةً وَسَطًا (And in the same way, We made you a moderate Ummah – 2:143) prove it, as do the many narrations from the Prophet’s living Traditions. The answer is that the people of the world being men¬tioned in this verse are the people who were living in the particular

period of Bani Isra’il which was marked by the presence of Sayyidna Musa among them. That was the time when no one in all the worlds was as blessed as were the Bani Isra’il. That any other commu¬nity in times to come could be blessed more than them should not be considered contrary to this.

Looking at verse 22 which begins with the words: قَالُوا يَا مُوسَىٰ (They said, 0 Musa …), it will be recalled that, in the verse previous to it (21), Allah Ta` ala had commanded the Bani Isra’il through Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) that they should wage a Jihad against the Amalkites and conquer Syr¬ia given along with it was the good news that the land of Syria has been destined for them, therefore, their victory is certain.

The present verse (22) tells us that, despite the Divine command and assurance, the Bani Isra’il, because of their well-known contumacy and crookedness, just did not obey that command as well. Instead of doing that, they said: ` 0 Musa, there is a nation of tyrants over there, and we shall never go in there until they get out of it. If they do get out of it, then, we are ready to go in.’

The actual event as reported from the masters of Tafsir (Exegesis), Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas, ` Ikrimah, ibn Abi Talhah and oth¬ers (رض) is that it was a time when the Amalkites ruled Syria and Baytul-Maqdis. They were an offshoot of the people of ` Ad, unusually big in height and size and very ferocious in looks and behavior. They were the people Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) and his community were asked to fight against and go on to conquer Baytul-Maqdis.

To carry out the Divine command, Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) marched towards Syria in the company of his people, the Bani Isra’il. Baytul-Maqdis was their first destination. After crossing the Jordan river, when they reached Ariha, the oldest city of the world, they made a stopover. We have already read about the appointment of twelve chiefs to administer the affairs of Bani’ Isra’il in the previous verses of the Holy Qur’an. The same chiefs were asked to go on an advance fact-finding mission into enemy territory. Their duty was to gather intelli¬gence on local conditions, the battle front and about the people who control Baytul-Maqdis and against whom they have to wage the Jihad. When these chiefs reached Baytul-Maqdis, they were stopped by an Amalkite man right outside the gate of the city. He, all alone, put them under arrest and took them to his king reporting to him that these people had come to fight them. The king went into consultation with his courtiers. Their decision was that all of them should either be killed or punished in some other way. Finally, they agreed upon the proposal that they should be allowed to go free so that they could return to their people and become walking eye witnesses of the great power and grandeur of the Amalkites against which they would never dare to think of marching.

At this point in most books of Tafsir, reported there are tall tales from Isra’ilite narrations which give the name of the person who ac¬costed these chiefs as ` Awj ibn ` Unuq. His extra-ordinary height and size and his power and strength has been described there with such exaggeration that a sensible person would find it too thick even to just pass it onwards.

Tafsir authority, Ibn Kathir has said: Tales reported in such Isra’ilite narrations can neither be accepted by reason nor do they have any justification in the Shari` ah. In fact, all this is a bundle of lies and imputations. The truth of the matter is no more than that there are the people called the Amalkites. Since they are the remnants of the people of ` Ad whose awesome height and size has been mentioned by the Holy Qur’an itself, so, their huge size and unusual strength were proverbial. One of their men proved strong enough to arrest and take away twelve men from the people of Bani Isra’il.

However, freed by the Amalkites, the twelve chiefs of Bani Isr-a’il returned to their people at Ariha. They told Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) about these unusual people and how unbelievable was their power and grandeur. Whatever they said to him left his heart unmoved because Allah Ta` ala had already given him the good news of victory over them through revelation.

So, despite having heard about the power of his enemy, he stood like a rock making preparations for the Jihad initiative. But, he had realized the danger that, should the Bani Isra’il come to hear about this unusual strength of their adversary, they would cringe and back out. Therefore, he instructed those twelve chiefs not to talk about the Amalkites before their people, in fact, he asked them to keep this as a guarded secret. But, what actually happened was that everyone from among them passed on the information to their respective friends pri¬vately. There were only two of them, Yusha` ibn Nun and Kalib ibn Yu’qina, who strictly followed the instructions of Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) and did not disclose the secret to anyone.

When ten out of the twelve chiefs let the secret out, it was only natural that the secret became public knowledge. Hit by the news of conditions prevailing in the enemy country, they were all upset. Wail¬ing and protesting, they said: It would have been much better if we too had been drowned in the Nile like the people of the Pharaoh! Now those who saved us there have brought us here to be killed at the hands of those tyrants! It was under these conditions that the Bani Isra’il said the following words:

They said, “0 Musa, there is a nation of tyrants over there and we shall never go in there until they get out of it. If they do get out of it, we are ready to go in.”

It appears in the next verse (23) that two persons, God-fearing and blessed by Allah, hearing the remarks made by the Bani Isra’il, gave them some good counsel by saying: Why are you so scared of death much before it has come? Just take a few steps. The gate of the city of Baytul-Maqdis is not far. Take heart and make your move. Only this much of your action, we believe, will become the cause of your victory. Once you enter the gate of Baytul-Maqdis, you will overcome your ene¬my who would run in defeat. These two persons mentioned in this verse are, according to most commentators, the same two of the twelve chiefs who had faithfully acted upon the advice given by Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) and had abstained from telling the Bani Isra’il every-thing about the Amalkites – that is, Yusha` ibn Nun and Kalib ibn Yu’gina.

The Determination of Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) against the Treachery of his People

The prayer of Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) ; قَالَ رَ‌بِّ إِنِّي لَا أَمْلِكُ إِلَّا نَفْسِي “0 My Lord, I have no control except over myself” should be seen in the perspective of the events in the life of the people of Bani Isra’il, the favours of Allah bestowed upon them and the conduct of their prophet, Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) in their case. An impartial observer would not fail to notice that the people of Bani Isra’il had been suffering from all sorts of pain and disgrace as slaves and serfs of the Pharaohs for centuries. It was the teaching of Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) and his barakah by virtue of which Allah Ta` ala blessed them with unprecedented sta¬tions. With their own eyes, they saw so many manifestations of the most perfect power of Allah Jalla Sha’nuhu . The Pharaoh and the peo¬ple of Pharaoh were defeated on their own grounds, in the Court con¬frontation summoned by them at the hands of Sayyidna Musa and Sayyidna Harun, peace be upon both of them.

The magicians they had trusted were the magicians who placed their trust in Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) and elected to stay by his side. Then, there was the Pharaoh, the one who claimed to be God, and along with him, there were so many members of his family who lived in luxury in the royal palace. And then, their eyes saw how the great subduing power of Allah, the Mighty, the Exalted, made all of them vacate all palaces and mansions they lived in and leave behind all they once owned, all simultaneously, in a single sweep of time. And how He drowned the Pharaoh in the sea with Bani Isra` il looking on the spectacle and how did He make the miracle of Bani Isra` il themselves cross the river. And finally, how was the wealth, over which the Pharaoh waxed proud by saying: أَلَيْسَ لِي مُلْكُ مِصْرَ‌ وَهَـٰذِهِ الْأَنْهَارُ‌ تَجْرِ‌ي مِن تَحْتِي (Is it not that this land of Egypt is for me and these are rivers which flow from beneath me?) given out by Allah Ta` ala, the entire country and the entire wealth, without any fighting or killing, to the Bani Isra’il

These were great happenings. These people were direct witnesses to the manifestations of Allah’s supreme power to subdue. No less was the good done to them by Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) who first delivered them from heedlessness and ignorance and then freed them from the slavery of the Pharaoh facing unbearable hardships in that process. After all that, when these very people were commanded to mount a Ji¬had on Syria, of course with assurances of Divine help and promises of rewards, they betrayed their mean nature and said: (So go, you and your Lord, and fight. As for us, we are sitting right here). Let the greatest possible reformer in the world stop for a while, cross his hand over his heart and think what effect such low at¬titudes demonstrated by the people he was working for would have produced on him. But, here we are talking about a highly determined Rasul of Allah who stands there as an immovable model of steadfast¬ness, despite all odds, and pursuing his goal relentlessly.

Now that he was made helpless by repeated breaches of trust com¬mitted by his people, he turns to his Lord and to Him he says only this much: إِنِّي لَا أَمْلِكُ إِلَّا نَفْسِي وَأَخِي (I have no control except over myself and my brother). And the problem was how could he now carry out the Jihad expedition against the Amalkites? Also worth noticing is the fact that there were at least two chiefs of the Bani Isra’il, Yasha’ ibn Nun and Kalib ibn Yu’qina, who had proved themselves to have been faithful followers of Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) and had made consistent efforts with him to give good counsel to their people and bring them to the right path. Still at this time, he made no mention of them as well. He simply talked about himself and his brother, Sayyidna Harun (عليه السلام) . It had no other cause but the same treachery and disobedience of the people of Bani Isra’il. Sayyidna Harun (عليه السلام) being a prophet was the only one Divinely protected there. That he would stand firm by the truth in word and deed was certain. As for the two chiefs, they were not so protected and infallible. So, being in pain and anger, he mentioned only those he was certain would stand firm on truth – ‘I have no control except over myself and my brother.’

The prayer that Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) made after that was: فَافْرُ‌قْ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَ الْقَوْمِ الْفَاسِقِينَ (So, make a separation between us and the sinning people). The substance of this prayer, according to an explanation given by Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas (رض) was that ‘the punish¬ment these people deserved should be given to them; and whatever we are found to be deserving of should be awarded to us.’

The manner in which Allah Ta` ala answered this prayer was: مُحَرَّ‌مَةٌ عَلَيْهِمْ ۛ أَرْ‌بَعِينَ سَنَةً ۛ يَتِيهُونَ فِي الْأَرْ‌ضِ (This [ land ] is prohibited to them for forty years. They shall be wandering around the earth). It means that the land of Syria was forbidden for them for forty years. They shall’ not go there, even if they wanted to. And not simply that they would be un¬able to go to the land of Syria, they would also be unable to return back to their homeland of Egypt, if they thought of going there. Instead of that, they shall be detained in this wilderness.

For punishments that come from Allah Almighty who needs the po¬lice and their handcuffs or the high and strong walls and iron-gates of prisons? When He intends to detain anyone, He needs none of these formal arrangements. He can put one under arrest even on grounds open from all sides. The reason is obvious. The whole universe is at His command. It was created by Him and from Him it takes its orders. When the universe is served with Divine orders to put someone under arrest, the air and the atmosphere and the earth and the space become the jailor for the condemned.

So, this open land area located between Egypt and Baytul-Maqdis is comparatively small. Its measurement, according to the Tafsir of Sayyidna Muqatil (رح) is thirty Farsakh in length and nine Farsakh in width. If one Farsakh is taken to be equal to three miles, it comes to be a total area of ninety miles in length and twenty seven miles in width. And according to some narrations, the whole area is thirty by eighteen miles. Thus, Allah Ta` ala detained a whole people whose total number, according to the statement of Sayyidna Muqatil (رح) was six hundred thousand, restricting them within this small open ground in a manner that they kept struggling for full forty years to somehow get out of this open land area and return back to Egypt, or go forward and reach Baytul-Maqdis. But, what actually happened was that by the time came evening after a whole day’s journey, they discovered that they have been as if moving in a circle having returned to the same spot from where they had started in the morning.

Authentic scholars of Tafsir say that the punishment Allah Jalla Sha’nuhu gives to a people is in proportion to their evil deed. Since these disobedient people had uttered the words: إِنَّا هَاهُنَا قَاعِدُونَ (we are sit¬ting right here), Allah Ta` ala had them detained right there for forty years in punishment. Historical accounts in this matter differ. Some say that during these forty years, the present generation which had disobeyed was totally destroyed. Their next generation survived and it was this generation which, after having been delivered from this forty year detention, entered Baytul-Maqdis; or, there were some people from the earlier generation who were still surviving. However, there was that promise of the Holy Qur’an: كَتَبَ اللَّـهُ لَكُمْ (that is, Allah has destined the Holy Land of Syria for the Bani Isra’il). That promise had to be fulfilled, that the Bani Isra’il should take it over and rule the land. But, the people of Bani Isra’il present during that time elected to ig¬nore this Divine award for which they were duly punished: مُحَرَّ‌مَةٌ عَلَيْهِمْ ۛ أَرْ‌بَعِينَ سَنَةً that is, they were deprived of victory over the Holy Land for forty years. Then, it was at the hands of their next generation, that this country was conquered, and the promise of Allah Ta` ala stood fulfilled.

In this wilderness of Tih, Sayyidna Musa and Harun were with their people for whom this wilderness was nothing but detention and punishment, while, for these two blessed souls, it was the fountain head of Divine blessings. This is why this period of forty years during which the Bani Isra’il were condemned was still full of many silver lin¬ings. Such was the barakah of the presence of Sayyidna Musa and Harun (علیہما السلام) among them, that Allah Ta` ala showered on them bless¬ings of many kinds. When they became helpless against the scorching sun over their heads in an open field, Allah Ta` ala, answering the prayer of Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) stretched out a canopy of clouds over their heads. Wherever they went, these clouds would follow them with their shade. When they complained of thirst and the shortage of water, Allah Ta` ala gave Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) a special stone which went with him wherever he went, and when they needed water, Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) would strike it with his staff and twelve streams would gush forth from it. When they were hit by hunger, the heavenly food of Mann and Salva was sent to them. And when they complained about the darkness during nights, Allah Ta` ala provided for them a tower of light under the light of which they did what they had to do.

To sum up, this wilderness of Tih was not full of condemned people only. In fact, there were two dear prophets of Allah Ta` ala and with them two favoured elders, Yusha` ibn Nun and Kalib ibn Yu’qina, as well. It was for their sake that, even during this period of detention and punishment, blessings kept coming to them. And since Allah Ta` ala is the Most Merciful of all those merciful, it is possible that these once disobedient people from the Bani Isra’il, after having wit¬nessed the happenings around them, may have repented from their sins and may be it was in return for their act of repentance that they were being blessed with these rewards.

According to authentic narrations, it was during this period of forty years that Sayyidna Harun (عليه السلام) died. Then, after a year or six month, came the death of Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) After them, Allah Ta` ala appointed the revered elder, Yusha` ibn Nun as a prophet and gave him the mission of guiding the Bani Isra’il. When the period of forty years of detention was over, the remaining people of Bani Isra’il got together under the leadership of Sayyidna Yusha` ibn Nun and marched towards Baytul-Maqdis on this mission of Jihad. True to the promise of Allah Ta` ala, they conquered Syria and the wealth of the land they inherited was unimaginable.

That it has been said: لَا تَأْسَ عَلَى الْقَوْمِ الْفَاسِقِين (so do not grieve for the sinning people) at the end of verse 26 has a basis, for the blessed prophets, may peace be upon them all, are endowed with a natural dis¬position which makes it impossible for them to bear by the pain and hardship of their people. Even if they are punished, the prophets too are affected emotionally. Therefore, Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) has been comforted here that he should not grieve over the punishment given to those people.

The Story of Habil (Abel) and Qabil (Cain)

In these verses, Allah Ta` a1a has instructed the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) that he should relate the story of the two sons of Adam truthful¬ly to the people of the Book, or to the whole Ummah.

People who are blessed with insight into the Holy Qur’an know that it is no book of folklore, fiction or history where the purpose is to relate an event from the beginning to the end. But, events of the past and accounts of earlier peoples carry many lessons and wise counsels within their fold. That is the real essence of history. Then, in them, there are such conditions and circumstances as form the basis of dif¬ferent religious injunctions. In view of these very beneficial considera¬tions, the Qur’an employs a methodology of its own throughout the text. It would, when the occasion warrants, narrate an event. Most of-ten, it would not narrate the whole event in one sequence and at one place. In fact, preference is given to narrating a particular segment from it which bears some element of purpose and is relevant at the given place.

This story of the two sons of Adam (عليه السلام) is being narrated here in the same style. It has many lessons and good counsels for the present and future generations; and under them, mention has been made of many religious injunctions.

We shall proceed by explaining the words used in the text of the Qur’an following which you will have an idea of the main story, and af¬ter that we shall be talking about injunctions and rulings contained therein.

In the previous verses, mentioned there was the command of Jihad given to the Bani Isra’il and how cowardly and evasive they turned out to be in response. Set in contrast, the present story condemns unjust killing and the destruction it brings in its wake. The purpose is to bring the people to adhere to moderation and balance in this matter, for the way it is an error to cringe and back out from fighting and killing to uphold the truth and put an end to falsehood, similarly, starting to kill and fight unjustly amounts to a stock destruction of one’s mate¬rial and spiritual life both in the present world and in the Hereafter.

As for the expression: ابْنَيْ آدَمَ (ibniy Adama: the two sons of Adam) appearing in the first verse (27), it can be said that, for that matter, every human being, man and woman, is from the progeny of Adam (عليه السلام) and everyone can be identified as being from among the children of Adam. But, according to the judgment of the majority of authentic scholars of Tafsir, the expression: ابْنَيْ آدَمَ at this place means the two real sons of Sayyidna Adam (عليه السلام) that is, Habil and Qabil. It was to relate their story that it was said: وَاتْلُ عَلَيْهِمْ نَبَأَ ابْنَيْ آدَمَ بِالْحَقِّ (and recite to them the story of the two sons of Adam truthfully).

While Reporting Historical Accounts, Caution and Truth are Mandatory

Here, by adding the word: بِالْحَقِّ (bil-haqq: truthfully), stress has been placed on an important principle to be observed while reporting historical narratives. Great caution is mandatory in this matter. These narratives should have nothing false in them, nothing contrary to the truth, nothing dubious or deceptive, nor should there be any change, increase or decrease, of any kind, in the narration of the original event. (Ibn Kathir)

This is not the only place where the Holy Qur’an has identified this principle. There are other places too where similar instructions appear that it be observed. In Surah ‘Al ` Imran, it was said: إِنَّ هَـٰذَا لَهُوَ الْقَصَصُ الْحَقُّ (This is indeed the true narration – 3:62). In Surah Al-Kahf, it was said: نَّحْنُ نَقُصُّ عَلَيْكَ نَبَأَهُم بِالْحَقِّ (We narrate to you their story with truth – 18:13). An d in Surah Maryam, it was said: ذَٰلِكَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْ‌يَمَ ۚ قَوْلَ الْحَقِّ (That was ` Isa son of Maryam – a Word of Truth … -19:34). At all these places, by including the key word of Al-Haqq or The Truth with historical narrations, the importance of observing truth in reporting events has been made man¬datory. The large number of disorders in this world generated through reporting of events usually issue forth from lack of caution in handling it as it should be handled. A little change of word or mode could distort the reality of the event. The religious codes and laws of past communi¬ties were lost through this trap door of negligence and lack of caution leaving their religious books to become collections of stories devoid of reliable authority. So, by adding a single word: بِالْحَقِّ (truthfully) at this place in the verse, a clear signal was given towards this important ob¬jective.

In addition to what has been said above, through this very word, the addressees of the Holy Qur’an are also being chastened and guided to the fact that their noble prophet, on him be the peace and blessing of Allah, who is a total Ummiyy (untaught by any human being), yet he is describing the events which took place thousands of years ago, absolutely true and correct. When so, how else could it be explained but that it was divinely revealed to a Divinely ordained prophet?

After this introduction, the event relating to these two sons of Adam     was put in the following words by the Holy Qur’an: اِذْ قَرَّ‌بَا قُرْ‌بَانًا فَتُقُبِّلَ مِنْ أَحَدِهِمَا وَلَمْ يُتَقَبَّلْ مِنَ الْآخَرِ‌ that is, both of them offered their sacrifices for Allah Ta` ala, but it was accepted from one of them and was not ac¬cepted from the other.

The word: قربان (Qurban ), in terms of Arabic lexical usage, refers to whatever is made the medium of nearness to someone; and in Islamic legal terminology, it means the Dhabihah or sacrifice which is offered to seek nearness to Allah Ta` ala.

The event of offering this sacrifice which has been reported on the basis of sound and strong chains of authorities and which has been de¬clared by Commentator Ibn Kathir as the unanimously agreed upon position of all earlier and later ` Ulama is given below.

When Sayyidna Adam and Hawwa’ (علیہما السلام) came to live in the world and started having children, it so happened that they had twins from every pregnancy, one of the two being a boy, while the other, a girl. That was a time when, among the children of Adam (عليه السلام) there was no one other than brothers and sisters – and brothers and sisters cannot be married to one another. So, Allah Jalla Sha’nuhu, in terms of the need of the time, had promulgated a special provision in the re¬ligious law given to Sayyidna Adam (عليه السلام) that, as for a boy and girl born out of one pregnancy, they shall be regarded as real brothers and sisters among themselves and marriage between them shall be consid¬ered forbidden. But, for a boy born in the second pregnancy, a girl born in the first one shall not be legally taken as a real sister and marriage between them would be permissible.

But, what happened was that the girl born with the first boy, Qa¬bil, was beautiful while the girl born with the second boy, Habil, was ugly. When came the time of marriage, the ugly girl born with Habil fell to the lot of Qabil according to rules. This enraged Qabil. He turned hostile to Habil and started resisting that the girl born with him should be the one given in marriage to him. Sayyidna Adam (عليه السلام) ، in view of the legal rule of procedure, did not accept the demand. Howev¬er, to remove the division between Habil and Qabil, he proposed that they should both offer their respective sacrifice for Allah. Whoever. has his sacrifice accepted will be the one to have that girl. The reason is that Sayyidna Adam (عليه السلام) was certain that the sacrifice to be accept¬ed will be the sacrifice of the one who has the right to marry her, that is, the sacrifice of Habil.

In those days, an open sign of a sacrifice being accepted was that a fire would come from the sky and eat up the sacrifice; and the sacrifice which was not eaten up by the fire was the sign of its remaining unac¬ceptable.

Now, the situation was that Habil was the owner of a flock of sheep and goats. He offered the sacrifice of a good spring lamb. Qabil was a farmer. He offered some grains as his sacrifice. As customary with them, a fire did come from the sky and ate up the sacrifice offered by Habil – and the sacrifice offered by Qabil remained lying where it was, untouched. Thereupon, hit by failure and disgrace, Qabil was further enraged. Unable to restrain it, he told his brother openly: لَأَقْتُلَنَّكَ (I will kill you).

Habil did not respond to his angry remark with counter anger on the spot. He rather said something which was peaceful and principled. It even had an element of sympathetic concern for him: لَأَقْتُلَنَّكَ (Allah accepts only from the God-fearing) that is, if you had been God-fearing, practicing Taqwa and piety, your sacrifice too would have been accepted. Since you did not do so, the sacrifice was not accepted. Why blame me for it?

Also mentioned within this statement is the cure for the envy (hasad) of the envier (hasid), that is, when the envier sees that Allah Ta` ala has given someone a particular blessing which has not been giv¬en to him, then, he should take his deprivation as a result of his own practical shortcomings and sins and think of repenting from them and correcting his or her behaviour – not that one starts wishing and wor¬rying about ways through which the other person could be made to lose the blessing he has – because this would not bring him any gain, in fact, it will become the cause of some loss to him, for acceptability with Allah depends on Taqwa (fear of Allah). (Mazhari)

Acceptability of Deeds Depends on Ikhlas (Sincerity) and Taqwa (Fear of Allah)

There appears in this dialogue between Habil and Qabil a sentence which has the status of an important principle: The acceptability of one’s deeds and acts of worship depends on Taqwa. The deed of a person who has no Taqwa in him is not accepted. For this reason, the learned among the righteous elders (salaf) have said that this verse is a shot in the arms of those who are devoted to acts of worship and do deeds in the hope of finding the pleasure of Allah. And this was the reason why Sayyidna ` Amir ibn ` Abdullah was crying at the time of his death. People around him asked: ‘As for you, you have been busy doing your ` Ibadat (acts of worship) and good deeds throughout your life, why, then, would you weep?’ He said, ‘You are saying this and ringing in my ears is this saying of Allah Ta` ala: إِنَّمَا يَتَقَبَّلُ اللَّـهُ مِنَ الْمُتَّقِينَ (Allah accepts only from the God-fearing). I just do not know if any ` Ibadah of mine will be accepted, or not.’

Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn Masud (رض) said: ‘If I become certain that Allah Ta` ala has accepted some deed of mine, then, I would not surrender this blessing even if the whole world were to turn into solid gold and pass into my possession, in fact, I would take it to be nothing as compared to that blessing.’

Similarly, said Sayyidna Abu Ad-Darda’ ‘If it stands set¬tled that one Salah of mine has found acceptance with Allah Ta` ala, then, that is far more than a whole world full of blessings for me.’

Sayyidna ` Umar ibn ` Abd al-` Aziz, may Allah be pleased with him, gave the following good counsel to a person in a letter he wrote to him.

“I tell you to hold on to Taqwa without which no deed is ac¬cepted; and mercy is not shown to anyone except those who observe Taqwa; and without it there is no Divine reward on anything. There are many who preach it but there are very few who practice it.”

And Sayyidna al-Murtada (رض) said: ‘Even the smallest deed done with Taqwa is not small. And how a deed which has been ac¬cepted can be called small? (Ibn Kathir)

Qur’anic Laws are Unique and Revolutionary

Mentioned in the previous verses (27-32) was the event of the killing of Habil (Abel) and its gravity as a crime. In the verses cited above, and in verses which follow, there is a description of the legal punish¬ments for killing, plundering, robbery and theft. Prompted in between the description of the punishments for robbery and theft is the need to fear Allah and the desirability of seeking nearness to Him through acts of obedience. This approach of the Qur’an, acting in a very subtle manner, prepares the human mind to accept the desired revolutionary change in thinking. The reason is that the Holy Qur’an, unlike the pe¬nal codes of the world, does not stop at a simple codification of crime and punishment. Instead of doing that, it combines with each crime and its punishment the ultimate fear of Allah and the Hereafter mak¬ing the later almost present before him whereby it would turn the hu-man orientation towards a state of being the very thought of which leaves a person all cleansed from every defect and sin. An impartial view of things as they are around us will prove that, without the moti¬vating factors of the fear of Allah and the apprehension of the Here-after, no law or police or army of this world can guarantee that crimes can be eradicated from human societies. It is this wise and affection-ate approach of the Holy Qur’an which ushered a revolution in the world when it created a society of human beings who, in their Godli¬ness, were ahead of even angels.

The Three Kinds of Islamic Legal Punishments

Before we proceed with the details of the Islamic legal punish¬ments for robbery and theft mentioned in the verses cited above and present our explanations of the particular verses, it seems appropriate to clarify the Islamic legal terminology concerning these punishments – a lack of familiarity with which causes even educated people to fall in doubts. Under all common laws of the world, punishments for crimes are considered penalties in an absolute sense, irrespective of the crime concerned. Law books like the Indian Penal Code, Pakistan Penal Code and some others in other countries are comprised of all sorts of crimes and their punishments. But, in the Shari’ah of Islam, things work differently. Here, the punishments of crimes have been divided into three kinds. These are: Hudud (Islamic legal punishment delimit¬ed as Divine Statute; plural of Hadd), Qisas (Even Retaliation) and Ta` zirat (Penalties; plural of Ta` zir). Before we move on to define these three kinds and explain their sense, it will be useful to bear two things in mind.

Firstly, it is necessary to know that crimes which bring harm or loss to a human being inflict injustice not only on the created but also cause disobedience to the Creator. Therefore, in every crime of this nature, the Right of Allah (Haqqullah) and the Right of the Servant of Allah (Haqqul ‘Abd) are intermingled, and one becomes guilty of both crimes. But, in some crimes, the status of the Right of the Servant of Allah is more important while, in some others, the status of the Right of Allah is more prominent. As for the modus operandi in religious in-junctions, it rests on this status of predominance.

Secondly, it is also necessary to know that the Shari’ah of Islam has not determined any yardstick for crimes other than those which are special. Instead, it has left it to the discretion of the Qadi (the Judge of an Islamic Court) who could award and enforce the kind and amount of punishment deemed necessary to plug out the incidence of crime keeping in view the objective conditions prevailing in whatever time, place and circumstance it may be. It is also possible that the Is¬lamic state of any time and any place may, with due consideration of Islamic legal percepts, restrict the rights of the Qadis in some manner and make them abide by a particular measure of punishment for crimes – as has been the practice in the later centuries of Islam, and as it nearly is the prevailing practice in most countries.

Let us now understand that crimes for which the Qur’an and Sun¬nah have not fixed any punishment, instead, have left it to the discre¬tion of the relevant authorities, are the kind of punishments which are called “Ta` zirat” (penalties) in the terminology of the Shari’ah of Islam. As for the punishments of crimes already fixed by the Qur’an and Sun¬nah, they are divided over two kinds. Firstly, those in which the Right of Allah has been declared to be predominant and the punishment for which is known as “Hadd,” the plural of which is “Hudud.” Secondly, those in which the Right of the Servant of Allah has been accepted as predominant in accordance with the Shari’ah of Islam and the punish¬ment for which is called the “Qisas” (Even Retaliation). As for the de¬scription of Hudud and Qisas, the Holy Qur’an has itself explained it in full details. The details of the remaining penal offences have been left to the judgment of the Holy Prophet a1ii and to the discretion of the relevant ruling authority of the time.

In short, we can say that the punishment of crimes which the Holy Qur’an has promulgated after having determined it to be the Right of Allah is called the “Hudud,” and that which it has ordained as the Right of the Servant of Allah is known as “Qisas,” and crimes the pun¬ishment of which has not been determined by it are called, “Ta` zir.” The injunctions of these three kinds differ in many respects. Those who take the punishment of every crime as “Ta` zir” on the basis of their own customary usage – and do not keep the difference of Islamic legal terminology in sight – make frequent errors of judgment in un-derstanding Islamic legal injunctions.

As for the punishment of penal offences (Ta` zir), they can be made the lightest, the heaviest, or could even be pardoned, all depending on attending circumstances. Here, the powers and options of the relevant authorities are wide. But, when it comes to Hudud, no Amir or govern¬ment or ruler or head of state is permitted to make the least change, alteration, reduction or increase in it. Neither does a change in time and place affect it in any manner nor does the Amir or chief executive of the government have the right to waive or pardon it.

There are only five “Hudud” in the Shari’ ah of Islam. These are the punishments for (1) Robbery, (2) Theft, (3) Adultery, (4) False Accusation of Adultery. These punishments have been mentioned in the Holy Qur’an clearly and categorically (Mansus). The fifth Hadd is that of drinking wine which stands proved on the basis of a consensus (Ijma`) of the noble Companions of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . Thus, the punish¬ments of a total of five crimes stand fixed here. These are called the “Hudud.” The way no Amir or ruler can reduce or pardon these punish¬ments, very similarly, even an act of repentance cannot bring about an amnesty for the criminal as far as the punishment due in this mortal world is concerned.

Of course, the sin bound to bring punishment in the Hereafter does get to be forgiven through sincere repentance leav¬ing at least that account in the clear. Out of these, there is only one punishment, that of robbery, in which there is an exception, that is, if the robber repents before being arrested and his conduct in dealings proves his repentance to be satisfactory, only then, this “Hadd” will stand dropped. Repentance after arrest is not valid with regard to the worldly punishment. Other than this, the remaining Hudud do not get to be forgiven in this world even by repentance – whether this repen¬tance comes before the arrest or after it. In matters relating to penal offences (Ta’zirat) recommendations could be heard as warranted by a relevant right. In the Hudud of Allah (punishment under Divine right) even the making of a recommendation is not permissible, and equally impermissible is its hearing too.

The Holy Prophet has prohibited it strictly. The punishments under Hudud are generally strict. The law of their enforcement is also strict as nobody has been permitted to make any additions or subtractions in them under any circumstances, nor can they be waived or forgiven by anyone. Along with this strict stance maintained in punishment and law, when it comes to some moderation of matters, equally stringent conditions have been imposed regarding the completion of the crime as well as the completion of the proof of the crime. Should even a single, condition out of these be found missing, the Hadd stands dropped. In fact, even the least doubt found in the proof will cause the Hadd to be dropped. In this matter, the established law of Islam is: اَلحُدُودُ تَندَرِءُ بالشُّبھَاتِ that is, Hudud are dropped in case of doubt.

At this point, let us also understand that in cases where the Islam¬ic legal punishment (Hadd) is dropped because of a doubt or absence of some condition, it is not necessary that the criminal would go scot-free only to become more daring in later crimes. Instead of that, the rele¬vant ruler would award the penal punishment to him as due in his case. The penal punishments (Ta` zirat) of the Shari` ah are generally physical which, being lesson-oriented, have a complete system of blocking and eradicating crimes. Suppose, only three witnesses were found to attest to the proof of adultery (Zina), and the witnesses are upright and trustworthy about whom the doubt that they would lie cannot be entertained. But, according to the Islamic legal norm, the Islamic legal punishment will not be enforced against the offender be-cause of the absence of the fourth witness. However, it does not mean that the offender will be allowed to walk out free of any obligation, les¬son or penalty. The ruler of the time would, rather, award an appro¬priate penal punishment to him which would be in the form of lashes. Or, take the example of the punishment for theft. If there remains any shortfall or doubt in conditions fixed as the required proof of theft, the Islamic legal Hadd punishment of cutting hands cannot be en-forced on the accused. This does not mean that the accused goes all untouched and free. On the contrary, other penal punishments will be given to him as warranted in his case.

The Punishment of Qisas (Even Retaliation)

Like Hudud, the punishment of Qisas has also been fixed in the Qur’an, that is, life be taken for life and wounds be retaliated by even wounds. But, the difference is that Hudud have been enforced as the Right of Allah (Huququllah). It means that should the holder of the right elect to forgive the offence, it will not be forgiven, and the Hadd will not be dropped. For example, should the person whose property has been stolen were to forgive the thief, the Islamic prescribed punishment for theft will not stand forgiven on that count. This is con-trary to the case of Qisas where the Qur’an and Sunnah have declared the status of the Right of the Servant of Allah (Haqqul-‘Abd) as pre-dominant. This is why the accused killer, after the crime of killing has been proved legally, is handed over to the guardian (Wali) of the person killed who can, at his discretion, take Qisas and have him killed, or forgive him, if he so wishes. Similar to this is the case of Qisas in cases of wounds.

You already know that Hudud and Qisas when dropped do not let the criminal go unscathed, the ruler of the time having the power and discretion to award the amount and kind of penal punishment (Ta` zir) considered appropriate. Therefore, it should not be doubted that, in the event the criminal charged with homicide were to be set free after having been forgiven by the guardian of the person killed, killers would be encouraged and cases of homicide would become common. This doubt is unfounded because taking the life of the person who had killed was the right of the guardian of the person who was killed – and he surrendered it by forgiving. But, providing the security of life for other people is the right of the government. It can, to protect this right, sentence the killer for life or give him some other punishments in order to offset the danger posed by such a person to the lives of oth¬er people.

The Explanation of Ay-at and Details of Hudud

Upto this point, we have dealt with necessary information about the terminology of Islamic Legal Punishments of Hudud, Qisas and Ta` zirat. We can now move to the explanation of verses which carry in-junctions about then) and which would also include a detailed discus¬sion of Hudud. The first verse (33) begins by stating the punishment of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger and go about spread¬ing disorder in the earth. For the sake of clarity, let us consider two things at this stage.

1. What does ` fighting’ (Muharabah) against Allah and His Messen¬ger and spreading disorder in the earth mean, and to whom does this apply? The word, Muharabah is derived from حَرب Harb and intrinsically means to wrest or snatch away. In Arabic usage, it is used against Salm which means peace and security. Thus, we can see that, the sense of Harb (fight) is the spreading of disorder. It is obvious that rare incidents of theft or killing and plundering do not cause public peace to be disturbed. In fact, this happens only when a powerful and organized group stands up to carry out acts of robbery, killing and plundering. Therefore, according to Muslim jurists, the punishment contemplated in this verse is meant for a group or an individual who robs people and breaks the law of the land by the force of arms. This will not include those who indulge in common individual crimes such as thieves and pick-pockets. (Tafsir Mazhari)
2. The second point worth noticing in this verse is that ` Muharabah’ (fighting) of the criminals is said to be against Allah and His Messenger, though the confrontation or fighting waged by robbers and rebels is apparently against human beings. The reason is that a powerful group when it elects to break the Law given by Allah and His blessed Messenger with force, it is really at war with the government, even though they are obviously carrying out their aggression against common human beings. But, when the government itself is Islamic, a government which subscribes to and enforces the Law of Allah and His Messenger, this act of ` fighting’ (Muharabah) will invariably be regard¬ed as being ` against’ Allah and His Messenger.

In short, the punishment mentioned in the first verse (33) applies to robbers and rebels who ruin public peace by attacking with armed group force and break the law of the land openly. As obvious, this could appear in many forms. So, everything from aggression against property and honour to killing and bloodshed is included within its sense. It is from here that we find out the difference between Muqata¬lah and Muharabah. Muqatalah refers to a bloody fight, though with actual killing or without, and though property is also looted as an ad¬junct. The word, Muharabah is used in the sense of spreading disorder by employing force and causing the destruction of public peace and safety. Therefore, this word is particularly used to denote high-handed and group-led intrusion into anything relating to the life, property and honour of people which is called highway looting, robbery and rebellion. The punishment for this crime has been fixed by the Holy Qur’an itself when it enforced it as the Right of Allah which, in a manner of saying, was a crime against the ultimate authority. In the terminolo¬gy of the Shari’ah, it is called the Hadd. Let us now find out the Islam¬ic prescribed punishment for dacoity and highway robbery. In the present verse (33), four punishments for highway robbery have been mentioned: أَن يُقَتَّلُوا أَوْ يُصَلَّبُوا أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْ‌جُلُهُم مِّنْ خِلَافٍ أَوْ يُنفَوْا مِنَ الْأَرْ‌ضِ : That they shall be killed off or be crucified or their hands and legs be cut apart from different sides or they be kept away from the land (they live in).

In the first three punishments, the words used belong to a particu¬lar from of verb called “Bab al-Taf’ il” which are emphatic and denote repetition and intensity of the respective acts. The added use of the plural form gives the hint that their being killed or crucified or ampu¬tated is not like common punishments where punishment is given only to one individual who has provenly committed a crime. The situation here is rather different when the whole group of robbers will be award¬ed the punishment by being killed or crucified or amputated, even though the actual crime was committed only by one single individual of the group. Another hint given here indicates that this killing, cruci¬fication and amputation is not in the form of Qisas which could stand pardoned after having been forgiven by the guardians of the person killed. Instead, this Islamic Legal Punishment (Hadd) has been enforced as the Right of Allah (Haqqullah) and the punishment will not be pardoned legally even if the people who have suffered were to fore-go and forgive. These two rulings were arrived at by the text’s choice of the particular grammatical form (Babut-Tafil) of the first three words of the verse. (Tafsir Mazhari and others)

These four punishments for highway robbery have been introduced by using the word: اَو : ` Aw,’ which is also employed to give choice in a few things and for a division in allotment of jobs too. Therefore, a group of Sahabah, Tabi` in and jurists of the Muslim Ummah, by taking the word, ` Aw,’ in the sense of choice, has taken the position that the Imam or Amir or the ruler has been legally given the choice to award all four punishments, or any one of them as suitable in their cases, of course, after an assessment of the power and terror of the robbers and the gravity or negligibility of their crimes. This is the view held by Sayyidna Said ibn al-Musaiyyib, Sayyidna ‘At-a’, Dawud, Hasan al-Basri, Dahhak, Nakh` ii and Mujahid as well as that of Imam Malik from among the Four Imams. On the other hand, Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Shafi` i, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمۃ اللہ علیہم and a group of Sahabah and Tabi` in have taken the word, Aw’ in the sense of division of work.

Thus, according to them, the sense of the verse is that there are differ¬ent punishments which can be applied to various conditions of high-way robbers and highway robberies. This position is also supported by a hadith where, based on a narration from Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas (رض) ، it has been reported that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) had entered into a peace treaty with Abu Burdah Aslami. He broke the treaty when he robbed some people going to Madinah to embrace Islam. Pursuant to this episode, Sayyidna Jibra’il (عليه السلام) came with an injunction for punish¬ment. The injunction stipulated that whoever killed, and looted prop-erty as well, should be crucified; and whoever killed, but did not loot, should be killed; and whoever looted, but did not kill anyone, should have his hands and legs cut apart from different sides; and whoever from them embraces Islam should have his crime pardoned; and whoever did not kill or plunder but restricted himself to scaring peo¬ple, which caused a breach of public peace, should be exiled. If these people have killed a Muslim or non-Muslim citizen of Dar al-Islam – but, did not loot property – their punishment is أَن يُقَتَّلُوا that is, all of them should be killed, even though the act of killing was directly car¬ried out by some of them only. And if they killed and looted both, their punishment is : يُصَلَّبُوا that is, they should be crucified. The form it should take is that they be hanged alive, then their stomach be slit with a spear or something else. And if they have participated in loot¬ing only and have not killed anyone, their punishment is :

أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْ‌جُلُهُم مِّنْ خِلَافٍ , ‘that is, their right hands be cut apart from the wrists and their left legs from the ankles. Here too, though this act of looting may have been performed directly only by some of them, yet the pun¬ishment will remain just the same for all of them, because whatever the doers of the act did, they did it with their trust in the cooperation and assistance of their accomplices, therefore, all of them are partners in the crime. And if they had yet to commit the crime of killing or plundering while they were arrested beforehand, their punishment is : أَوْ يُنفَوْا مِنَ الْأَرْ‌ضِ that is, they be kept away from the land they live in.

The sense of ` keeping away’ or turning out from the land, according to a group of Muslim jurists, is that they should be turned out from Dar al-Islam. Some others say that they should be turned out from the place where they have committed the crime of robbery. In cases like this, Sayyidna ` Umar al-Faruq (رض) gave the verdict that should the criminal be turned out from one place and left to roam free in oth¬er cities, he was bound to harass the people there. Therefore, let a criminal like this be locked in a prison. This will become his ` keeping away’ or turning out from the land for he cannot go and walk any-where. Imam Abu Hanifah has adopted this very view.

As for the question that armed attacks of this kind these days are no more restricted to looting of property or killing and bloodshed alone for there are frequent instances of raping and kidnapping women as well. So, if the statement of the Qur’an : وَيَسْعَوْنَ فِي الْأَرْ‌ضِ فَسَادًا (and run about trying to spread disorder in the earth) were to be taken as inclu¬sive of such crimes, what punishment would they deserve? Here, ap¬parently the Imam or Amir or the ruler will have the option of enforc¬ing whichever of the four punishments he deems fit in their case; and in the event that he does find the necessary proof of adultery as admit¬ted by the Shari’ ah of Islam, he would enforce the Hadd punishment for Zina (adultery) as well.

Similarly, if the position is that no one was killed, no property was looted, but, some people did receive wounds at their hands, then, they would be subjected to the law of Qisas (Even Retaliation) against the inflicting of wounds. (Tafsir Mazhari)

Towards the end of the verse (33), it was said: ذَٰلِكَ لَهُمْ خِزْيٌ فِي الدُّنْيَا ۖ وَلَهُمْ فِي الْآخِرَ‌ةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ that is, the Islamic Legal Punishment to which they have been subjected here is humiliation for them in this world and certainly a token of punishment. As for the punishment of the Akhirah, that is much harsher and more lasting. This tells us that the punishments of Hudud, Qisas or Ta` zirat in this mortal world do not lead on to the for¬giveness of punishments due in the Akhirah unless the person sen¬tenced repents and makes a genuine Taubah, following which he could hope to have the punishment of Akhirah forgiven.

In the second verse (34) : إِلَّا الَّذِينَ تَابُوا مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَقْدِرُ‌وا عَلَيْهِمْ (… except those who repent before you overpower them), an exception has been men¬tioned. The exception is that should the robbers and rebels were to repent – before they are surrounded and overpowered by government forces, and are in a state when their position of strength is still opera¬tive – and decide on their own to abandon their practice of highway robbery, then, this Prescribed Punishment will stand dropped in their case. This exception is different from the general Law of Hudud because in other crimes such as theft and adultery, if the criminal, after he has committed the crime and has been indicted by a Qadi court as guilty, were to prove that he had repented genuinely, then, though the punishment of the Hereafter (Akhirah) would stand forgiven by virtue of this repentance, yet the Islamic Prescribed Punishment ( حَد شَرعی ) will not be forgiven in this mortal world – as it will be explained later, after some verses, under the punishment for theft.

The wisdom behind this exception is that, on the one hand, such severity has been maintained in the punishment of robbers that for the commitment of the crime – even if by one person out of a whole group – punishment is given to the whole group. Therefore, on the oth¬er hand, things have been made softer and lighter through this excep¬tion, that is, let them repent if they would, in which case, the punish¬ment of the mortal world would also be forgiven. In addition to that, there is a strategic advantage here in this provision, that is, it is not always easy to control or overpower a powerful group, therefore, the door of persuasion has been left open for them so that they are induced to repent.

Yet another expedient consideration in this matter is that killing a person is an extreme punishment. Here, the drift of the Islamic Law is that it should happen as rarely as possible while, in a case of rob¬bery, the killing of a whole group becomes necessary, therefore, the ef-fort to reform them too, through persuasion, was continued simultane¬ously. The kind of effect it produced was that ` Ali Asadi who robbed passersby on the outskirts of Madinah with the help of his group hap¬pened to hear one of those days the following verse of the Holy Qur’an being recited by a Qari in the caravan (under attack) : يَا عِبَادِيَ الَّذِينَ أَسْرَ‌فُوا عَلَىٰ أَنفُسِهِمْ لَا تَقْنَطُوا مِن رَّ‌حْمَةِ اللَّـهِ (0 My servants who have committed excesses against their own selves, do not lose hope in the mercy of Allah – Zumar, 39-53). When he looked for the Qari and found him, he asked him to re-cite the verse once again. When he had heard the verse the second time, he put his sword back into the sheath, repented from robbery and reached Madinah. At that time, Marwan ibn al-Hakam was the chief executive of Madinah. The well-known Sahabi, Sayyidna Abu Hu¬rairah (رض) I held Asadi by the hand and took him to the Amir of Madinah. Before him, he recited this verse of the Qur’an and said: You cannot give him any punishment.

The government was already helpless :against their robbery and the disorder generated by it. Everyone was pleased with the outcome.

An event similar to this happened when Haritha ibn Badr rebelled, left the city and took to the practice of killing and plundering. But, Al-mighty Allah gave him the Taufiq (ability) later on when he repented and returned to Madinah. Then, Sayyidna ` Ali (رض) did not subject him to the ordained legal punishment (حَد شَرعی).

At this point, it is worth remembering that the waiver in the Is¬lamic Legal Punishment (حَد شَرعی) does not make it necessary that the Rights of the Servants of Allah the criminal has trampled upon will also be forgiven. On the contrary, the fact of the matter is that any-thing valuable taken from anyone, which is still available, must be re-turned back. And if someone was killed or wounded, one is duty-bound to go through the consequences as stipulated under the Law of Qisas (Even Retaliation). However, since Qisas is the Right of the Ser¬vant of Allah, it could be forgiven if forgiven by the guardians of the person killed or by the person who holds that Right. Other than that, if someone has hurt someone else financially, it is necessary to vacate the liability (Daman), or have it forgiven by the person concerned. This is the favoured position of Imam Abu Hanifah and that of the ma¬jority of the jurists of Islam. A little reflection would show that this is a fairly obvious matter as the act of seeking deliverance from any in¬fringement of the Rights of the Servants of Allah is a part of the act of Taubah (repentance) itself. Taubah without it remains just incomplete. Therefore, a robber or dacoit will be taken as genuinely repentant only when he pays for whatever Rights of the Servants of Allah he has infringed upon, or has it forgiven by them.

Commentary

In verses previous to those cited above, the Islamic Prescribed Pun¬ishment of robbery and rebellion, as well as the details of injunctions relating to them, were mentioned while the Prescribed Punishment for theft is coming up after three verses later. The three verses which ap¬pear in between talk about Taqwa (the fear of Allah), obedience to and the worship of Allah, inducement to Jihad (fighting or struggling in the way of Allah ) as well as the ruinous effects of disbelief, rejection, obstinacy and disobedience. A deeper look into this particular style of the Qur’an would reveal that its oft-recurring approach is not simply to state the letter of the law of penalty and punishment as some cold and coercive command from the law giver and just leave it at that, instead, by taking the approach of an affectionate nourisher and nurturer, it also smooths out the edges of the human mind to prepare it for its ultimate abstention from crimes. And when it awakens the human minds to the awaiting realities of the fear of Allah and the Akhirah (Hereafter) and when it makes the everlasting blessing and bliss of Paradise appear almost in sight, it goes on to change hearts replacing their chronic taste for crime with instant distaste. This is the reason why words similar to: اِتَّقُوا اللہِ (fear Allah) are repeated after stated laws of crime and punishment. Here too, three things have been commanded:

1. The first one is : اِتَّقُوا اللہِ , that is, ` fear Allah’, for it is the fear of Al¬lah alone which can really stop human beings from committing crimes openly and secretly.
2. The second one is that is, ` seek the nearness of Al¬lah.’ The word, وَابْتَغُوا إِلَيْهِ الْوَسِيلَةَ : wasilah, left untranslated, is a derivation from the verbal noun, ` waslun’, which means to make effort to become close to someone. This word, whether spelt with the letter, sin سین : وسیلہ) or sad (وصیلہ : صاد), is used almost in the same sense. The only difference is that waslun spelt with the letter, Sad (صاد) refers to becoming close in the absolute sense, while, waslun spelt with the letter, sin, is used to denote seeking to gain nearness with longing and love. Related details appear in the Sihah of Jauhari and in the Mufradat of Raghib al-Isfahani. So, wuslah (وصلہ) or wasilah (وصیلہ) spelt with the letter, Sad, refer to something which brings about nearness or conjunction between two things, whether that nearness comes to be through longing and love, or in some other form. As for the word, wasilah (وسیلہ) spelt with the letter, sin, it means that which brings someone closer to some-one else through liking and love. (Lisan al-` Arab, Mufradat al-Qur’an)

The act of seeking to gain access to Allah – that is,` wasilah’ to Allah, to be precise – is anything which brings a servant of Allah nearer to his or her sole object of worship with all longing and love. Therefore, the righteous elders, the Sahabah and Tabi` in have explained the word, ` wasilah’, to mean obedience, nearness, faith and righteous conduct. Sayyidna 1Iudhayfah, as reported by Hakim, said : ` Wasilah’ means nearness and obedience, and Ibn Jarir has reported the same on the authority of ` Ata’, Mujahid and Hasan al-Basri, may the mercy of Allah be upon them all.

Also, Ibn Jarir and others have reported from Qatadah a Tafsir of this verse which is : تَقَرَّبُوا الیہِ بطاعتہِ والعَمَل ھِما یُرضیِیہ . It means: Seek nearness to Him by obedience to Him and by doing deeds which please Him. Therefore, the gist of the explanation of this verse is that one should seek the nearness of Allah through ‘lman (faith) and Amal (good deeds).

Appearing in the Musnad of Ahmad, there is a sound (Sahih) hadith in which the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has been reported to have said: ` Wasilah’ is a high rank of Paradise, above which there is no rank. You pray to Almighty Allah that He gives me that rank.

Again, in a narration from Sahih Muslim, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has been reported to have said: When the Mu’adhdhin مؤذَّن): Muezzin) calls the Adhan, you keep saying what he says. Then, recite Durud on me and pray that I be blessed with ` Wasilah.’

These ahadith tell us that ` Wasilah’ is a special rank of Jannah (Paradise) which is identified particularly with the Holy Prophet . As for the command to seek and find ` Wasilah’ given to every believer, it seems to be, on the surface, contrary to this particularity. But, the answer is fairly clear that the way the highest station of guidance is special to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) who always prayed for it, but, its elementary and intermediary ranks of guidance are common and open to all Muslims – similarly, the high rank of ` Wasilah’ is particular to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and all ranks after it are open and common to all believers through the linkage of their love for him.

In his Letters, the famous renovator of the second millennium of Islam in India, Mujaddid Alf-Thani, and Qadi Thana’ullah of Panipat, in his Tafsir Mazhari, have both warned that the sense of longing and love embedded in the word, ` Wasilah’, clearly shows that advancement in the ranks of ` Wasilah’ depends on the love for Almighty Allah and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) – and love comes through the following of Sunnah, the words and deeds of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) .  This is because Al mighty Allah says: فَاتَّبِعُونِي يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللَّـهُ (Say [ 0 Prophet ], “If you do love Al¬lah, follow me; Allah shall love you …”- 3:31). Therefore, the more par¬ticular one is in following the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in acts of worship, transactions, dealings, morals, social living, practically in all departments of life, the more beloved of Allah one shall be, and the more widening becomes the gyre of this love, the closer and nearer to Allah one shall be.

Now, after this lexical explanation of the word, ` Wasilah,’ and the exegetical notes from the Sahabah and Tabi` in, we do know how every-thing which becomes the means of achieving the pleasure and near¬ness of Allah is, for a human being, the ` Wasilah’ of becoming close to Allah. As included in it are faith (‘Iman) and good deeds (al-a` mal al¬salih الاعمال اصالح), so included therein are the company and the love of prophets and righteous people as well, for that too is one of the causes of the pleasure of Allah – and so, praying to Allah Almighty by making them a Wasllah’ should be correct, as was done by Sayyidna ` Umar (رض) ، when he, at the time of a famine, making Sayyidna ` Abbas (رض) ` Wasilah,’ made a prayer for rains before Almighty Allah. The prayer was answered.

It is reported that the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم    had himself taught a blind Sahabi to pray with the words which are as follows : اَللَّھُمَّ اِنِّی اَسأَلُک وَ اَتَوَجَّہُ اِلَیکَ بِنَبِیِّکَ مُحَمَّدِ نَبِیِّ الرَّحمَۃِ ; ( O Allah, I seek from You, and I ask for Your attention with (the Wasilah of) Your Prophet, Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. (Manar)

3. Before taking up the third command, that of Jihad, in this verse (35), it will be useful to recollect the first command, that of Taqwa, then the command to seek nearness to Allah through faith and good deeds, and now in the end it was said: وَجَاهِدُوا فِي سَبِيلِهِ (and carry out Jihad in His way). Though Jihad was included under ` good deeds’ yet it was to spell out the higher status of Jihad among ` good deeds’ that Jihad was mentioned separately and distinctly – as confirmed by a saying of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) which is: وَ ذِروَۃُ سَنَامِہِ الجِھَادُ that is, Jihad is the highest peak of Islam. Moreover, there is yet another element of wisdom why Jihad has been mentioned distinctly at this place. It will be recalled that the unlawfulness of spreading disorder on the earth, alongwith its worldly and other-worldly punishment, was mentioned in previous verses (32, 33). Since Jihad too, given a surface view of it (or, as those allergic to it would love to believe), appears to be some form of disorder on the earth (al-fasad fi al-ard), therefore, it was possible that someone ignorant could just fail to understand the difference between Jihad (fighting in the way of Allah) and Fasad (spreading disorder). To offset this possibility, the spreading of disorder on the earth was for-bidden first and it was after that that the command of Jihad was men¬tioned distinctly and the difference between the two was pointed out by the addition of the words : فِي سَبِيلِهِ (in His way). This is because the killing and plundering of the property of people in robberies and rebel-lions is for the sole purpose of personal aggrandizement and other ne¬farious objectives while, should it ever come to happen in a Jihad, it will still be for the initial purpose of upraising the Word of Allah and eliminating oppression and tyranny. There is a world of difference between the two.

Moving on to the second (36) and the third (37) verses, one notices the manner in which the grave curse of Kufr (disbelief), Shirk (the as¬sociating of partners in the Divinity of Allah) and sin has been pointed out. It is so poignant that even a little reflection on it could bring an instant revolution in the lives of men and women of such persuasion compelling them to abandon all Kufr and Shirk and sin. To explain the curse of sinful living a little further, it can be said that sins in which one gets involved usually is because of personal desires and needs or for the desires and needs of family and children. Since their Fulfillment comes through an increase in wealth and property, one goes after amassing wealth and property without making any distinc-tion between what is Halal (lawful) and what is Haram (unlawful) in it. In these verses, Almighty Allah has censured the acquisition mania of such people which will prove to be futile in the ultimate analysis because its cure lies in realizing that things of comfort collected to satisfy a short lived span of life by working hard day and night still remain unattained. More and more stays to be the order of every other day in life. What begins must end and this race of gold and greed will also end when the punishment of the Doomsday will appear in sight and, at that time, if these people were to offer all they had collected in the mortal world, wealth and property, things and things of comfort, taste and value, offer all of it in return for their release from the punish¬ment, then, this would not be possible anymore. Even if the wager is increased higher, suppose everything of value were to be owned by one person, nay, let us say twice as much, and if he were to offer all of it to have his release from the punishment, still then, nothing would be ac¬cepted from him and he will not have his deliverance from the punish¬ment of the Hereafter.

The fourth verse (38) reverts to the subject of the punishment of crimes where the Islamic Legal Punishment of theft has been described. The punishment for theft belongs to the category of Hudud which is one of the three kinds of Islamic Legal Punishments dis-cussed earlier (under the Tafsir of verses 33 and 34). Since the Holy Qur’an has itself fixed this punishment, it has not been left at the dis¬cretion of the relevant authorities. The Holy Qur’an has determined it as the Right of Allah (Haqqullah), therefore, it is called the Hadd of Sariqah (The Islamic Legal Punishment of Theft). The words of the verse are:

As for a man or woman who commits theft, cut off the hands of both to recompense them for what they earned, a deterrent from Allah. And Allah is Mighty, Wise.

Noteworthy here is the fact that the address in Qur’anic injunc¬tions is generally to men wherein women are also understood as in¬cluded consequentially. In Salah, Sawm, Hajj, Zakah and in all injunctions of the Shari’ ah, this is the general operating principle of Qur’an and Sunnah. But, in the case of the punishment for theft and adultery, the text here does not limit itself to addressing men only, in-stead of which it addresses its command to both sexes mentioning them separately.

One reason for doing so is that this is a matter of Hudud in which the least doubt could cause it to be dropped. Therefore, women were not left as implied under the address. They were, rather, mentioned explicitly.

Understanding the Islamic Law of Sariqah (Theft)

Something else we should find out at this stage is the very sense of the word, ‘Sariqah’ and its definition as determined in the Shari` ah of Islam. According to Al-Qamus, the Arabic Lexicon, if anyone takes what belongs to someone else, from a secured place, without his or her permission, clandestinely, it is called “Sariqah.” And this is its Islamic legal definition too. So, in the light of this definition, in order that Sa¬riqah be proved, a few ingredients must exist:

1. BEING PRIVATELY- OWNED: The property concerned must have been owned privately by an individual or group. The stealer should own nothing in it, nor should there be any doubt of such owner-ship, nor should there be things in it in which the rights of common people are equal, such as, institutions of public welfare and their be-longings. This tells us that should someone take something in which he or she has ownership rights, or there is a doubt of such ownership, or in which the rights of common people are equal, then, the Hadd of Sariqah, the Islamic Prescribed Punishment, will not be enforced against the stealer. However, the relevant authority of the time could enforce punitive punishment (Ta` zir) at his discretion.
2. BEING SECURED: It means that the stolen property must be secured as in a locked house or under a security guard. Property not in a secured place, if picked up by someone, would also not render that person liable to be charged with the Hadd of Sariqah. However, should there be even a doubt in the property concerned being secure, even then, the Hadd of Sariqah will stand dropped. Considerations of sin and punitive punishment (Ta` zir) are a separate matter.
3. BEING WITHOUT PERMISSION: If a person, who has been given the permission to take or pick up and use the property con¬cerned, chooses to take it away for good, the Hadd of Sariqah will not be imposed. And should there be even a doubt about the stealer hav¬ing such permission, the Hadd will stand dropped.
4. TAKING CLANDESTINELY : This is because the looting of someone’s property openly is no theft. It is robbery, the punishment for which has already been stated. The point is if it is not by stealth, the Hadd of Sariqah will not be imposed on the person concerned.

After having heard the details involved in all these conditions, you would have already realized that theft as known to us carries a gener¬al and wide sense. Every single person who indulges in it is not legal¬ly liable to the Hadd of Sariqah, that is, the punishment of cutting hands. Instead of that, this Prescribed Punishment shall be enforced against that particular form of theft in which all these ingredients have been found present.

Along with it, you also know that situations in which the Hadd for theft is dropped, it is not at all necessary that the criminal would go scot-free. In fact, the relevant authority of the time could award puni¬tive punishment against him at his discretion, which could even be physical, as that of lashes.

In the same way, let it not be surmised that, in situations where the absence of some condition of Sariqah restrains the enforcement of the Hadd Punishment, the act itself would become legally permissible and lawful – because, as explained earlier, we are not talking about sin and the punishment of the Hereafter here. The concern here is that of the temporal punishment, and that too of a particular kind of punish¬ment. Otherwise, the property of a person taken without his pleasure and permission, no matter how, shall remain Harm (unlawful), caus¬ing punishment in the Hereafter – as clarified in the verse : لَا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوَالَكُم بَيْنَكُم بِالْبَاطِلِ (And do not eat up each other’s property by false means – 2:188).

Also worth noting here is the fact that the words used by the Qur’an in the matter of theft are the same as those used about the punishment of adultery. But, the difference is that, in the matter of theft, the mention of man appears first and that of woman follows, while, in the case of adultery, the arrangement has been reversed where woman has been mentioned first. Thus, in the punishment of theft, it was said: 0, r), (a man or a woman who commits theft – وَالسَّارِ‌قُ وَالسَّارِ‌قَةُ while, in the punishment of adultery, it was said: الزَّانِيَةُ وَالزَّانِي (the woman and the man guilty of fornication – 24:2). Commentators have indicated many elements of wisdom in this reversal of word order, but the one that appeals most is that the crime of theft when committed by man as compared to that committed by a woman is more grave because Almighty Allah has blessed him with the kind of strength to earn his living which a woman does not have. Should a man who, de-spite that so many doors of earning his living are open to him, stoop so low as to commit the disgraceful crime of theft, really increases the gravity of his sin. And when it comes to the matter of adultery, Allah Almighty has blessed a woman with natural modesty and secured at¬mosphere which leaves no reason for her to fall into the lower levels of immodesty which would be a grave crime indeed. Therefore, in theft, the mention of man precedes while, in adultery, that of woman.

After stating the Hadd حدّ Punishment for theft in this verse (38), two sentences have been added. The first sentence is: جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا (to recom¬pense them for the evil deed they committed and the second sentence is: نَكَالًا مِّنَ اللَّـهِ (a deterrent from Allah). The later is composed of the words, ` Nakal’ (a deterrent) and ` min Allah’ (from Allah). Lexically, the Arabic word, ` Nakal’ means a punishment which is exemplary, something which teaches a lesson to others as well so that they too abandon any intentions of committing crimes. Therefore, a translation of this word in the idiom of any other language would have to have a sense of lesson and dissuasion both. The hint given here is that the stern punishment of cutting hands is based on a consideration which is special and wise. In simple words, it amounts to punishing one and chastening the rest so that this ugly crime is eradicated totally. Then, by adding ` min Allah’ (from Allah), a pointed reference has been made to yet another subject of importance, that is, there are two ways of looking at the crime of theft. Firstly, a person may take the property belonging to someone else without any right to do so which inflicts in-justice on the later.

Secondly, this person acted counter to the com¬mand of Allah. Keeping the first aspect in sight, this punishment is the right of the victim of injustice which requires that the punishment, if pardoned by the holder of the right, will stand forgiven – and this is the customary practice in all cases of Qisas (Even Retaliation). Now looking at it from the second aspect, this punishment is for having act¬ed contrary to the command of Allah. It requires that this punishment will not be forgiven even if it were to be forgiven by the person who has been the victim of the theft – unless, of course, forgiven by Al-mighty Allah Himself. This is called Hadd or Hudud in the terminolo¬gy of the Shari` ah of Islam. So, by determining the second aspect through the addition of ` min Allah’ (from Allah), the hint given is that this punishment is Hadd – not Qisas, that is, in a manner of saying, the punishment has been awarded for what constitutes a Crime against the State! Therefore, even if the person who is the victim of the theft were to forgive, the punishment would still not be dropped.

Finally, towards the end of the verse (38), by saying: وَاللَّـهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ (And Allah is Mighty, Wise), answer has been given to the doubt so widely entertained these days, that is, this punishment is very harsh. Not resting at that, there are the loudmouthed and the uninformed among them who would not even fight shy of saying that this punishment is savage. Refuge with Allah! These words are there to point out that the introduction of this severe punishment is not only that it is an out-come of Allah’s being Mighty and Powerful, but that it also based on His being Wise as well. The Islamic Legal Punishments which the modern highbrows of the West label as harsh and savage shall be tak¬en up in details with comments on the wisdom behind them, their need and benefits, soon after we have completed the explanation of the present set of verses.

The later verse (40) says:

Do you know that to Allah alone belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth? He punishes whomsoever He wills and He forgives whomsoever He wills. And Allah is powerful over everything.

This verse is linked with and homogeneous to previous verses which feature stringent injunctions of the Islamic Legal Punishments for rob¬bery and theft. A shallow look at these injunctions could give the false impression of their being contradictory to human dignity. It is to re-move this doubt that Almighty Allah has, in this verse, initially stated that He alone is the real Master of the entire universe. Then, He says that He alone is the Absolute Power. In between, comes the statement that it is not only that He punishes. He forgives as well, and that forgive¬ness and punishment depend on His Wisdom, for the way He is the Absolute Master and the Absolute Power, so is He Absolutely Wise too. There is no human power which can guage the extents of His mastery and domain so shall there be no human reason which can fully fathom the countless manifestations of His Wisdom – and that which it would pass on to human beings by virtue of pondering through principles is sufficient enough to put their hearts at peace.

What is Benign and at is Savage?

People in the West and those influenced by their education and cul¬ture commonly object that Islamic punishments are harsh. And as pointed out a little earlier, there are some heedless people who do not even hesitate to say that these punishments are savage and undigni¬fied.

Before we deal with this matter, it would be useful to keep what has been stated earlier in sight. We know that the Holy Qur’an has it-self determined and fixed the punishments for only four crimes which are called Hadd, in the terminology of the Islamic Shari’ ah. The pun¬ishment of robbery is the cutting of the right hand and the left foot; the punishment of theft is the cutting of the right hand from the wrist; the punishment of adultery is one hundred lashes in some situations, and stoning to death in some others; the punishment of making a false accusation of adultery is eighty lashes. The fifth Islamic Prescribed Punishment (Hadd) is that of drinking which is eighty lashes as fixed under the consensus of the Sahabah of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . With the sole exception of these five crimes, the punishment of all other crimes has been left to the discretion of the ruler of the time so that the rele¬vant judge may award the kind and amount of punishment with due consideration of the crime, the criminal and the circumstances. This is a matter in which it is also possible that some particular system de-signed to delimit and apportion punishments is established in consul¬tation with those fit to guide and advise, and Qadis or judges are bound with it.

This is what happens these days when penal laws are generally enacted through legislative assemblies, and Qadis or judges award punishments within limits already identified. Although, in the five crimes the punishment for which has been fixed by the Qur’an, or through a consensus (Ijma`), and in which no individual or party or assembly has any right of alteration or substitution, but, in them too, if the proof of the crime is not available through the Law of Evidence prescribed by the Shari` ah, or there be the proof of the crime but condi¬tions under which this punishment is enforced may not be complete, and the fact of the crime stands proved in the sight of the Qadi or judge, still then, in that situation too, the Hadd Punishment (حَد شرعی) will not be enforced, instead of which, the punishment given will be punitive (Ta` ziri). Along with it, there is the standing rule of Islamic Law that the benefit of doubt goes to the person accused of a crime. A doubt about anything in the proof of the crime or the conditions of the crime causes the Hadd Punishment to be dropped. But, in the event that there be the necessary proof of crime available, the punishment given will be punitive (Ta’ziri).

This tells us that there will be many more situations in which the Hadd Punishment will not be enforced and, in their place, punitive punishments will be awarded subject to the discretion of the ruler of the time. Since punitive punishments have not been predetermined by the Shari’ah, they can be changed or tailored to suit the needs of every time and every circumstance just like the general laws of the land. Therefore, at least, in this field, nobody has room for any objection. Now the ‘debate’ is reduced to the punishments of five crimes only, and that too, in their particular situations. For example, let us take theft and see that the punishment of cutting the hand has not been imposed by the Shari` ah on every theft, in an absolute sense – that is, theft as we know it in our common usage. This is no Sariqah. Sariqah, the crime which is punished by cutting the hand, has a peculiar definition of its own, details about which have appeared earlier (under the subheading: ` Understanding the Islamic Legal Punishment of Sariqah’ ) and which can be briefly defined here as the taking out of someone’s property from a secured place, by breaking the security arrangements, unlawfully and secretly. According to this definition, many forms rec¬ognized as common thefts stand eliminated from the standard definition of the Hadd of Sariqah.

For instance, the condition of a secured place tells us that property stolen from commonly used public places such as Masjid, masalla of ` Id (area earmarked for the large congrega¬tional prayers on the occasion of ` Idul-Fitr and ` Idul-Adha), Park, Club, Railroad Station, Waiting Room, Train, Airplane etc., or stealing fruits hanging on trees, or stealing honey will not cause the Hadd of Sariqah to be imposed against the thief, instead of that, punitive punishment will be given to the culprit as generally done in most countries. Simi¬larly, take the example of a person you have allowed to enter your house – whether he is your servant or maid or a worker on wages or a builder on contract or a friend or relative – now should he take some-thing away from your house, then, though he is included under the definition of common theft and is deserving of the punitive punish¬ment for it, yet, the Islamic Legal Punishment of cutting the hand will not be enforced on him – because he entered the house with your per-mission and the arrangement of legal security is not complete as far as he is concerned.

Similarly, incidents like someone picked someone else’s pocket, or snatched away cash or jewellery from someone’s hand, or extracted something by fraud, or went back on his word when asked to return what he had agreed to keep in trust are all unlawful and impermissi¬ble, and definitely included under customary thefts, but, the punish¬ment for all these is punitive which depends upon the discretion of the ruler. Since these are not included under the definition of legally cul¬pable ‘Sariqah,’ no amputation of hand will take place.

Likewise, the hand of a stealer of coffin clothes will not be cut be-cause, first of all, it is in no secure place, then the shroud itself is not in the ` ownership’ of the deceased, though this act of the stealer is gravely unlawful. For this, he will have his punitive punishment at the discretion of the ruler. In the same manner, if someone commits a theft in what was jointly owned property in which the stealer too had some share – whether it was a joint property from inheritance or from commercial partnership – it is a situation in which, since some part of the ownership of the stealer is also included therein, the doubt about such ownership will cause the Islamic Legal Punishment (Hadd) to be dropped and punitive punishment will be given.

As for all these conditions, they relate to the actual completion of the crime, a brief outline of which you have seen above. Now what comes next is the completion of the proof. In this matter of enforcing Hudud, the Shari’ah has also made its Law of Evidence unmistakable by keeping it very distinct and cautious as compared to what concerns other common matters. In the punishment of adultery, imposed there is the condition of four witnesses in place of two – and that too, while they give such eye witness as would not leave any word doubtful there-in. Though, in the case of theft, only two witnesses are sufficient, yet, even for these two, some additional conditions, other than those com¬monly required in witnessing, have been imposed.

For example, there are other matters in which, if needed, the Qadi or judge has the option to accept the witness of a sinning person if he is satisfied that the per-son, despite his being a sinner practically, does not lie. But, in the case of Hudud, the Qadi or judge does not have the right to accept his witness. Common matters can be judicated based on the evidence giv¬en by one man and two women. But, in Hudud, the evidence of two men is necessary. In common cases, the Shari’ah does not consider Ta-madi (being time-barred) as valid excuse – a witness given by someone can be accepted irrespective of the time lag since the event occurred. But, in Hudud, if a testimony is not given immediately, instead of that, was given after one month or was delayed more than that, then, it will not be acceptable.

This brief outline of the conditions of the enforcement of the Hadd of Sariqah appearing above has been taken from the highly authorita¬tive book of the Hanafi Fiqh, Bada’i` al-Sana’i`.

The outcome of all these conditions is that the Hadd of Shari’ ah, the Islamic Prescribed Punishment, will be enforced only in a situation when it is strictly in accordance with the rules of procedure determined by the inviolable Shari’ ah of Islam that the crime, as well as, its proof are found conclusively complete – and so complete too as would leave no aspect of it doubtful. This tells us that the Shari’ah has done two things simultaneously – it has, on the one hand, fixed the punish¬ment of these crimes, as required in its wisdom, being strict as they are; but, on the other hand, it has also taken extreme precaution in the enforcement of the Hudud of Islamic Law. The Law of Evidence as applicable to Hudud is also different from the Law of Evidence as ap¬plicable to common matters, and is certainly based on extreme precau¬tion.

The slightest shortfall in it renders the Hadd of the Shari` ah to be changed into punitive punishment. Similarly, in the event of any shortcoming being found in determining the completion of the crime, the Hadd of the Shari’ ah is dropped and punitive punishment gets ac¬tivated in its place. The practical outcome of this is that the far-out occasion of enforcing the Hudud of the Shari` ah would present itself only very rarely ( or, as they would say in charged English, only once in a blue moon! ) Under normal conditions, even in crimes which fall under Hudud, the punishments given are punitive. But, in a case, where the completion of the crime and the completion of the proof con-join, even though in one per cent cases, the punishment given is very stringent, something which would inspire awe, something mindboggling and heart-rending, something which would cause the next as-pirant cold feet before even touching a crime like that. This kind of punishment, notwithstanding objections, becomes the source of eradi¬cation of crimes and the blessing of public peace for ever. This stands in stark contrast against societies built around penal laws with which hardened criminals keep playing as some sort of sport they enjoy.

They sit in jails making programs to do what they have been doing all along much better next time they are out there. There are countries where the Hudud of the Shari` ah are imposed even now. A look at con¬ditions which prevail there would bring the reality in the open. You do not see there a lot of people with amputated hands, nor is there an event of stoning to death (Rajm) for years and years together. But, such is the standing awe and dread and fear of these punishments in arts that theft, robbery and immodesty do not seem to exist there. Muslims have the first-hand and direct knowledge about conditions in Saudi Arabia because Muslims of all classes and countries have the good fortune of being there in connection with Hajj or ` Umrah. Five times every day, everyone sees that shops and stores are open. Mer¬chandise worth millions is lying there and their owner leaves for the Sacred Mosque at prayer time without closing them – and comes back from there only after having made his prayers in perfect peace. He never has any scruples about anything having disappeared from where he had left it.

Then, this is not a matter of one day. This is a matter of whole life and how it goes on. Do this in any ` civilized’ country of the world, you will end up with hundreds of thefts and robberies in a sin¬gle day. Strange are the ways of those who claim to be the standard bearers of civilization and human rights. They are compassionate to professional criminals but they have no mercy for the whole humanity harassed by them. In cold reality, showering mercy on one criminal amounts to being tyrannical to the whole humanity. This attitude is the greatest cause of disturbing public peace and tranquility. This is the reason why He, who is the Lord of all universes and worlds, and who provides sustenance to the virtuous and the vicious, the pious and the polytheists, the saints and the sinners, and who gives to snakes, scorpions, lions and wolves their livelihood, and whose mercy extends to all, it was He who, when He revealed the religious laws of Hudud in the Qur’an, also said along with it: وَلَا تَأْخُذْكُم بِهِمَا رَ‌أْفَةٌ فِي دِينِ اللَّـهِ that is, ` do not show mercy to these criminals in enforcing the Hudud of Allah.’ On the other hand, He declared Qisas (the Law of Even Retaliation) to be the life of humanity: وَلَكُمْ فِي الْقِصَاصِ حَيَاةٌ يَا أُولِي الْأَلْبَابِ that is, ` for you in Qisas there is life, 0 people of understanding.’ It appears that those who oppose and obstruct the institution of Islamic Hudud, just do not wish that crimes be eradicated. Otherwise, as far as mercy is concerned, who else, if not Islam, can be the teacher? It is Islam which has recog¬nized the right of even enemies and killers in the heat of the battlefield where it demands: Hold your hands before women, hold your hands before children, hold your hands before the aged, and do not kill the religiously observing not fighting against you on the battlefield but are busy with worship in their way.

What is most astonishing is the cold fact that objections against Is¬lamic punishments are raised by, of all the people, those have their hands red with the blood of hundreds and thousands of innocent and blame-free human beings of Hiroshima even to this day, human beings who may have never dreamed of fighting and killing in a battlefield and included among them are women and children and old people, a whole lot of human beings indeed! And these are the people whose fury has still not subsided even after the tragedy of Hiroshima and who are still going ahead with all sorts of goals and projects and exper-iments to build and stock nuclear weapons of mass destruction.

Other than this, there is not much we can say, except raise our hands in prayer – May Allah remove the curtains of selfishness from their eyes and may He guide them towards the true Islamic methods of establishing peace in the world.l

1. This is the basis of the nuclear conflict among nations. The haves want to keep what they have and stop others from having it. If others have it, that will be ` proliferation’. The power to destroy must stay with the powerful. Because, powerful is responsible. But, was it? So, being powerful, or mutually cooperating powerful, is no guarantee that nuclear weapons will not be used. Human beings of one country sitting on their nukes and talking about world peace is hardly believable.

Let’s say Amen to the prayer.

A word about the use of the word, ` deterrent’ with nuclear weapons. They are there, just in case … They are supposed not to be used first. They are for retaliation. The having of nuclear weapons means that everybody should behave, or else! So, they are ` deterrents’, telling people to be careful and not mess around. So human beings can have deterrents to check the irresponsible behaviour of others, the behaviour of ` rogue’ states, for example. Now, if God were to enforce His own deterrent against criminals, robbers and thieves and fornicators, in His wisdom, how could that become ` savage’ overnight? Or, is it that what a set of human beings can do in their ` self-interest’, cannot be done by God, in His Wisdom? … Mercy! (Tr.)

Sequence of the Verses

Continued from the third Section of Surah al-Ma’idah was the subject around the People of the Book. In between, some other subjects, though very few, appeared where particularly appropriate. Now, the text resumes that subject again which goes on further ahead. The People of the Book already had two groups among them. Joining them was a third group. They were really Jews who had become Muslims hypocritically. They would show their Muslim face before Muslims but when they sat with their coreligionist Jews, they mocked Islam and Muslims. The three verses appearing above concern the doings of these three groups which show that they prefer their desires and opin¬ions over the injunctions and instructions of Almighty Allah and keep trying to interpret and mould them to their own choices. These verses tell us about the disgrace and evil end of such people in this world as well as in the Hereafter. As a corollary, there appear some guiding principles and injunctions for Muslims.

The Background of the Revelation

Two events which are the cause of the revelation of the cited verses relate to Jewish tribes who lived in the vicinity of Madinah during the blessed period of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . One of these events was that of Qatl and Qisas (killing and retaliation) and the other, that of Zina (fornication) and its punishment.

It is not hidden from anyone who knows history (as it is) that tyr¬anny prevailed all over before the advent of Islam. Mastery was for the powerful and slavery, for the weak. The powerful and the influen¬tial had their laws different from the weak and the meek. Not too far is an extension of that approach in our own time where some of our so-called civilized countries had separate laws for the black and the white. But, across this bridge of history, came the blessed benefactor of humanity, the Arab Prophet, may the blessings of Allah be upon him, and peace, who alone erased these distinctions. It was he who first declared equality of rights for the progeny of Adam and taught human beings their essential lesson in humanity.

Before the coming of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to Madinah, there lived on the outskirts of Madinah two tribes of Jews, Banu Qu¬rayzah and Banu Nadir. Out of the two, Banu Nadir were more power¬ful and wealthy than Banu Qurayzah who constantly suffered at their hands and could do nothing about it. Matters reached to the point when Banu Nadir forced Banu Qurayzah to agree to a disgraceful pact whereby if a man from Banu Nadir were to kill a man from Banu Qurayzah, they would not have the right to take his life in Qisas (retaliation). Instead, stipulated the pact, they will receive only seven¬ty Wasaq of dates as his blood money (Wasaq, Arab measure of weight approximately equivalent to 195.30 kg). As for the case being the re-verse of it, if a man from Banu Qurayzah were to kill a man from Banu Nadir, the law will be that the killer will be killed and, on top of it, blood money will be taken, and that too, twice as much as compared to what Banu Nadir were entitled to, that is, one hundred and forty Wa¬saq of dates. Attached along with these were more conditions such as, if a woman from Banu Nadir were to be killed, a man from Banu Qu¬rayzah will be killed in retaliation; and if the person killed were to be a man, two men from Banu Qurayzah will be killed in retaliation; and if a slave from Banu Nadir has been killed, a free man from Banu Quray¬zah will be killed in retaliation; and if one hand of a man from Banu Nadir has been cut by someone, two hands of a man from Banu Quray¬zah will be cut; if one ear has been cut, two ears of their man will be cut. This was ` law’ before Islam as it prevailed between these two tribes and Banu Qurayzah being weak had no choice but to go along with it.

When the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) migrated to Madinah, it became Dar al-Islam, a homeland of Muslims. These two tribes had not embraced Islam upto that time nor were they bound to follow Islamic law under any treaty obligation. But, they were observing the justice and common good brought in by Islamic law from a distance. During this period, it so happened that a man from Banu Qurayzah killed a certain man from Banu Nadir. According to the pact mentioned above, Banu Nadir demanded the doubled blood money (Diyat) from Banu Qu¬rayzah. As said earlier, Banu Qurayzah were neither a part of the Muslim community nor did they have any existing pact with the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . But, they were Jews who had among them many learned people as well. They knew on the strength of the prophecies of the Torah that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is the promised Last Prophet the glad tiding of which was given by the Torah. But, they had not declared their faith in him because of religious prejudice or temporal greed. Since they were watching that the Last Prophet’s religion is a standard bearer of human equality and justice, they used it as a crutch to get rid of the tyranny of Banu Nadir. They refused to pay the doubled blood money on the plea that they belonged to the same family, same country, and same religion, that is, Judaism, and that they were not going to tolerate the unjust treatment meted out to them because of their weakness against tyranny right upto that day.

This reply enraged Banu Nadir to the point of an imminent war. But, later, on the advice of some elders, it was decided that this matter should be taken to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) for his decision.

Banu Qurayzah could not have it any better. They already knew that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was not going to allow the injustice of Banu Nadir to continue. As for Banu Nadir, though they did agree to mutual conciliation talks under a situation of duress, but they also backed it up with a conspiracy when they sent a group of people to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) before their case was to be presented in his court. These people were really their co-religionists, that is, they were Jews but kept in touch with the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) by hypocritically assuring him of their Islam. Their objective was to somehow find out the view of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) before he hears and de¬cides the case. So, the mandate and instruction given to these people was that they should accept what he said subject to the condition that it was in favour of their demand, and in the eventuality that his judgment turned out to be contrary to this, they were told not to make any commitments about its acceptance.

This event describing the cause of the revelation of these verses has been reported in detail by al-Baghawi while the Musnad of Ahmad and Abu Dawud have reported its summary from Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas (رض) (Mazhari).

Similar to this, there is another event, that of Zina (fornication). Reporting its details, al-Baghawi says that it took place among the Jews of Khaybar. According to the punishment prescribed by the Torah, the couple involved had to be stoned to death. But, both of them belonged to some influential family. The Jews, acting in accordance with their old habit, looked for a softening of the punishment for them knowing that the religion of Islam gives leaves and concessions liberal¬ly. Based on this, they assumed that Islam would reduce this punish¬ment as well. So, the people of Khaybar sent a message to their clansmen of Banu Qurayzah asking them to have this case settled by Muhammad and along with it, they sent the two accused as well. Their motivation behind this action was no different as they too in-structed their clansmen to accept the verdict of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) if the punishment awarded by him turned out to be light, but they were to reject it if the case was otherwise. At first, Banu Qurayzah were re¬luctant about the proposal. They did not know how the case will be decided by him and once they were there, they would have to accept the verdict. But, after further consultations, they decided that some of their chiefs should take the accused couple to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and request him to decide the case.

So, a deputation of Ka’b ibn Ashraf and others accompanied by the accused couple came to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . They asked: ` If a married man and a married woman are involved in adultery, what punishment do they get?’ He said, ` Will you accept my verdict?’ They said that they would. At that moment, Sayyidna Jibra’il appeared with a command from Almighty Allah which announced that their punish¬ment was stoning to death. When these people heard this verdict, they were taken aback. They refused to accept it.

Sayyidna Jibra’il (عليه السلام) advised the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم that he should ask these people to appoint Ibn Surya as the arbitrator before deciding whether to accept or not to accept the verdict. Then, he told him about Ibn Surya and his identity. He asked the members of the deputation if they knew the young man who is white but blind in one eye. He lived in Fidak and His name was Ibn Surya. Everyone confirmed that they did. He asked, ` What do you think about him?’ They said, ` Of the learned people among Jews, there is no scholar greater than him on this earth.’ He said, ` Call him in.’

So, he came. The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) asked him on oath, ` What is the injunction of the Torah in this case? He said, ` By the Be¬ing in whose name you have put me on oath, if you had not put me on oath in that manner, and I did not have the apprehension that a false statement on my part would make the Torah burn me, then, I would have not revealed the reality. The reality is that the Torah too, like the injunction in Islam, does carry the command that both of them should be killed by stoning (Rajm).’

The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said, ` What has come upon you now that you act against the injunction of the Torah?’ Ibn Surya replied, ` The fact of the matter is that, religiously and legally, this is the pun¬ishment of adultery with us. But, since a prince of ours got involved in this crime, we showed leniency to him and let him go. We did not stone him to death. Later, the same crime was committed by an ordi¬nary man. People responsible decided to stone him to death. The sup-porters of the criminal protested demanding that the Jewish Legal Punishment decided for this man should be given to the prince first, otherwise, they threatened, they would resist and block the execution of the punishment against him. When things dragged on, they sat to¬gether and compromised on just one light punishment for all, leaving the injunction of the Torah aside. So, we came up with a punishment which required some beating and the taking out of a procession with the culprits having their faces blackened with soot (a symbol of dis¬grace). This, then, became the usual custom with everyone.’

Commentary

We now know the details of the background in which the present three verses (41-43), and others which will follow, were revealed. Their gist is that the Jews were habitually used to issuing religious edicts as desired by the people, either for the benefit of relatives or to satisfy their greed for money, property, influence, and recognition. This had become a common custom particularly in matters involving punish¬ments that they would, if the crime was committed by an influential person, change the severe punishment of the Torah into an ordinary one. It is this behaviour pattern of theirs which has been described in the first verse (41) in the following words: يُحَرِّ‌فُونَ الْكَلِمَ مِن بَعْدِ مَوَاضِعِهِ (They dis¬place the words after their having been placed properly).

When the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) took up residence in Madinah, these people started noticing changes. The Islamic Rule of Law was working as a unique system. It was simple, open and full of conven¬iences. Then, it had a reasonable set-up to eradicate crimes through appropriate punishments. Now the people who were used to making the severe punishments of the Torah easy for their clients by changing them saw an opportunity for themselves whereby they could take such shady matters to the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم  and make him their judge or arbitrator. The dual advantage they saw in it was that they would reap the benefits of all easy and light rules of Islamic Law while, at the same time, they would not have to commit the crime of altering the Torah. But, here too, they had their crookedness at work as they would hold on to their decision of taking their case to him until such time that they succeeded in finding out beforehand through some source or ruse as to the actual verdict which would be delivered in their case when presented. Then, if they found this verdict matching their wishes, they would make him their arbitrator and have him de¬cide their case. If it happened to be contrary to their wishes, they would leave it at that. Since the events of this nature had caused pain to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) he has been comforted in the opening sentence of the verse that he should not grieve about their behaviour because it would finally turn out to be good for him.

Then, Allah Almighty let him know that these people were not making him a judge in their case sincerely. Their intentions were mis¬chievous. Then, in the later verse (42), he was given the choice to ei¬ther decide or avoid their case as he wished. He was also assured that they will not be able to harm him in any way, if he wished to avoid them. This is what the verse: فَاحْكُم بَيْنَهُمْ أَوْ أَعْرِ‌ضْ عَنْهُمْ (judge between them or turn away from them) means. Then, in the part of the verse which follows immediately, it was stated that should he elect to decide their case, the guideline given is that the decision has to be just. In other words, it meant that he was to decide the case in accordance with his Shari` ah because, after the coming of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، all former religious codes and their laws stand abrogated, except those which have been retained in the Holy Qur’an and the Shari’ah of the Last Prophet. It is for this reason that the act of deciding a case on the ba¬sis of another law, custom or usage contrary to the Divine Law has been declared to be injustice, sin and disbelief in later verses.

Judicial Process for Non-Muslims in an Islamic State

At this point, it should be borne in mind that these Jews who sent their cases to the court of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did not believe in him or his Shari` ah nor were they Dhimmis (non-Muslim citizens) protected by Muslims. However, they did have a no-war pact with the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . This is why he was given the option to either turn away from them, or give a decision in their case according to his Shari` ah because no responsibility for them falls on the Islamic state. If they were Dhimmis (protected non-Muslim citizens of a Mus¬lim State) and approached the Islamic government, the responsible Muslim official would have been duty-bound to give a verdict in their case. Avoiding it would have not been permissible because watching over their rights and removing injustice done to them is the duty of an Islamic government. Therefore, in a verse which will appear a little later (49), it has also been said: وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّـهُ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ (And judge between them by what Allah has sent down and do not follow their de-sires …) In other words, it means: If these people bring their case to you, decide it in accordance with your Shari` ah.

No choice has been given in this verse. Instead, the command is to decide as prescribed. In Ahkam al-Qur’an, Imam Abu Bakr al-Jassas (رح) has accomodated the sense of both these verses by suggesting that the first verse where a choice has been given relates to non-Muslims who are not citizens or Dhimmis of the Islamic state but continue to live where they are under a pact, such as, the position of the tribes of Banu Qurayzah and Banu Nadir. They had nothing to do with the Islamic state except that they were bound by a no-war pact. And the second verse concerns particular non-Muslims for whom Muslims are respon¬sible and who are citizens of the Islamic state and owe allegiance to its legal government.

Worth pondering here is that in both these verses – the first verse which gives a choice and the second which gives a specified command – the instruction given to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is that he should decide cases of these non-Muslims, whenever he does so, in ac¬cordance with the injunctions revealed by Almighty Allah, that is, in accordance with his Shari’ah – and not in accordance with the wishes of these non-Muslims or the religion they follow.

To explain, it can be said that this injunction is related to events which have been described under the background of the revelation of these verses. Of these, one concerned the punishment for killing and blood money while the other was that of adultery and its punishment. In such punishments of crimes, the universal practice is to have a com¬mon law for the whole country. In this common law, no discrimination is made on the basis of classes or religions, for example, amputating the hand of the thief which would not apply to Muslims alone, but would be the punishment for every citizen of the country. Similarly, the punishments for killing and adultery will also be common to everyone. But, it does not make it necessary that personal and purely relig¬ious matters of non-Muslims should also be decided in accordance with the Islamic Shari’ah.

Take an example from the conduct of the Holy Prophet g himself. Though he did declare liquor and swine unlawful for Muslims and prescribed a punishment for it, but he left non-Muslims free of any obliga¬tions in this matter. In addition to that, he never interfered in the personal law of non-Muslims pertaining to marriages and similar oth¬er matters. In fact, he accepted their marriages as valid.

With the rise of Islam in the Arabian Peninsula, the Magians of Hajar and the Jews and Christians of Najran and Wadi al-Qura became Dhimmis (protected non-Muslim citizens) of the Islamic state. That the Magians believed in marriage with even a mother and sister as lawful was known to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . Similarly, marriage without ` Iddah (waiting period), or witnesses, was valid among Jews and Christians. But, he did not interfere in their personal matters and took their marriages as valid.

In short, it can be said that decisions about personal law and relig¬ious matters of non-Muslims who are citizens of a Muslim state shall be left to their own religion and thinking – and should there be the need to arrive at a judicial settlement of their cases, a judge from their own religion will be appointed to decide them.

However, in the event that they turn to a Muslim judge or ruler and show that the concerned parties would agree with the decision giv¬en, then, the Muslim judge or ruler will deliver his judgment but in accordance with his Shari` ah – because he is now the legally appointed arbitrator as approved by the parties concerned. In the noble verse وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّـهُ (Judge between them by what Allah has sent down and do not follow their desires – 49) appearing a little later, the command to decide in accordance with the Islamic Shari` ah given to the Holy Prophetصلى الله عليه وسلم is based either on the matter being that of common law from which no section can be exempted, or rests on the basis that such people have themselves come to the Holy Prophet , have taken him as the arbitrator and wish that he himself should decide their case. Thus, it becomes obvious that his decision should be the one he believes in and which is also the mandate of his Shari’ ah.

Now as we move on to other aspects of verse 41, we see that it be-gins with words of comfort for the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) after which, he has been informed of the conspiracy hatched by the Jews, the description of which goes right upto its end. It reveals that the deputation coming to him was comprised of hypocrites who were se¬cretly in league with the Jews and it is at their behest that they were going to see him. After that, there is a description of some evil traits of character the visiting group has against which Muslims have been warned. As an adjunct, it has been pointed out that these traits of character are rejectionist in nature, therefore, effort should be made to stay safe from them. Listed below are these four evil traits of charac¬ter.

1. The first trait identified is: سَمَّاعُونَ لِلْكَذِبِ (They are listeners of the lie). It means that they are used to listening to and going by what is false. They are the kind of blind followers of unfaithful Jews who see to it that they are called men of learning who would go on following them despite noticing that they were openly negating the injunctions of the Torah, worse still, they would continue being satisfied with their fictional interpretations of it.

Following ` Ulama’: The Norm for People

The way those making alterations and adulterations in the injunc¬tions of Allah and His Messengers have been warned here, indicted similarly are those too who take such people as their leaders in relig¬ion and get used to listening to false and fabricated presentations from them. Offered here is an important rule of guidance for Muslims that, though the only way of following the obligations of religion open to un-lettered masses is to act in accordance with the ruling (Fatwa) and teaching (Ta` lim) of ` Ulama’ (traditionally trained, morally groomed, professionally equipped men and women of learning and living and teaching in accordance with the inviolable truth of the Qur’an and Sunnah – a sense not carried by stray equivalents of scholars, the learned, religious leaders, divines, priests, et al. Tr.). But, this is a responsibility from which the masses too cannot escape. It is their duty to first find out what they are doing. Before they take a Fatwa or hope to act correctly in a religious matter, they must at least investigate into the antecedents of those they are going to follow. This is like a sick person looking for a good physician. He consults people who know about the best in the field, about their education, expertise, practice, professionalism, moral quality and human dealing. After this possible assessment, if one makes a mistake and falls into the trap of a quack or charlatan, a reasonable person would not blame him. But, anyone who did not take the trouble of investigating and landed into the lair of a false practitioner and messed up his life, then, he alone will be re¬sponsible for his suicide.

The same principle applies to the dissemination of knowledge about religious matters for common people. If one of them first did what was necessary, talked to people of knowledge, expertise and ex¬perience available in his area and was able to pick up an ` Alim to con¬sult and follow, and acted according to his Fatwa, then, he would be considered excusable not only in the sight of people but also in the sight of Allah. In a hadith relating to a similar matter, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is reported to have said: فَاِنَ اِثمَہ علٰی مَن اَفتٰی which means, if in a situation like that, should the ` Alim or Mufti make a mistake, and a Muslim acts in accordance with this incorrect Fatwa, then, the sin for having acted in that manner does not fall on him, but it does on that ` Alim or Mufti – and that too would apply in a situation when that ` Alim or Mufti had made such a mistake knowingly, or had fallen short in deliberating on the problem to the best of his ability, or, may be, he was no ` Alim or Mufti to begin with, and had taken that re¬sponsible office through fraud or favour.

But, if a person takes someone as an ` Alim (a source of correct re¬ligious guidance which is worth following) on his own, without investi¬gating, and does what he says – and the ` Alim so chosen is really not deserving of being followed – then, its curse will fall not only on that Mufti or ` Alim alone, but this person who chose him will also share its consequences equally because he gave the reins of his ‘Iman (faith) into the hands of such a person without any investigation. These are the kind of people the Holy Qur’an calls ` the listeners of the lie,’ people who keep tagged behind their (ill-chosen) religious leaders without taking the trouble of finding out the truth about their knowledge and integrity, conduct and deeds, trustworthiness and honesty. Unfortu¬nately, they have got themselves into the habit of listening, accepting and being satisfied with fabricated and false narratives from them.

The Holy Qur’an is talking about the condition of Jews here but the message behind it is actually beamed at Muslims so that they can stay safe against something like that. Unfortunately, this is one of the reasons of the downfall of Muslims in the contemporary world. They are quite smart in their mundane matters. When sick, they find the best physician. When stuck with a case, they will search out the best lawyer. When they make a house, they can dig out the top architect and engineer. But, when it comes to the matter of religion, they become so careless that they would take any man with a beard, a long shirt and a glib tongue as their religious leader, ` Alim, Mufti or guide. They would do that without bothering to find out whether or not this person was educated and trained formally in a reliable institution of higher religious learning; whether or not he has sat at the feet of ex¬perts in the field and culled the taste and temperament of the knowl¬edge of Din; whether or not he has made intellectual contributions dur¬ing his career; whether or not he has benefited from the company of truly pious elders and Men of Allah by imbibing from them the essen¬tial virtues of Taqwa (fear of Allah) and Taharah (physical and spiritu¬al purity)?

The result of this carefree attitude is that a large section of people from among Muslims who do turn to religion unfortunately falls into the fishing nets of ignorant preachers and commercial pirs and becomes far-removed from the correct path of religion. For people like that, their knowledge of religion stands reduced to tales which leave their desiring selves untouched and which, then, gives them the delu¬sion that they are following religion and doing a lot of worship. But, its reality is what has been described in the Holy Qur’an in the follow¬ing words:

They are the people whose efforts and deeds have gone waste within the life of the world while they are thinking that they have done something good.

Concluding with a summary, we can say that the Holy Qur’an iden¬tifies an important principle by describing the hypocrites from among the Jews as ` the listeners of the lie.’ The principle is that following ` Ulama is inevitable for people at large, but it is their responsibility that they should not follow anyone as their ` Alim or guide in religion without prior investigation as a result of which they may not become habituated to listening to what is false from ignorant people.

2. Describing the other evil trait of these hypocrites, it was said: سَمَّاعُونَ لِقَوْمٍ آخَرِ‌ينَ لَمْ يَأْتُوكَ (listeners for other people who did not come to you). It means that these people have obviously come to ask you about a re¬ligious matter. But, the truth of the matter is that their objective is neither religion nor some ruling about it. In fact, they are the spies of the kind of Jewish people who did not come to you by themselves be-cause of their arrogance. The deputationists, following the wishes of their senders, simply want to find out your view of the punishment of adultery and let their senders know about it who will themselves de¬cide whether or not they would accept the verdict. In this, there is warning for Muslims that whoever seeks a Fatwa from an ` Alim of Din is bound by the condition that the intention of the seeker must be to find out the command of Allah and His Messenger and to follow it. Any effort to find out from one Mufti, or more than one, the objective solution of a religious problem, then, going about looking for a solution which suits one’s desires is an open demonstration of following one’s own desiring self – and Shaytan. This should be avoided.
3. Describing the third evil trait of these people, it has been said that they ` displace the words (of Allah) after their having been placed properly,’ which means that, by doing so, they give the Word of Allah a meaning which is not intended and thus try to alter Divine injunc¬tions. Included here is the possibility of making some changes or al¬terations in the very words of the Torah, as well as the eventuality that they keep the words as they are but make interpretations and al¬terations which are absurd in meaning. The Jews are used to doing it both ways.

In this, the warning given to Muslims is that Allah Almighty has Himself taken the responsibility of protecting the Holy Qur’an. As for an alteration in its words, nobod’ – can dare to do that because it is simply not a matter of what is written in the already countless copies of the Qur’an, but also that of what lies secured in the memory banks of millions of human beings. Anyone who makes the slightest mistake of mispronouncing even a short vowel is caught instantly. As for an al¬teration in meaning, it can obviously be done – and doers have done it too. But, for its security, Almighty Allah has made the arrangement that there shall remain in this Ummah right through the Last Day of Qiyamah, a group of people who would be armed with the correct meaning and message of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and they would be enough to unmask the alterers, corrupters and distorters of their meanings.

Bribery and its evil consequences

4. The second verse (42) mentions another evil trait of these people by calling them: أَكَّالُونَ لِلسُّحْتِ translated here as ` eaters of the unlawful’ making ` the unlawful’ to stand for the word, ` suht’ in the text. The liter-al meaning of Suht is to uproot or destroy something totally which is the sense in what the Qur’an says in: فَيُسْحِتَكُم بِعَذَابٍ , that is, (do not forge lies against Allah) lest He destroy you with a punishment – 20:61). But, at this place in the Qur’an, Suht denotes bribe. Sayyidna Ibrahim Nakha’ii, Hasan al-Basri, Mujahid, Qatadah and Dahhak and other leading authorities in Tafsir have explained it as bribe.

The reason for equating bribe with Suht (total destruction; also – unlawful earning, detestable enough to be shunned) is that it not only destroys its givers and takers alike but also goes on to uproot the whole country and community and destroy public peace and tranquili¬ty (by causing rise in illegal gratification and fall in avenues of honest earning). When bribery gains currency in a country or a department, law freezes and bribery stays hot. As for the law of a country, it is the only power which maintains peace and stability. When law and order stand suspended, nothing remains safe, life or property or honour, nothing. Therefore, by calling it Suht, the Shari’ ah has declared it to be gravely Haram, forbidden and unlawful. Moreover, to block all pos¬sible doors of bribery, even the gifts given to officials or leaders or dig¬nitaries of a country have also been classed as Suht or bribe in an au¬thentic Hadith, and has been declared to be Haram. (Jassas)

The Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلمhas said in a hadith: Almighty Allah causes His curse to fall on the giver and taker of bribe and on him too who acts as a broker between them. (Jassas).

The Islamic Legal definition of Rishwah (meaning bribery) is the taking of compensation for something the taking of which would not be legally correct. For example, a person doing a job, the doing of which is included within his duty, and the fulfilling of which is mandatory on him, cannot take any compensation for it from any party. If taken, that is bribe. Functionaries of governments, officials or clerks, higher or lower, are all obligated to do their duties by virtue of being paid em¬ployees of the government. If they take something from the person whose case they are handling, that will be a bribe. The father and mother of a girl are responsible for the marriage of their daughter. They cannot take any ` compensation’ for doing that. If they take any ` compensation’ from the person who will have the hands of their daughter in marriage, that is a bribe. Sawm (fasting), Salah (prayers), Hajj (pilgrimage) and the Tilawah (recitation) of the Qur’an are ` Ibadah’ (acts of worship) with which Muslims have been obligated. The taking of any ` compensation’ from anyone is a bribe. However, the duty of the Teaching of Qur’an and the duty of leading Salah as Imam are exempt from this (as ruled by later Muslim jurists).

Then, a person who takes bribe and does someone’s job as it should rightfully be done, he commits the sin of taking bribe and the money or material he has ` earned’ is ` suht,’ and unlawful for him. And should he do it as it should have not been done rightfully, then, this becomes another grave crime, that of wastage of what was right and that of changing an express command of Allah, in addition to the initial one. May Allah keep all Muslims safe from this curse.

Sequence of the Verses

This is the third Section of Surah al-Ma` idah. Here, Allah Almighty has asked the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims to pay heed to a particular injunction of the creed they all share as being the three communities attached to the Prophetic Tradition. Appearing in differ¬ent contexts through verses which have gone earlier, this is the serious matter of acting against the pledges given to Almighty Allah and that of changes, alterations and false interpretations made in injunctions sent to them – something which had become a chronic compulsion of habit with the Jews and Christians.

In the first two verses (44:45) of this Section, addressing the people of the Torah, Almighty Allah has warned them on this crookedness and about the sad end it will bring. With it, as a corollary, some con¬gruent injunctions pertaining to Qisas (Even Retaliation) have also been mentioned – for the Jewish conspiracy described in the previous verses was related to Qisas which the people of the tribe of Banu Nadir did not like to be even and because of which they had compelled their weaker rivals, the Banu Qurayzah, to be content with lesser blood money as compared to themselves. Thus, in these two verses, the Jews have been given a stern warning against imposing their own law con¬trary to the Law sent down by Almighty Allah and those who do that have been classed as Kafir (disbelievers) and Zalim (unjust).

After that, the third (46) and the fourth (47) verses are addressed to Christians. They too have been warned against enforcing a law of their own contrary to the Law sent by Allah. And those who do that have been classed as contumacious and disobedient.

Finally, in the fifth (48) and sixth (49) verses, addressing the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) Muslims have been instructed that they should take precautions to stay immune from the disease which had afflicted the people of the Book lest they too, God forbid, were to start changing through misinterpretations the injunctions and laws given by Al-mighty Allah – goaded by greed for money and recognition, or stoop to the haughtier level of making and enforcing a self-made law of their own contrary to His Law.

Also stated here subsequently is an important matter of principle which posits that all prophets, may peace be upon them all, adhered to the same faith and way as far as believing in and obeying Allah is con¬cerned. But, every prophet was given, as wisdom demanded, a Shari` ah or Way or Code, appropriate to the nature and need of his time and in which many subsidiary injunctions differ. Thus, as pointed out here, the very Shari’ah given to a prophet was the wisest choice for that time of the prophet and during which following it was obligatory. When abrogated and replaced by another Shari’ah, the later, then be-came what was wise and expedient at its time, the following of which also became equally obligatory. That there is a unique element of wis¬dom in the phenomena of alternation and variation in the systems of Shari’ah is a point which has also been made here.

Commentary

In the first verse of the set of verses appearing above, by saying: إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَ‌اةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ‌ (Surely We have sent down the Torah, having guid¬ance and light therein), the hint given is that the abrogation of the Shari’ah of Torah at that point of time is not because of any shortcom¬ing of the Torah itself but it has been done rather because of the need to change injunctions with the change of time. Otherwise, the Torah too is a Book revealed by the same Revealer. It has rules of guidance for the Ban’ Isra’il and it also has a special light which moves their hearts spiritually.

After that it was said: يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا لِلَّذِينَ هَادُوا وَالرَّ‌بَّانِيُّونَ وَالْأَحْبَارُ‌ that is, ` We had revealed the Torah so that, until its Shari’ah has not been abrogated, all incoming prophets and their deputies, the men of Allah and the ‘Ulama shall all decide and rule in accordance with this Torah making it the working law of their time.’ The deputies of the prophets, may peace be upon them all, have been mentioned in two categories – ‘Rabbaniyyan’ and ` Ahbar.’ The word, ‘Rabbaniyy ‘ is attributed to ` Rabb’ and means ` Man of Allah.’ As for Ahbar’, it is the plural form of Hibr which, in the Jewish terminology, used to stand for ` Alim (roughly, a scholar of religious sciences). It is obvious that for one to be a Man of Allah one has to have the knowledge of the necessary injunctions of Al-mighty Allah, otherwise deed sans knowledge is not possible – and no one can become a Man of Allah without obeying Divine injunctions and acting in accordance with them. Similarly, an ` Alim is, in the sight of Allah, one whose deeds in life are a mirror of his knowledge, otherwise an ` Alim who, despite his knowledge of Divine injunctions, does not ful¬fill his binding religious obligations by doing what is required of him nor shows any concern for his failure to do so, is worse than an ignor¬ant person in the sight of Allah. The outcome is that every Man of Al¬lah is an ` Alim and every ` Alim is a Man of Allah (or should be, in prin¬ciple). But, at this place, by mentioning both separately, a notice of caution has been given – no doubt, knowledge is necessary for a Man of Allah and deed, for an ` Alim – but, one gets to be identified with his dominant activity or colour (of the rainbow he follows in his path of obedience to Allah) and that becomes the name he is called with. A person who mostly devotes himself to ` Ibadat (acts of worship), A` mal (deeds) and the Dhikr of Allah (remembrance) and acquires religious knowledge sufficient for his needs, he is called a Rabbaniyy or Man of Allah. This, in our contemporary usage, is given names like Shaykh, Murshid, Pir and a good many others. As for the person who acquires the highest practical expertise available in religious sciences, and de-votes himself to the mission of teaching and training people in the rules of the Shari` ah, and fulfills the obligations of discharging what is Fard, Wajib and Sunnah al-Mu’akkadah – but is unable to spend any-more time in performing Nail ` Ibadat (voluntary acts of worship) – he is called ` Hibr’ or ` Alim.

To sum up, it can be said that the explanation given above also makes it clear that there is no dichotomy in Shari` ah and Tariqah and no distance between ` Ulama and Masha’ikh. They all converge into the basic unity. As far as the difference in their method of work and the predominant area of occupation is concerned, it becomes equally evident that the ‘Ulama (religious scholars) and Sufis (religious mys¬tics) are not two sects or factions. Far from it, they are, rather, one – in the sense that they both work for the same purpose in life, that of submission and obedience to Allah and His Messenger. But, their comparative methods employed to achieve this purpose do seem to be formally divergent.

After that, it was said: بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُوا مِن كِتَابِ اللَّـهِ وَكَانُوا عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاءَ (because they were entrusted with the protection of the Book of Allah and they stood guard over it). It means that these prophets and their two kinds of deputies, the ` Ulama and the Masha’ikh (Men of Knowledge and Men of Allah) were responsible for enforcing the laws of the Torah because Almighty Allah had entrusted them with the protection of the Torah and they had given the pledge that they would guard it.

Upto this point, the text was referring to the Torah as Divine Scripture and guidance and light which was enforced and guarded by prophets, and their deputies among guides and scholars. Then, the fo¬cus turns on to the contemporary Jews who have been censured for not having guarded the Torah as their elders did. They acted crookedly when they started changing its injunctions, for example, the glad tid¬ings of the coming of the Last among Prophets, Muhammad al-Mustafa, may the peace and blessing of Allah be upon him, was men¬tioned clearly in the Torah and the Jews were asked to believe in him. But, rather than believe in him as required, they became hostile to him. Also given here is the reason as to what prompted them to do so. It was love for power and love for money. They knew that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was a true prophet of Allah but they balked at the thought of following him because they were taken as leaders among their people, common Jews who followed them. Now if they were to embrace Islam, they will turn into common Muslim individu¬als. Gone will be their pivotal position for power play. Other than this, they had almost made it a profession that they would bend and alter the provisions of the Torah to provide officially endorsed conveniences for influential people against payment of bribes. The contemporary Jews were warned about this practice in the following words:

(So, do not fear people, fear Me. And do not take a paltry price for My verses).

It means that they should not fear that their people will stop following them or will turn against them and that they should not alter Divine commands for the sake of insignificant worldly gains for it would ruin them both materially and spiritually because:

And whoever does not judge by what Allah has sent down, then, they are the disbelievers.

In the second verse after that (45), there is a description of the injunctions of Qisas (Even Retaliation) with a particular reference stressing that ` We had revealed these injunctions in the Torah.’ The words of the text are:

` We had revealed in the Torah this injunction of Qisas for the Jews that there will be life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth; and for wounds an equal retalia¬tion.’

It will be recalled that the case of Banu Qurayzah and Banu Nadir was brought before the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . Counting on their power, Banu Nadir had compelled the weaker Banu Qurayzah to agree to their oppressive conditions which stipulated that should a man from Banu Qurayzah kill a man from Banu Nadir, they will have to pay two penalties. The Qisas of life for life will be taken as well as the blood money will have to be paid. If the case was the reverse, that is a man from Banu Nadir kills a man from Banu Qurayzah, then, there will be no Qisas; only blood money will be paid but that too will be half of what Banu Nadir were entitled to.

In this verse, Allah Almighty has exposed the lie of these people by pointing out that the injunctions of equality in Qisas (retaliation) and Diyat (blood money) exist in the Torah too. at these people are do¬ing is considered avoidance and that they bring their case to the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم         for a decision as alleged is no more than a ruse to find an excuse.

At the end of the verse it was said: وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّـهُ فَأُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ (And whoever does not judge by what Allah has sent down, then, they are the unjust.) It means that people who do not take the injunctions of Allah binding and who do not decide matters in accordance with them, are dissenters to the Divine commandment, its rejectors and rebels. They are unjust. The third verse (46) begins with the mention of the coming of Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) who was sent to confirm the pre¬vious Scripture, that is, the Torah. Mentioned after that is the Injil because that too, like the Torah, is guidance and light.

The Qur’an: Custodian of Torah and Injil

In the fifth (48) and the sixth (49) verse, the address is to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) saying that to him Allah has revealed the Qur’an which confirms the Torah and Injil, Books previous to it, and is their custodian as well. This is because, after the people of the Torah al¬tered the Torah and the people of Injil made changes in the Injil, it was the Qur’an alone which turned out to be the kind of overseer and protec¬tor which exposed the alterations made by them, lit up truth and reali¬ty in their proper perspective. Even today, the true teachings of the Torah and Injil still survive through the Qur’an while those who inher¬ited them and those who claim to follow them have disfigured them to the extent that it has become impossible to distinguish truth from un¬truth. Towards the end of the verse, the Holy Prophet g has been giv¬en the same instruction as was given to the people of the Torah and the people of the Injil, that is, all orders and judgments given by him should be according to injunctions revealed by Allah, and that he should see through the ploy of these people who intend to have him de¬cide matters according to their wishes and take his guard against their evil plans. There was a particular reason for saying what was said. Some Jewish religious scholars came to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . They told him that they were religious leaders among the Jews. If they became Muslims, the rest of them would become Muslims too. But, there was a condition to it. They said that they had a legal dispute with his people. They would bring that case to him. If, in this case, he were to decide in their favour, they would embrace Islam. Thereupon, Al-mighty Allah gave him the word of caution that he should never decide against considerations of equity and justice and the Law revealed by Allah because of the offer to become Muslims made by these people – a proposition which was not for him to worry about.

The Wisdom behind Partial Difference in Shari’ahs of Prophets

Besides other elements of guidance, this verse carries an answer to a basic question of principle. The question is: When all prophets have been sent by Allah, and all Books and Shari` ahs come from Him, why do they differ and why do a coming Book and Shari` ah abrogate the outgoing Shari` ah and Book? The answer has been given in this verse, along with its wisdom:

For each of you, We have made a way and a method. And had Allah willed, He would have made a single community of peo¬ple, but (He did not), so that He may test you in what He has given to you. Strive, then, to excel each other in good deeds.

To explain this in other words, it can be said that Allah has made for every section among human beings a particular Shari` ah and par¬ticular method of doing things in which, despite common principles, there are expedient differences in subsidiary injunctions. Had Allah so willed, it would have not been at all difficult for Him to make all hu¬man beings one community with only one Book and one Shari` ah for everyone. But, Allah Almighty did not prefer to do so for He intended to test people. He wanted to see who gets to know the reality of ` Ibadah (worship) and stays alert to receive and respond positively to whatever command comes for them. It may be a new Book or a new Shari` ah. They will be ready to accept and follow that, no matter how dear the previous Shari` ah and Book may be to them and no matter how hard its abandoning may be on them because of its grip on them as their ancestral religion. But, such people with their awakened sense of belonging to their ultimate master, always stay tuned to the next Divine call, and always ready to obey. At the other end of this trial shall obviously be those who fail to see this essential reality of obedience, who take to a particular Shari` ah and Book as closed objec¬tives of life giving it the uncompromising status of ancestral religion as a result of which they choose not to pay any attention to any Divine command.

Great wisdom lies in this difference among Shari` ahs. This is the channel through which every section of the human community of any time is taught the reality behind genuine ` Ibadah (worship) and the re¬ality behind human servitude to God. The message given is that the reality of ` Ibadah (acts of worship) lies in being an ` Abd, a servant, and in obeying and following – which does not depend on Salah, Sawm, Hajj, Zakah or Dhikr of Allah or Tilawah of the Qur’an – nor are these acts of worship an end by themselves. Instead of that, they all have one sin¬gle purpose behind them: Obedience to the Command of Allah. This is the reason why times during which Salah is prohibited, offering Salah at those times does not bring any reward. On the contrary, it becomes a source of sin. During the days of the two ` Ids, the ` Idul-Fitr and the ` Idul-Adha, when fasting is forbidden, it becomes a sin to fast at that time. Other than the ninth of the month of Dhil-Hijjah, gathering in the plain of ` Arafat on any day or month to pray and worship is no re¬ward-worthy act while on the ninth of Dhil-Hijjah, this is the greatest ` Ibadah on the plain of ` Arafat.

The same rule applies to all other acts of worship. Done when asked to do, they are ` Ibadah. But, when they are stopped at a certain limit, they too become Haram, unlawful and impermissible. Ignorant people are usually not aware of this reality. ` Ibadat which become their habit, rather, national customs which they get used to as if they were ` Ibadat, then, they would ignore even open commands from Allah and His Messenger. This is from where sprout the seeds of innovations and deviations (Bid` at and Muhaddathat) in established religion which, with the passage of time, become attached to it as if they were a part of it while they are not. This has been the major cause of alterations in past Shari’ahs and Books. By sending different Books and Shari’ahs to different prophets, Allah Jalla Sha’nuhu has taught human beings the lesson that they should not take one mode of action or one mode of worship as their primary objec¬tive. They should, instead, become obedient servants of Allah in its most desirable sense on the strength of which they should be able to instantly leave what they were doing earlier, as and when asked to do so. And, conversely, they should immediately be ready to do whatever they are asked to do.

Other than this, yet another wisdom behind this difference in Sha¬ri’ahs is that since tempers and tastes of human beings from every pe¬riod and section of the world are different, the variation in the time frame affects human disposition considerably. If subsidiary injunc¬tions were to be made identical for everyone, human beings would be in deep trouble. Therefore, it was the dictate of Divine wisdom that appropriate change be made in subsidiary injunctions with due consid¬eration of the response patterns of the people of different tastes and times. Here, the religious terminology of Abrogator (Nasikh) and Ab¬rogated (Mansukh) does not mean that the Law Giver did not know conditions before and gave one law – and when new circumstances pre¬vailed it was abrogated – or the earlier law was promulgated by mistake or lack of attention but was changed on later recollection. This is not the way it is. The Nasikh and Mansukh are just like the prescrip¬tion of a doctor or physician where a change in medicines appears gradually since the doctor or physician knows in advance that a cer¬tain symptom will show up in the patient after he or she has used the initially prescribed medicine for three days which then will be the time to prescribe a certain other medicine. So, when he cancels his earlier prescription and replaces it with a new one, it will not be correct to say that the previous prescription was wrong and for that reason it was cancelled. Instead, the truth of the matter is that this very prescrip¬tion was correct and necessary for use during the initial days of sick¬ness – and under later conditions, the same second prescription is cor¬rect and necessary.

A Summary of Subsidiary Injunctions

1. We know from the initial verses that the case brought to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) by the Jews was decided by him. The deci¬sion was in accord with the Shari` ah of the Torah. This proves that the religious injunctions in force in the previous Shari` ahs remain in force until abrogated by the Holy Qur’an or Divine Revelation as it was in the cases of the Jews where the injunction concerning equality in Qi¬sas (Law of Retaliation) and stoning to death (Rajm) in punishment of adultery (Zina) was there in the Torah as well. Then, the Qur’an too retained it as it was.
2. Similarly, in the second verse (45), the injunction of Qisas about the Retaliation for Wounds which has been mentioned with reference to the Torah was enforced in Islam by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . On this basis, the rule of procedure with the majority of the ` Ulama of Islam is that injunctions of previous Shari` ahs which have not been abrogated by the Qur’an are valid, enforceable and obedience-worthy in our Sha¬ri` ah too. That is why, in the cited verses, the people of the Torah have been asked to decide, judge and obey in accordance with the Torah and the people of the Injil have been asked to decide, judge and obey in ac¬cordance with the Injil – though both these Books and their Shari` ahs stand abrogated after the appearance of the Holy Prophet The out-come is that the injunctions of the Torah and Injil which were not ab¬rogated by the Qur’an are obedience-worthy even today.
3. The third injunction which stands proved from these verses is that ruling contrary to the injunctions revealed by Almighty Allah is Kufr (disbelief in and rejection of Faith) under some conditions spe¬cially when it is combined with belief in its being not true. And under some conditions, it is Zulm (injustice) and Fisq (disobedience, sin) – when belief-wise, one does accept them as true, but, in practice, does what is contrary to it.
4. The fourth injunction which appears in these verses is that tak¬ing bribe is absolutely Haram (unlawful) – specially, the taking of bribe in a judicial case, which is far too grave.

The fifth injunction which emerges clearly from these verses is that all prophets, may peace be upon them, and their Shari’ahs agree in principle, but there is that difference in minute and subsidiary in-junctions with them – a difference which is based on considerations of great wisdom.

Explanation in Brief

The verses cited above take up three important subjects which are the basic principles of unity among Muslims as a collectively organized community.

1. Muslims can deal with non-Muslims in the spirit of tolerance, sympathy, goodwill, equity, justice, favour and kindness, almost every-thing within that line of conduct. In fact, they should do that for they have been taught to do that. But, what is not permitted is the kind of fast friendship and indiscriminating intimacy which may garble the distinctive hallmarks of Islam. This is the issue known as the ` Tack al-Muwalat’ to refrain from deep (friendship) in Islamic terminology.
2. The second principle stressed upon is that should the Muslims of any time and place shift away from the first principle stated above and develop an intimacy of this nature with non-Muslims, then, let them not be under the impression that their conduct could harm Islam in any manner whatsoever – because Allah Almighty has Himself tak¬en the responsibility of seeing that Islam remains duly protected. It cannot be eliminated by anyone. However, if a set of people still go out of their minds, break the limits of Islamic modality of doing things and, let us presume, decide to leave the very pale of Islam, then, Allah Ta` ala will bring in another set of people who will uphold and establish the principles and laws of Islam.
3. Once we know the positive and negative aspects in perspective, it becomes evident that the real friendship of a Muslim – deep, intense, profound and reliance-worthy – can only be with Allah, the Highest of the high, His Messenger, and with those who believe in them.

After this brief introduction of the subject, we can now move to the detailed explanation of the verses.

Commentary

In the first verse (51), Muslims have been commanded not to enter into “Muwalat” (deep friendship) with Jews and Christians as is the customary practice of non-Muslims in general and, of Jews and Chris¬tians in particular, who reserve deep friendship for their own people only. They do not deal with Muslims at the same wave length.

After this clear instruction, should a Muslim do otherwise and en-ter into an intimate friendship with a Jew or Christian, then, in the sight of Islam, he is fit to be counted as one of them – and not as a Muslim.

The Background of Revelation

Reporting from ` Ikrimah, Ibn Jarir (رض) has said that this verse was re¬vealed in the background of a particular event. After the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) had settled in Madinah, he had entered into a treaty with Jews and Christians living nearby which required that they would neither fight against Muslims nor help any other tribe at war with them, rather, they would join Muslims to fight against them. Similarly, Muslims will not fight them nor help anyone against them, rather, would de-fend them against the aggressors. For some time, both parties kept adhering to the treaty. But, the Jews could not observe the terms of the treaty any longer because of their conspiratorial nature and anti-Islam temperament. They made a secret deal with the pagans of Makkah against Muslims and wrote them a letter inviting them to their fortress. When the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) came to know about this conspira¬cy, he dispatched a posse of Mujahidin to confront them. These Jews from Banu Qurayzah were, on the one hand, conspiring with the disbe¬lievers of Makkah, while on the other, having infiltrated among Mus-lims, they had succeeded in making pacts of friendship with many of them. This was their front of spying for the disbelievers of Makkah against Muslims.

Revealed thereupon was this verse which stopped Muslims from indulging in deep friendship with Jews and Christians, so that they could be deprived of having access to sensitive informa¬tion about Muslims. At that time, some noble Companions, including Sayyidna ` Ubadah ibn Samit (رض) ، openly announced the cancellation of their treaty obligations as well as their support for abandonment of any close friendship in the future. As for the hypocrites who had their pragmatic relationship with Muslims, or people whose hearts had yet to taste the sweetness of genuine faith, they apprehended dangers in breaking relationships with Jews and Christians lest the conspiracy hatched by the disbelievers and the Jews succeeded and Muslims were overpowered in which case it would be necessary that they keep their relationships balanced both ways to avoid any problems Tor them later on. It was on this basis that ` Abdullah ibn Ubaiyy ibn Salul (رض) had said that he saw danger in cutting off relationship with these people and, therefore, he cannot do that. Revealed thereupon was the second verse (52):

The fourth verse (54) tells us that the prohibition of intimate friend-ship and intermingling with non-Muslims is for the good of Muslims themselves. Otherwise, Islam is the particular religion the responsibil¬ity to protect which has been taken by Almighty Allah Himself. The crookedness or disobedience of an individual or group is self-destruct in its place. However, should some individual or group from among Muslims were to really abandon Islam itself, turn into an apostate (Murtadd) totally and become a part of non-Muslims, even that too could bring no harm to Islam because Allah who is Absolutely Power¬ful is responsible for its protection and He will immediately bring in some other nation into action which will carry out the duties of pro¬tecting and spreading the Din of Allah. Things He must do depend neither on an individual nor on the largest of the large party or insti¬tution. When He so wishes, He can make straws work for beams and logs, otherwise beams and logs sit in forests turning into compost any-way. As referred to elsewhere in this Commentary, how well this was put in an Arabic couplet:

When Divine decree helps – it can make the weak overtake the mighty.

When it was said in this verse that should Muslims become apos¬tates, it does not matter, for Allah will make another set of people rise to take their place, then, right there, some virtues of this set of people have also been enumerated saying clearly that they can be marked out by such and such distinguishable qualities. Those engaged in the ser¬vice of their religion should keep these qualities foremost in their minds because these verses tell us that people who have such quality and character are welcome and dear in the sight of Almighty Allah.

1. Their first quality identified by the Holy Qur’an is that Allah will love them and they will love Allah. There are two parts to this quality. The first one is the love of these people for Almighty Allah. This could be taken, in one or the other degree, within one’s control since one can, even if one does not love someone emotionally or natu¬rally, at least make his intention and determination to work for him in loving intellectually. And even emotional or natural love is though not in one’s control, yet its causes are, for instance, the meditation of the greatness and majesty of Almighty Allah, the conception of His most perfect power and the recapitulative survey of His authorities and blessings over human beings. This would definitely generate even nat¬ural love for Almighty Allah in the heart of a man or woman.

But, as far as the other part is concerned, that is, the love of Allah will be with these people, it obviously seems to indicate that this is a matter where human choice and action play no role. So, what is be¬yond our control and choice hardly warrants a description and is obvi¬ously fruitless – one may be tempted to wonder.

But, by pondering over some other verses of the Holy Qur’an, one will discover that the causes of this part of love too are within human control. If someone uses these means, the love of Allah will necessari¬ly be with him or her. Those means of achieving this end have been mentioned in the verse of the Qur’an which appears in Surah ‘Al-` Imran قُلْ إِن كُنتُمْ تُحِبُّونَ اللَّـهَ فَاتَّبِعُونِي يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللَّـهُ (Say [ 0 Prophet ], “If you do love Allah, follow me; Allah shall love you” … 3:31).

This verse tells us that one who wishes to have Allah love him or her should make the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) the very pivot of life and develop a committed habit of following Sunnah in whatever one does in each and every department of one’s life. If so, the promise of Allah is there – He will love that person. And this very verse also tells us that the only group of people which can stand up and meet the challenge of Disbelief and Apostasy (Kufr and Irtidad) shall be the group of people which follows the Sunnah conscientiously and habitually – neither falling short in obedience to the injunctions of the Shari` ah, nor initiating and introducing on their own, deeds con¬trary to the Sunnah.

2. The second quality of this group has been identified as: أَذِلَّةٍ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَعِزَّةٍ عَلَى الْكَافِرِ‌ينَ (…soft on the believers, hard on the disbelievers …). Here, the word: ` adhillah’ could be, as explained in Qamus, the plural of both dhalil or dhalul. Dhalil means low or despicable while dhalul means soft and tractable, that is, easily controlled, docile. According to the majority of commentators, this is the meaning of ` adhillah’ at this place, that is, these people will be soft with Muslims. Even in mat¬ters of dispute, they can be controlled and mollified easily. They would set the dispute aside, even if they are right in it – as said by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in an authentic hadith: اَناَ زعیم ببیت فی رَبصِ الجنۃِ لِمَن تَرَکَ المراَء و ھو مُ حِقُ ;that is, ` I am the guarantor of a home in the middle of Paradise for one who abandons dispute despite being in the right.’ Thus, the essential meaning of this word comes to be that these people will have no dispute with Muslims in matters relating to their rights and dealings.

The second word is ‘a’izzah’ in: أَعِزَّةٍ عَلَى الْكَافِرِ‌ينَ , it Ai (hard on the disbeliev¬ers). Here too, ‘a’izzah’ is the plural of ` Aziz which means dominant, strong and hard. So, the sense is that these people are hard and strong against the enemies of Allah and His Din who would be unable to control or manipulate them. Now, by combining both sentences we can arrive at the essence of the statement – that this will be a set of people whose love and hate, friendship and enmity will be, not for their person or their rights and dealings, but only for Allah, His Mes¬senger and His Din. Therefore, when comes the time to fight, it will not be against the obedient servants of Allah and His Messenger, instead of that, it would be against those who are hostile and disobedient to Allah and His Messenger. The same subject appears in a verse of Surah Al-Fath where the words are: أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ‌ رُ‌حَمَاءُ بَيْنَهُمْ (severe against disbelievers, merciful between themselves – 48:29).

3. The essence of the first quality was the most perfect fulfillment of the rights of Allah, and the essence of the second quality was moder¬ation in the fulfillment of the rights of the servants of Allah by remain¬ing accommodating in dealings. Now, the third quality of these people mentioned here is: يُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّـهِ that is, they shall keep carrying out Jihad to spread and establish the True Faith. In essence, it means that fighting against forces of disbelief and apostasy is no easy task. In this confrontation, traditionally known devotion to worship in seclu¬sion or a simple softness or hardness of attitude is not enough. Also necessary here is a feeling and fervour for the mission of establishing Din دین .
4. To ensure that this feeling and fervor achieves its desired per¬fection, the fourth quality of these people has been identified as: وَلَا يَخَافُونَ لَوْمَةَ لَائِمٍ that is, they will not care for any blame, censure or deroga¬tory criticism directed against them while they are engaged in their ef¬forts to upraise the true word of Allah and establish His Din. A little reflection will show that the leader of a movement usually faces two types of impediments in his efforts which are the power of the adver¬sary and the vilification of his own people. Experience bears out that people who lead a movement resolutely would stand firm against any adversary, even go through arrests, jail sentences, beatings and tor¬tures, yet, when it comes to facing blames and vilifications from their own people, even the most determined leaders tend to falter. Perhaps, it is to stress the importance of this trying situation at this place, that Allah Almighty has considered it sufficient to say that these people go on with their Jihad without taking notice of any blames directed against them.

Finally, towards the end of the verse (54), it was added that these good qualities of character are nothing but rewards from Almighty Al¬lah. It is He who gives them to whom He wills. A human being can-not acquire these by dint of his own effort and deed without Divine grace.

The Fitnah of Apostasy

Through the explanation of the words of this verse, it has already been clarified that the incidence of some from among Muslims turning into apostates will not harm Islam as a religion because Allah will raise a set of people with high morals and superior deeds who would defend and support it. However, the majority of commentators have dwelt further on the Fitnah (trial) of Apostasy (Irtidad). According to them, this verse is actually a prophecy of this Trial and at the same time a good news for the group of people who will fight against it and eliminate it successfully. This coming Fitnah of Apostasy was a seri¬ous problem the germs of which had already started spreading to-wards the lattermost period of Prophethood. But, after the departure of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) from this mortal world, this became an epidemic spreading all over the Arabian Peninsula. The group blessed with the good news was that of the noble Companions (رض) who confronted this onslaught of Apostasy under the command of the first Khalifah of Islam, Sayyidna Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (رض) .

Chronologically, Musaylimah al-Kadhdhab (the Liar) was the first to claim prophethood along with the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and was so audacious that he returned his emissaries back with the threat that he would have killed them had it not been for the protocol which pro¬hibited killing of envoys and emissaries. Musaylimah was a liar in his claim. The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did not get the time to wage Ji¬had against him and he left this mortal world.

Similarly, Aswad al-` Ansi, the chief of the tribe of Mudhhaj in Ya¬man announced his prophethood. The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) or¬dered the Governor of Yaman appointed by him to fight against him. But, the very next day after the night he was killed, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) departed from this mortal world. The news about his being killed reached the noble Companions (رض) at the end of Rabi’ al-Awwal. Another event like this was reported concerning the tribe of Banu Asad whose chief, Tulayhah ibn Khuwaylid laid a claim to his own prophethood.

Groups from these three tribes had turned Apostates during the last sickness of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . The news of his passing away took the lid out of this storm of Apostasy. Seven tribes of Arabia from different places turned against Islam and its legal authority.

They refused to pay Zakah as required by Islamic law to the Khalifah of the time, Sayyidna Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (رض) .

After the passing away of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) the responsibility of the country and the community fell on the shoulders of Sayyidna Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (رض) . There was the great shock on the one hand, and the flood of trials and rebellions on the other. Sayy¬idah ` A’ishah (رض) says that the shock faced by her father, Sayyid¬na Abu Bakr (رض) ، after the passing away of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، was so great that had it fallen on high mountains they would have been re¬duced to powder. But, Almighty Allah had blessed him with the high station of patience and fortitude by virtue of which he fought against all odds with full determination and courage, and did succeed finally.

Rebellion, as obvious, can be quashed by use of force only. But, conditions had reached a point of danger and Sayyidna Abu Bakr (رض) went into consultation with the noble Companions. None of them approved of a hard-line against rebellions. The danger was: If the Companions (رض) were to be committed to internal warfare, foreign powers would run over their new Islamic country. But, Allah Almighty made the heart of His ` True one’ strong and settled for Jihad. He gave an eloquent Khutbah before the Companions (رض) of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) which opened up their hearts too in favour of Jihad. The power and perfection of his determination and fortitude is reflected through his words:

“People who, after they have become Muslims, turn back and reject the injunctions given by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، and the Law of Islam, then, it is my duty that I should wage a Jihad against them. If, against me, they decide to bring along the combined force of all Jinns and human beings, and all trees and rocks of the world, all together, and I have no comrade in arms to support me, even then, I would, all by myself, put my neck on the stake and carry out this Jihad.”

After having said this, he mounted his horse and started moving ahead. Then, the noble Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all, came forward and made Sayyidna Siddiq al-Akbar (رض) sit at his place. In no time, a battle plan was drawn with fronts assigned to different people and the time of their departure set for action.

Therefore, Sayyidna ` Ali (رض) ، Hasan al-Basri, Dahhak, Qata¬dah and other Imams of Tafsir have said that this verse has been revealed about Sayyidna Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (رض) . He was the first one of the promised people about whom it was said in this verse that they will appear to defend Islam at the command of Allah.

But, not contrary to this, is the possibility that some other group could also be included in the sense of this verse. Therefore, respected elders who have pointed out to Sayyidna Abu Musa al-Ash` ari (رض) or other noble Companions (رض) as being included in the sense of this verse cannot be really taken as contrary to this suggestion. In fact, the most sound and safe position is to believe that all these blessed people, rath¬er every single Muslim due to come right upto the Last Day of Qiymah, who will keep confronting disbelief and apostasy in accordance with the commands of the Qur’an – they all shall be considered as in¬cluded under the purview of this verse.

Let us now resume our description of how the moving exhortation of Sayyidna Siddiq Alkbar made a group of Sahabah rise to the occa¬sion and meet the challenge of this trial of Apostasy under the leadership of the first Khalifah of Islam. Assigning an army of fighting men, he sent Sayyidna Khalid ibn Walid (رض) to Yamamah to fight against Mu-saylimah the Liar who had become very poweful in his area. The encounters were tough, but Musaylimah the Liar was ultimately killed at the hands of Sayyidna Wahshi, may Allah be pleased with him. His group repented and returned to the fold of Islam. Again, it was Sayy¬idna Khalid (رض) who went to fight against Tulayhah ibn Khuwaylid. He escaped and went out to some other area. Then, Allah gave him the ability to repent and return to Islam once again. He came back as a Muslim.

The news that Aswad al-‘Ansi had been killed and his group had surrendered had reached Madinah toward the end of the month of Rabi’ al-Awwal, the first month of the Siddiqi Caliphate. This was the very first news of victory which reached Sayyidna Siddiq al-Akbar (رض) under such trying circumstances. So, from this point onwards, the noble Companions (رض) of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) were also blessed with more clear victories on every front against other tribes which had refused to pay Zakah.

Thus, the practical demonstration of the truth of the word of Allah mentioned towards the end of the fifth verse (56): فَإِنَّ حِزْبَ اللَّـهِ هُمُ الْغَالِبُونَ (then, the people of Allah are the ones to prevail) was seen by the whole world. Speaking historically and objectively, it is a proven fact that the problem of Apostasy did affect some tribes of the Arabian Peninsula after the passing away of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . Then, the group that Allah made to rise and fight against the challenge was that of Sayyid¬na Siddiq al-Akbar (رض) and his colleagues among the Sahabah (رض) . So, it also stands proved from this very verse that the qualities of the promised set of people given in the Qur’an were all present in Sayyidna Siddiq al-Akbar and the Sahabah with him. To restate these, we can say:

1. Allah loves them.
2. They love Allah.
3. They are soft with Muslims and hard against disbelievers.
4. Their Jihad was in the way of Allah in which they were not afraid of any blame.

Pointing out to the reality of realities, it was clearly stressed that all these high qualities of character, their timely use and the ultimate success in the Islamic expedition through them were things which are not achieved by simple reliance on planning or power or numbers. This is nothing but the grace of Allah. It is He who bestows this bless¬ing upon whom He wills.

Marks of True Muslims

In the previous four verses discussed so far, Muslims have been forbidden to maintain intimate friendship with disbelievers. A posi¬tive approach has been taken in the fifth verse (55) where those with whom Muslims can have intimate friendship and special camaraderie have been identified. Mentioned first is Allah and then, His blessed Prophet, for Allah is – and He alone can be – the real friend, guardian and guide of a true Muslim, all the time and under all conditions. Other than the relationship with Him, every relationship and every friendship is perishable. As for the bond of fidelity to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is concerned, that too is, in reality, connected with Allah – and not separated. In the last sentence of the verse, the sincere most friends and fellows of Muslims have been identified as those who are true Muslims – not simply Muslims in name. They have three qualities which mark them out. These are:

Those who establish Salah and pay Zakah and bow before Allah.

It means that they: (1) Fulfill the obligation of Salah punctually ob¬serving all etiquettes (‘Adab) and conditions (Shara’it) which must be observed in it; (2) Pay Zakah out of their wealth; and (3) they are hum¬ble and modest and never become proud and arrogant over their good deeds.

The word, رکوع Ruku` in the concluding statement of this verse (55) : وَهُمْ رَ‌اكِعُونَ translated as ` those who bow before Allah’ could be taken in more than one sense. Therefore, some of the leading commentators have said that Ruku` refers to the functional Ruku` (bowing position) at this place – which is a basic element (Rukn`: pillar) of Salah. And the sen¬tence: وَهُمْ رَ‌اكِعُونَ (and those who bow before Allah) has been placed after: يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلَاةَ ‘ (those who establish Salah) because the purpose is to distin¬guish the Salah of Muslims from the prayer offered by others. As for the essential prayer which Muslims call Salah is something the Jews and Christians also do, but it has no Ruku` in it. Ruku’ is a distinctive element of the Islamic prayer known as Sarah. (Mazhari)

But, the majority of commentators says that Ruku` at this place does not mean the technical Ruku’ of Sa1ah. Rather, it means to bow, to be modest and humble in the lexical sense. Abu Hayyan in Tafsir al-Bahr al-Muhit and Al-Zamakhshari in Tafsir al-Kashshaf have gone by this meaning. The same view has been adopted in Tafsir Mazhari and Tafsir Bay-an al-Qur’an. Thus, the meaning of this sentence comes to be that these people do not feel proud of their good deeds; their natural disposition is, rather, modesty and humility.

It appears in some narrations that this sentence has been revealed about Sayyidna Ali (رض) ، in the background of a particular event. It is said that Sayyidna Ali (رض) was busy making Salah on a certain day. When he bowed in Ruku`, someone needy turned up and asked for something. He, within that state of Ruku`, took out a ring from one of his fingers and tossed it towards him. He could have taken care of the need of this person after having finished his Salah, but he did not wish to make even that much of a delay in removing the need of a poor fa¬qir. This act of ` racing towards good deeds’ was pleasing in the sight of Almighty Allah and it was through this sentence that it was appreciat¬ed.

The Sanad or authority of this narration is a debated issue among Varna and Muhaddithin, but, should this narration be taken as cor¬rect or sound, it would essentially mean that deserving of the close friendship of Muslims are common Muslims who fulfill the obligations of Salah and Zakah particularly and regularly – and among them, Sayy¬idna ` Ali (رض) is specially more deserving of this friendship – as has been said by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in another authentic Hadith: مَن کُنت موَلاہُ فَعَلِیُّ مَولاہُ (To whomever I am a friend, then, ` Ali too is a friend of his) (narrated by Ahmad, as in Mazhari). In yet another hadith, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has been reported to have said: اللَّھُمَّ وَالِ مَن وَالَاہُ وَ عَادِ مَن عَادَاہُ (0 Al¬lah, befriend whoever befriends him and take as enemy whoever shows enmity to him).

Perhaps, Sayyidna ` Ali (رض) has been blessed with this honour because the Fitnah to appear in the future was unveiled before him and he knew that there will be people who will nurse enmity with him and will not hesitate in even rising in rebellion against him – as it did happen during the uprising of the Khawarij.

Anyway, the revelation of the present verse – even if it is related to this event – is worded in a general sense which includes all Compan¬ions (رض) of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، and all Muslims. This is not particular to any one individual under a specific command. Therefore, when someone asked Sayyidna Imam Baqar (رض) : “Do the words: الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا (those who believe) in this verse mean Sayyidna Ali (رض) ?” He said: “He too, as included under ` believers’, is within the purview of this verse.”

People of Allah shall prevail ultimately

The next verse (56) gives the good news that such people will over-come the world as come forward in obedience to the Qur’anic injunc¬tions given in this verse and stay away from forging close friendship with others by limiting themselves to taking Allah, His Messenger and those who have faith in them as their genuine friends. The words of the verse are:

The Prohibition of Friendship with those who make fun of Islam

In the sixth verse (57), Allah Almighty has again stressed upon the injunction mentioned in verse 51 at the beginning of the Section, the sense of which is that the Muslims should not seek close friendship with people who make fun of their religion. They can be divided in two groups: The People of the Book, that is, the Jews and the Christians; and the disbelievers and non-Muslims in general. In al-Bahr al-Muhit, Imam Abu Hayyan (رح) says that the People of the Book were already in¬cluded under the word, Kuffar or disbelievers, still, the People of the Book have been mentioned here particularly perhaps, because the Peo¬ple of the Book were, though, closer to Islam as compared with other disbelievers, yet, experience bears that very few from among them embraced Islam. This is the reason why a look into the statistics of those who embraced Islam after the age of prophethood and during the peri¬od later to it, will reveal that the majority of them were from among the common disbelievers. The number of those who became Muslims from among the People of the Book will be much lower.

Why would that be so? The reason is simple. The People of the Book take pride in being adherents to Divine Faith and Divine Scripture. This proud partisanship made them opt for not accepting the Truth. The attitude of mockery against Muslims was something that they displayed most. When mockery becomes wickedness, things much lower can happen, as would be illustrated by an episode mentioned in the eighth (58) verse in the following words: وَإِذَا نَادَيْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ اتَّخَذُوهَا هُزُوًا وَلَعِبًا (And when you call for Salah, they take it in jest and fun). Tafsir Mazhari, with reference to Ibn Abi Hatim, reports the event itself by saying that there was a Christian in Madinah al-tayyibah. When he heard the words : اَشھَدُ اَنَّ مُحَمَّدَاً رَّسُولُ اَلله (I testify that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah) in the Adhan (call for prayer), he used to say: اَحرَقَ اَللہُ الکَذِبَ (May Allah burn the liar). At last, this very remark made by him became the cause of his entire family burn to ashes. How this happened was commonplace. When he was sleeping, his servant entered the house with a little fire for some purpose. A speck from it flew out and fell down on some piece of cloth. When everybody was fast asleep, the speck had turned into a blaze and everybody was burnt to death.

The Tragedy of People who do not Understand

At the end of the verse (58), it was said ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَوْمٌ لَّا يَعْقِلُونَ (That is be-cause they are a people who do not understand). It means that the reason for their jest and fun being directed against what is True Faith could be no other but that they do not understand.

Qadi Thanaullah of Panipat has said in Tafsir Mazhari that Allah Almighty calls them devoid of understanding although their reason and intelligence in worldly matters is well known. From here we learn that it is possible that one could be very smart and quick-witted in cer¬tain kinds of jobs, but when it comes to doing some other things, he ei¬ther does not use his mind or his mind does not work in that direction. Therefore, he turns out to be dumb in it, like one who does not under-stand. The Holy Qur’an has referred to this subject in another verse as follows:

These people do know outward matters of the present life while they are heedless to the Hereafter. (30:7)

The Correction of Deeds

Of those who have laid the greatest emphasis on the correction of deeds, the foremost are the respected Sufis (spiritual masters) and the men of Allah. These blessed souls have deduced from these very say¬ings of the Qur’an the significant principle that all human deeds, good or bad, really come from ingrained habits and morals which ultimately become man’s second nature. Therefore, when they wish to check, modify or dilute the recurrence of evil deeds, they keep these ingrained habits in sight. Thus, when they correct these, all deeds that issue forth start coming out right. Let us take the example of a person whose heart is overwhelmingly filled with greed for worldly acquisi¬tions. As a result of this greed, he takes bribes, and devours income from interest, and if, given the opportunity, things could also reach the limits of theft and robbery. Instead of correcting these crimes separ-ately, the spiritual masters use one masterly prescription which could cause the very foundation of these crimes razed to the ground – and that is the realization of the mortality of the world and the poisoned nature of its luxuries.

Similarly, if someone suffers from over weaning pride or arrogance or anger, and he belittles or insults others, or quarrels with friends and neighbours, these blessed souls will use the same prescription, the prescription with ingredients of the concern for the life-to-come and the fear of ultimate accountability before Almighty Allah. Once these start remaining in sight actively, such evil behaviour patterns die out automatically.

In short, this Qur’anic indicator tells us that man has some ingrained traits which become his second nature. If these ingrained traits tilt towards good, good deeds issue forth on their own. Similarly, if the ingrained traits are evil, man starts running towards evil deeds automatically. To achieve a total correction of behaviour, the correc¬tion of these ingrained traits is necessary.

Are religious leaders responsible for the deeds of common people?

In the second verse (63), the Shaykhs and ` Alims among the Jews have been sternly warned as to why would they not stop such people from evil deeds. At this place in the Qur’an, two words have been used. The first word is: رَبَّانِيُّونَ ‘Rabbaniyyun’, which means Men of Allah, that is, those who are intensely devoted to acts of worship and abstain from worldly temptations – commonly known as Derwish, Pir or Shaykh. The second word used is Ahbar.’ Religious scholars among Jews are called Ahbar.’ This tells us that the real responsibility of the Qur’anic injunction of اَلاَمر بالمعروف Al-Amr bil-Ma` ruf (bidding the Fair) and نھی عن المنکر Nahy Anil-Munkar (forbidding the Unfair) falls on these two groups, that is, on the Shaykhs and A` lims. However, some commentators have said that ` Rabbaniyyun’ refers to ` Ulama who have been appointed by Gov¬ernment and are fully authorized, while ‘Ahbar’ means the ` Ulama in general. Taken in that sense, the responsibility of stopping people from committing crimes comes to fall on government officials and ` Ulama both. Incidentally, this has been further clarified in some other verses as well.

For ` Ulama and Mashayikh – a Note of Warning

Towards the end of the verse (63), it was said: لَبِئْسَ مَا كَانُوا يَصْنَعُونَ : “Evil is what they have been doing” – which means that it is bad habit on the part of such religious leaders known as Mashayikh and ` Ulama that they have abandoned their cardinal duty of bidding the Fair and forbidding the Unfair. They see people ruining themselves and they do not stand up and stop them.

Commentators with knowledge and insight have pointed out that at the end of the first verse (62) which mentioned the errors made by common people, what was said is: لَبِئْسَ مَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ (Evil is what they have been doing). But, in the second verse (63), where the Mashayikh and ` Ulama have been admonished for their failing, the concluding sentence used is: لَبِئْسَ مَا كَانُوا يَصْنَعُونَ “Evil is what they have been doing [ by design ].” The reason is that, according to the Arabic usage, the word, فعل :fi’l (that which is done) includes everything done, whether with in¬tention, or without. But, the word, عمل :Amal (that which is acted upon) is applied to what is done particularly with intention and volition. As for the words, صنع : Sana’a and صنعت : San’at (that which is done by design) are concerned, they are applied when something is done with in¬tention, and volition or choice, and that it is done repeatedly as a matter of habit and considered purpose both. Therefore, as a result of the evil done by common people, the word chosen was Amal, that is: لَبِئْسَ مَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ (Evil is what they have been doing). But, as a result of the wrong done by Mashayikh and ` Ulama particularly, the word selected was: صنع : Sana’a, as in: لَبِئْسَ مَا كَانُوا يَصْنَعُونَ : “Evil is what they have been doing [ by design ].” In this arrangement here, there may be a hint that the attitude of such religious leaders was false because they knew that if they were to stop their people, they would listen to them and, it was likely, that they would abstain from evil deeds. Yet, such is their greed for whatever offerings they may get from them, or such is their fear of losing the faith of their clients, that their hearts are not moved enough to stand up to defend and uphold the truth. This failing of theirs is far too grave than the evil doings of those evil doers.

The outcome is: If the people of a country get involved in sins and crimes, and their religious leaders know that they will listen and ab¬stain if asked to stop, then, under such a condition, if they do not try to stop the flood of sins and crimes because of temptation, fear or apathy, their crime is more grave than the crime of real criminals and sinners.

Therefore, Sayyidna Abdullah ibn Abbas (رض) had said that a stronger warning for Mashayikh and ` Ulama does not appear any-where in the entire Qur’an other than the one in this verse. The recog¬nized authority in Tafsir, Dahhak has said: In my view, this is the most frightening Ayah for Mashayikh and ` Ulama. (Ibn Jarir & Ibn Kathir)

The reason is that in the light of this verse, the failing of religious leaders gets to be rated as far more serious than the actual crime com¬mitted by thiefs and robbers and sinners (Refuge with Allah). Howev¬er, it should be borne in mind that this stern warning stands operative in the situation when the Mashayikh and ` Ulama are reasonably cer¬tain that their appeal will be heard and accepted. But, under other conditions when prevailing trends or corresponding experience create a stronger likelihood that nobody is going to listen to them, rather, they may even have to face harm or hurt in doing so, the command is that their responsibility, no doubt, stands dropped, but, the conduct which still remains better and higher is that they should – whether heard or negated – go on doing their duty without bothering about any blame thrown or pain caused. This approach was identified earlier as well in verse 54 which highlighted one of the qualities of the Mujahidin in the way of Allah by saying: وَلَا يَخَافُونَ لَوْمَةَ لَائِمٍ that is, they are not afraid of any blame thrown at them by those who would blame anyone who speaks the truth.

It is useful to sum up the main elements of our discussion before we part with it by saying that Mashayikh and ` Ulama, rather, all Mus¬lims, once they know something to be sinful or against law, are duty-bound to check, stop or prohibit sin and crime, to the best of their abil¬ity – with their own hands or word of mouth or, at the least, with dis¬taste of the heart or dislike of the attitude – of course, subject to the condition that the occasion lends to the possibility and stronger prob¬ability that they will be heard and their call will be entertained. But, should there be an occasion where stronger probability exists that they will not be heard or they will be subjected to hostility against them, then, that will be a different condition in which it will no more be obligatory on them that they must prohibit and stop people – but, it shall still remain the better and the higher form of conduct. All these details about the well known Qur’anic maxim of Bidding the Fair and Forbidding the Unfair have been deduced from Sahih Ahadith. We can say that, by placing the responsibility – of personally doing what is right and good, avoiding what is not, and inviting others too to do good and shun evil, – on Muslims at large, and on Mashayikh and ` Ulama in particular, Islam has given to the world a priceless principle of peace which, if practiced, could help nations after nations become easily cleansed of all sorts of evils which afflict them.

The Method of Community Correction

As long as Muslims adhered to this principle right through the ear¬ly and later centuries of Islam, they held a position of universal dis¬tinction in terms of knowledge, deed, morals and character. Once Mus¬lims ignored this duty, started taking the prevention of crime as the sole responsibility of the government and its law-enforcing agencies and withdrew from their role in it, the result that came out was no se¬cret. It is there for everyone to see. Here you have a father, a mother, the whole family, all religiously observing and fully adhering to the Shari` ah. But, their children and their family circle are different, al-most their reverse. They think and feel otherwise. They do things dif¬ferently. It is for this reason that the mission of Bidding the Fair and Forbidding the Unfair has been particularly stressed upon in the Qur’an and Hadith as the surest method of any collective reform in the Muslim Ummah. The Holy Qur’an has identified this mission as a unique distinction of the Ummah of the Prophet of Islam (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . And it has also declared that any contravention of this rule shall be a grave sin and a certain cause of punishment. In Hadith, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has said: When sins are committed among a people and there lives someone who does not stop them, then, not far is the likelihood that Allah sends a punishment to fall on all of them. (Ai-Bahr al-Mubit)

Warning against Not hating Sins

Malik ibn Dinar says: Allah asked his angels to destroy a certain town. The angels said that there lived in that town a devoted servant of His busy praying to Him. Came the command: Let him too taste the punishment because he never showed his anger against people dis¬obeying Us and committing sins openly, not even with a sign of it on his face.

To Sayyidna Yusha` ibn Nun (عليه السلام) ، (Joshua) the Israelite prophet, Allah Almighty revealed that one hundred thousand of his people will be destroyed by a punishment. Of them, forty thousand were righteous and sixty thousand, evil. Sayyidna Yusha` (عليه السلام) said: 0 Lord, the ruin of the evil is obvious but why the good ones? It was said: The good ones had friendly relations with the bad ones. Together, they ate and drank and enjoyed life and never frowned on people sinning and disobeying their Creator. (Details of all these narrations can be seen in Al-Bahr al-Muhit)

Sequence

Some conditions of the Jews were mentioned in the previous vers¬es. More particular ones appear in the verses cited above, especially the ones identified with Nabbash son of Qays and Fenhas, the chief of the Jewish tribe of Qaiynuqa` who uttered words of affront with refer¬ence to Almighty Allah, the description of which follows. Thereupon, the opening verse was revealed. (As in Al-Lubab, from Sayyidna ibn ` Abbs (رض) nar¬rated by Al-Tabarani and Abu Al-Shaykh)

Commentary

The first verse begins with the words: وَقَالَت الیَھُودُ the Jews said). It mentions what was a grave offence and an utterly undignified re-mark for any human being to make. They were wretched enough to (God forbid) say that Allah’s hand is tied up.

The background in which this was said was that Allah Almighty had given to the Jews of Madinah extended means and money. But, when the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) came to Madinah, they heard the call of Islam, yet they remained unmoved because they were more in¬terested in holding on to their communal hegemony and the money they received through offerings based on their self-perpetuating cus¬toms. So, they turned against what was the call of truth and took a hostile stand against the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) himself. Then, as a punishment of this behaviour of theirs, Almighty Allah turned their affluent material circumstances into what was materially straightened for them – and they faced poverty.

Thereupon, all frustrated and off-guard, they started uttering words to the effect that (God forbid) the Divine treasure seems to be running short or, perhaps, Allah has chosen to become miserly. It was in answer to them that it was said in this verse that the hands to be tied up will be their own hands who are saying what they are saying and cursed they shall be when punish¬ment visits them in the Hereafter, and in the present world as well, when it comes to them in the form of disgrace. As for the hands of Al¬lah, they are always open and well-extended, and His generosity has been there since ever and shall remain forever. But, He Himself is Independent, free of need, yet the master of all means. Then, along with this, He is Wise too. He gives and gives in His Wisdom. Means are extended for whom He wills in His Wisdom and means are straightened for whom He wills in His Wisdom.

After that, it was said that the people the Prophet of Islam is deal¬ing with are contumacious people as they refuse to benefit from the open and clear words of the Qur’an revealed to him, instead of which, their disbelief in and denial of the truth keeps getting more hardened. So, it is to keep Muslims safe from their evil designs that Allah has caused differences to crop up within their own sects because of which they would neither dare fight an open war nor would any conspiracy by them succeed. The failure to wage an open war has been mentioned in: كُلَّمَا أَوْقَدُوا نَارً‌ا لِّلْحَرْ‌بِ أَطْفَأَهَا اللَّـهُ (Whenever they lit the flames of war, Allah puts it out) while the failure to hatch sinister conspiracies has been pointed out in: يَسْعَوْنَ فِي الْأَرْ‌ضِ فَسَادًا (And they run about on the earth spreading mischief).

Full obedience to the Divine Commands brings Blessings in This World Too

In verse 65, the Jews have been admonished that the people of the Torah and Injil have not derived any benefit from the guidance given therein nor from the teachings of the blessed prophets. Once involved in worldly greed, they ignored what was not to be ignored. As a result, they ran into straightened circumstances right here in this world as well. But, if they were to take to the ways of faith and godliness even now, Allah could forgive them their past sins and admit them to Gardens full of bliss.

How are Divine Commands carried out in Full?

Mentioned in verse 66 which begins with the words: وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ أَقَامُوا التَّوْرَ‌اةَ (And if they had upheld the Torah …), are some details of the same faith and godliness for which worldly blessings have been promised in the previous verse (65). The detail is that they should, uphold the Torah, the Injil and the Holy Qur’an revealed after them. The word used here does not refer to ‘acting in accordance with these books’. Instead of that, the word placed here is ` Iqamah’ which means to establish, and to make something stand upright and straight. It signifies that their teachings can be carried out fully and correctly only when there is no increase or decrease or shortcoming in them. What is meant to stand straight must stand perfectly straight – established, not tilting.

The essence of the verse is that if the Jews were to believe in the guidance of the Torah, the Injil and the Qur’an, even today, and carry out their instructions fully, without failing to act properly, nor opting for excess and transgression by equating self-innovated things with es¬tablished religion, then, they shall deserve the promised blessings of the Hereafter, and the doors of sustenance will be thrown open for them in the present world as well. It will come from above and it will come from beneath. ` Above’ and ` beneath,’ as obvious, mean suste¬nance which will be available easily and constantly. (Tafsir Kabir)

It will be noticed that the earlier verse (65) promised blessings only in the Hereafter. The present verse (66) extends the promise to cover worldly comforts as well. The reason for this may perhaps be that the Jews had taken to malpractices, particularly the practice of altering and distorting Scriptures because of their taste for the temporal and their insatiable greed for money. This became their main hurdle which had stopped them from obeying the Qur’an and the Prophet of Islam despite that they had seen very clear signs of their veracity. They were scared at the idea that by becoming Muslims, their leadership role in the community will be all over. Also gone will be the offer¬ings and gifts which they received as religious high-priests. It was to remove this kind of doubt or apprehension that Almighty Allah prom¬ised to them that if they take to believing truly and acting righteously, nothing will be decreased from their worldly wealth and comfort which would, rather, be increased.

Answer to a Doubt

Details given above also show that this particular promise was made to Jews who were present during the time of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and were his direct addressees. If they had obeyed the command given to them, they would have had all sorts of blessings in the mortal world as well. So, those who took to the message of faith and good deed, they had these blessings in full – like Najashi (Negus) the King of Ethiopia and Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn Salam (رض) . However, it is not necessary that for one who abides by faith and good deed, sustenance will be extended as a rule and, vice versa, for one who does not, sustenance will be straightened as a rule. The reason is that, at this place, the purpose is not to describe a general rule. This is a promise made to a particular group under particular conditions.

However, as far as the standard or general rule regarding faith and good deeds is concerned, the promise of the blessing of good and pure life is universal – but, that could either take the form of extended means of sustenance, or means which are outwardly constricted, as it has been with the blessed prophets and men of Allah not all of whom had extended sustenance all the time, but they all did have the purest of the pure life.

Justice was served when in the last verse (67), it was also added that the evil doings of Jews mentioned in the text do not apply to all Jews. Among them there were moderate people, people who were on the right path. But, the majority was evil doing. ` People on the right path’ denotes people who were first Jews and Christians, then believed in the Qur’an and the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and entered the fold of Islam.

Emphasis on Tabligh and Comfort for the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

In the present verses as well as throughout the previous two sec¬tions, there has been a continued description of the crookedness, way¬wardness, obstinacy and anti-Islam mechanizations of Jews and Christians. One natural effect it could have on the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was that he, being human, could feel disappointed or compelled by circumstances and, as a result of which, the process of Tabligh or the very mission of prophethood might slow down or left lacking somewhere. The second effect could be that in the event he elected to devote single-mindedly to his call and mission as a prophet without car¬ing for any hostility, enmity, harm or hurt, there was every likelihood that it could result in the worst of hardships at the hands of his adver¬saries. Therefore, in the last verse (67), the Holy Prophet   صلى الله عليه وسلم was, on the one hand, emphatically commanded to convey everything revealed to him by Allah, all of it, without any hesitation, to the peo¬ple. That someone likes or dislikes it, takes or rejects it, should not worry him in his mission. Then, on the other hand, by giving the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم the good news that all those disbelievers will be unable to bring any harm to him in his mission as a prophet for Allah will Himself protect him.

The sentence: وَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلْ فَمَا بَلَّغْتَ رِ‌سَالَتَهُ And if you do not, then, you have not conveyed His message [ at all ] ‘ in this verse is worth pondering. This address to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) here means that if he failed to convey even one Divine command to the Muslim Ummah, he would not find himself absolved of the responsibility of prophethood. This was the reason why the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) strived with his full courage and strength all his life to fulfill this heavy obligation placed on his shoulders. Muslims are familiar with the renowned Khutbah of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) during his Last Hajj, the great address which was not only the Constitution of Islam but also the last will and testament of an elementally lenient and merciful prophet who was far more affectionate and caring than a father and mother could ever be.

The parting will of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) on the occasion of the Last Hajj

In this Khutbah before a huge gathering of his noble Sahabah, after he had given important instructions to them, he asked the audience: اَلَا بَلَّغتُ (Listen: Have I conveyed your religion to you?). The Sababah confirmed that he certainly had. Thereupon, he said: You be a witness on this. And along with it, he also said: فَلیُبَلِّغِ اشَّاھِد ( الغای (عليه السلام) بَ (that is, those present in this gathering should convey my message to those who are not here). Included among the absent are those who were present in the world at that time but were not present in the gathering itself – and also included are those who were yet to be born. The method of conveying the message to them was the spreading of the knowledge of the دین Din of Allah, a duty which was fulfilled by great efforts made by the Sahabah and the Tabi’in.

It was under the direct influence of this parting advice that the no¬ble Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all, took the words and deeds of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as a weighty trust of Allah and did their best to ensure that not a single sentence uttered by his blessed tongue should remain un-conveyed to his Ummah. This holds true under all normal conditions. However, if someone did not narrate a particular Hadith before people for a special reason or compulsion, he made it a point to do that before his death by reciting it to at least some people around so that they could be relieved of the burden of trust they have been carrying on their shoulders. A similar event about a Hadith from Sayyidna Mu’adh (رض) has been reported in the Sahih of al-Bukhari, that is, اَخبر بہ معاذ عند موتہ تاثما that is, Sayyidna Mu` adh recited this Hadith at the time of his death so that he would not become a sinner because of his failure to convey this trust with him to others.

The Protection of Allah

In the second sentence of the last verse: وَاللَّـهُ يَعْصِمُكَ مِنَ النَّاسِ (And Allah shall protect you from the people), good news has been given to him that his enemies would remain unable to do anything harmful against him despite their myriad demonstrations of animosity.

It appears in Hadith that, before the revelation of this verse, some Companions (رض) generally used to stay around him in order to protect him. They guarded him wherever he was, in the city or in travel. After the revelation of this verse, he relieved them all as no security arrange¬ments were needed anymore. Allah had Himself taken that responsibility.

In a Hadith narrated by Sayyidna Hasan, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has been reported to have said: When I was charged with the duty of conveying the message of Allah as His prophet, the charge appeared to be very frightening because people around me were bound to falsify and oppose me. Then, as this verse was revealed, I was at peace. (Tafsir Kabir)

Thus, after the revelation of this verse, no one dared to harm the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) during his efforts to spread the message of Islam as a prophet of Allah. Any casual injury received in Jihad bat¬tles is not contrary to this.

Sequence

Earlier, the people of the Book were persuaded to embrace Islam. Mentioned now is the futility of their current approach which they claimed to be the God’s truth while it was unworkable in the sight of Allah, insufficient for salvation and dependant on Islam as the only source of salvation. Then, as an antidote to their insistence on remain¬ing disbelievers after being warned, there are words of comfort for the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . The mention of Tabligh of Din had appeared in between as based on particular need and congruity.

Follow the Divine Shari` ah: Instruction for the people of the Book

In the first verse (68), the people of the Book, that is, the Jews and Christians were instructed to follow the Divine Shari` ah by making it clear that they would be reduced to nothing if they chose not to abide by the injunctions of the Shari` ah. In other words, if they do not ad-here to the Shari` ah of Islam, all their achievements shall stand wast¬ed. To them Allah had given the privilege of being the progeny of prophets. Then, they had the intellectual excellence of the Torah and the Injil as well. Added to this was the presence of many men of Allah among them who went through strenuous spiritual exertions in their search for truth. But, for all this to be valid and weighty the one bind¬ing condition was that they should follow the Divine Shari` ah. Without it, no genealogical superiority will work, nor would their intellectual excellence or their spiritual strivings become the means of their salvation.

This statement provides for Muslims too the crucial guidance that there is no way of Dervishes or path of spiritual realization (Suluk & Tariqat) or repeated strivings to achieve spiritual goals (Mujahadah and Riyadat) or extra-sensory spiritual illumination (Kashf) or having visitations of inspiration (Ilham) which can become the source of spiri¬tual achievement or salvation in the sight of Allah unless there is full adherence to the Shari’ah.

To prove one’s obedience to the Divine Shari` ah, the instruction giv¬en in this verse is to follow three things. These are the Torah and Injil which had been revealed earlier for the Jews and Christians while the third one is: وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّ‌بِّكُمْ , that is, what has been revealed to you from your Lord.

According to the consensus of the majority of commentators, the Sahabah and the Tabi` in, it means the Holy Qur’an which was sent for the universal community of inviters to faith – including the Jews and Christians – through the (midmost) medium of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . Therefore, the verse comes to mean unless you act in accor¬dance with the injunctions brought by the Torah, the Injil and the Qur’an – correctly, fully and totally – no lineal or intellectual excellence of yours shall be valid or acceptable with Allah.’

At this point one may wonder why, in this verse, rather than men¬tioning Qur’an by its brief name, as was done with the Torah and the Injil., a long sentence : (and what has been revealed to you from your Lord) has been used. What is the wisdom behind it? It is possible that it may be carrying a hint to what was said by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in which he disclosed that the way he was given the Qur’an which is a treasure of knowledge and wisdom, also given to him were other sources of knowledge and insight, which could be called, in a certain aspect, the explication of the Holy Qur’an as well. The words of the Hadith are:

Remember! I have been given the Qur’an and, with it, (many fields of knowledge) like it – lest, in times to come, some sated man reclining on his couch were to say: For you this Qur’an is sufficient – what you find Halal in it, take that as Halal; and what you find Harm in it, take that as Haram – although, what the Messenger of Allah has declared to be Harm is like what Allah has declared to be Harm. (Abu Dawud, Ibn Ma¬jah, Darimi & others)

Three Kinds of Ahkam

The Qur’an itself is a testimony of this subject. It says:    وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَىٰ ﴿٣﴾ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَىٰ ﴿٤﴾ which means that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) does not say anything on his own – whatever he says is all revealed to him from Almighty Allah; and under conditions when he says something based on his Ijtihad (fully deliberated judgment) and Qiyas (analogical de-duction) – following which he receives no guidance contrary to it – then, consequently, that Qiyas and Ijtihad too hold the same legal force as that of an injunction revealed through Wahy.

In a nutshell, we can say that, out of the injunctions (Ahkam) given to the Ummah by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) first come those which have been mentioned clearly in the Holy Qur’an. Then, there are those which have not been mentioned in the Qur’an clearly, instead of which, they were revealed to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) through a separate Wahy (Wahy Ghayr Matlu: Revelation not recited). Thirdly, the command which he gave as based on his Ijtihad and Qiyas – following which no command was revealed by Almighty Allah – then, that too takes the legal force of a revealed injunction. It is obligatory to follow all these three kinds of injunctions. They are included within the purview of وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّ‌بِّكُمْ (What has been revealed to you from your Lord).

It is also possible that the use of the longer sentence: وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّ‌بِّكُمْ (and what has been revealed to you from your Lord) in place of the likely brief name of Qur’an in this verse may have been preferred so as to indicate that the following of all injunctions given in the Qur’an or given by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is equally mandatory.

Another point worth noting in this verse is that the Jews and Christians have been asked to follow the injunctions of all three Books, that is, the Torah, the Injil and the Qur’an – although, some of them abrogate others. The Injil abrogates some injunctions of the Torah and the Qur’an abrogates many injunctions of the Torah and the Injil. How then, could the sum of three be followed in action?

The answer is clear. Since every incoming Book changed some injunctions of the outgoing Book, it becomes obvious that following the replaced modality, in itself, amounts to acting in accordance with both Books. Following and acting in accordance with abrogated injunctions is against the requirement of both Books.

Allah consoles His Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

To console the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) it was said at the end that there will be many among the people of the Book who would fail to benefit by the Divine magnanimity shown to them. They may even react adversely by increasing the tempo of their disbelief and hostility. Let this be no cause of grief to him, nor should he have any sympa¬thetic concern for them.

Salvation promised for Four Communities having faith and good deeds

In the second verse (69), Allah Almighty addresses four traditional religious communities, persuades them to have faith and act right¬eously whereupon He promises salvation for them. The first of those are: الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا (those who believe) that is, the Muslims. Secondly: الَّذِينَ هَادُوا (and those who are Jews); thirdly : صابِئُونَ (the Sabians); and fourthly: نصَارَ‌ىٰ (the Christians). Three of these Communities – Muslims, Jews and Christians – are well-known and found in most parts of the world. Any community having the name Sabian does not exist today. Therefore, scholarly opinion varies as to their exact identity. Quoting Qata-dah, the Tafsir authority, Ibn Kathir has reported that Sabians were people who worshipped angels, offered prayers contra-oriented to the Qiblah and recited the Scripture, Zabur (revealed to Sayyidna Dawud) (عليه السلام) .

The context of the Qur’an seems to support it as the four Scriptures mentioned in the Qur’an are Torah, Zabur, Injil and Qur’an. Thus, named here are the believers in these four Books.

Another verse on the same subject, almost in the same words, has appeared in the seventh Section of Surah al-Baqarah:

Surely, those who believed, and those who are Jews, and Christians, and the Sabians – whoever believes in Allah and in the Last Day, and does good deeds – they have their reward with their Lord. And there is no fear for them nor shall they grieve. (2: 62)

Other than the place-oriented transposition of some words, there is no difference between them.

With Allah, Distinction Depends on Righteous Deeds

The gist of both these verses is that distinctions of lineage, home-land, and nationality do not matter in the sight of Allah. Anyone who takes to total obedience, faith and good deeds as a way of life – no matter what he has been before – shall find himself acceptable with Allah and his devotion will bring the best of appreciation from his Creator. And it is obvious that total obedience after the revelation of the Qur’an depends on being a Muslim – because, there are instructions to this ef¬fect in the past Scriptures of the Torah and the Injil as well, while the Qur’an itself was revealed for this particular purpose. Therefore, after the revelation of the Qur’an and the appearance of the Last among Prophets               , (عليهم السلام) it cannot be correct – without believing in the Qur’an and having faith in the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) – to follow either the Torah or the Injil or the Zabur. Thus, these verses would mean that whoever from among these communities becomes Muslim shall become deserving of salvation and reward in the Akhirah (Hereafter). Provided right here is the answer to the doubt as to what would happen to all their dark doings of sin and disobedience and dis¬belief and anti-Islam and anti-Muslim mechanizations once they have become Muslims? The disarming answer is: All past sins and short-comings will stand forgiven and in the life-to-come, they shall have no fear or grief.

A surface view of the subject may suggest to someone that this should not be the place to mention Muslims because they are – in their faith and through their obedience – at the stage desired in the verse. In other words, the occasion here calls for the mention of only those who are supposed to be persuaded to enter the fold of Islam. But, what we have here is a special mode of eloquence employed by the Qur’an. It is like the law promulgated by the highest imaginable au¬thority saying that it is for everyone, in favour or in opposition, bring-ing reward for the law-abiding and punishment for the law-breaking. It is obvious that those in favour are already obedient. The purpose is to make those in the opposing camp hear it. The particular element of wisdom behind mentioning those already in favour is that they are be¬ing told here that they are being appreciated not because of any per¬sonal or group excellence of theirs but simply because of their quality of obedience to their Creator. If the dissenter in the opposing camp were to take to the path of obedience to his Creator, he too will deserve the same grace and reward.

There is No Salvation (Najat) without Belief in Prophethood (‘Iman bir-Risalat)

The set of instructions given in the address to these four Traditional Religious Communities is divided in three parts: (a) ‘Iman bil-lah : Belief in Allah (b) ‘Iman bil-yowmil-akhir : Belief in the Last Day (c) and Al-Amalus-Salih: Good deeds.

It is obvious that the intention in this verse is not to give the entire details of Islam’s articles of faith, nor is there any occasion for it. By mentioning some basic beliefs of Islam here, the aim is to point out to all Islamic beliefs, and to invite people to them – nor is it something so necessary that whenever ‘Iman or faith is mentioned in a verse, all details about it should also be mentioned right there. Therefore, the ab¬sence of a clearly emphasized mention of the faith in the Messenger or Prophet at this place should have not given anyone having the least commonsense and justice the room to entertain any doubt – specially, when the whole Qur’an and hundreds of its verses are brimming with clear statements about belief in the Risalah. Present there are loud and clear assertions that there is no Najat (salvation) without believing in the Rasul (Messenger of Allah) and the sayings of the Rasul fully and completely, and that no belief and action is acceptable or valid without it. But, a group of deviators, which insists on thrusting its re¬pugnant ideas in the Qur’an somehow, has come up with a new theory based on the absence of an explicit mention of prophethood in this verse – which is absolutely contrary to so many open assertions of the Qur’an and Sunnah. They theorize that every person, despite his re¬ligion, a Jew or Christian, even an idol-worshipping Hindu could deserve salvation in the Hereafter – if he believes only in Allah and the Last Day and does good deeds. For final salvation (as they would pre¬fer) entry in Islam is not necessary. (Na` udhu-bil-lah : Refuge with Al¬lah! )

People whom Allah has blessed with the Taufiq of reciting the Qur’an and having true faith in it would not need some major knowl¬edge or insight to help them remove this doubt which even they could do through these very clear statements. Even readers of the Qur’an with the help of authentic translations could understand the falsity of this kind of theorizing. Some verses are being given here as an exam¬ple.

The place where the Holy Qur’an has described the articles of faith (‘Iman) in details appears at the end of Surah al-Baqarah as follows:

All have believed in Allah, and His angels, and His Books, and His Messengers. (in a way that) “We make no difference between any of His Messengers,” and they have said … (2:285).

Within the details of ‘Iman (faith) described clearly in this verse, it has also been clarified that believing in any one or some Messengers is ab¬solutely insufficient for salvation. Instead of that, believing in all Mes¬sengers is a binding condition. If anyone does not believe even in one single Messenger, his or her ‘Iman shall not be valid and acceptable in the sight of Allah.

At another place, it is said:

Surely those who disbelieve in Allah and His Messengers, and wish to make division between Allah and His Messengers, and say, “We believe in some, and disbelieve in some” and wish to take a way in between that. Those are the disbelievers in reality … (4:150-151).

The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has said:

Had Musa (عليه السلام) been alive, he would have had no choice but to follow me.

Now, if someone were to say: ` Let the followers of every religion keep acting according to their respective religions. Thus, they can find Paradise and achieve salvation in the Hereafter without having to be¬lieve in the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and without having to become Muslims!’ – this would, then, be a flagrant disregard of the verses cited above.

In addition to that, if every religion or community is something act¬ing according to which in every age is sufficient for ultimate success and salvation, then, the coming of the Last among Prophets and the revelation of the Qur’an itself becomes meaningless. The sending of one Shari’ah after the other also becomes redundant. The first Mes¬senger would have brought one Shari` ah and one Book. That would have been sufficient. at need was there to send other Messengers, Shari` ahs and Books? At the most, sufficient would have been the pres¬ence of people who would have preserved the Shari` ah and the Book, practiced it themselves and pursuaded ethers to do the same – as has been the duty of the ` Ulama of every community. This, then, would be a situation in which the words of the Qur’an: كُلٍّ جَعَلْنَا مِنكُمْ شِرْ‌عَةً وَمِنْهَاجًا ، (For each of you We have made a way and a method – 5:48) will lose their meaning.

Is it not that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) carried out the mission of Jihad against Jews and Christians, and others, those who did not believe in him and in the Book of Allah revealed to him, even fought against them on battlefields? What justification would remain for that? And if, for a human being to be a true believer acceptable with Allah, having faith only in Allah and the Last Day should be taken as sufficient, why then, would Iblis (Satan) be cursed? Did he not believe in Allah? Or, was he a denier of the Last Day? Was he not the one who, even in his fit of anger, by saying: إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ يُبْعَثُونَ (Till the Day, the [ dead ] are raised – 38 :79), confirmed his faith in the Last Day?

The truth of the matter is that this error is the product of the no¬tion that religion can be given as a gift on a silver plate as done in marriages. Seen in modern and international context, religion can be used to develop bonds of relationship with other nations – although, the Holy Qur’an has said very openly and clearly that we should have our relations with non-Muslims based on tolerance, sympathy, favour, charity, mercy and things like that, but this should be done by ensur¬ing that the limits of religion are not crossed and that its frontiers re-main fully guarded.

If, in the verse under reference, let us suppose, there was no men¬tion of the faith in prophethood, then, other verses quoted above which command it emphatically, would have been sufficient. But, a closer look at this verse itself will show a distinct hint towards belief in pro¬phethood because, in the terminology of the Qur’an, only that ‘Iman bil¬lah (belief in Allah) is valid, in which there is belief in everything told by Allah. The Qur’an has made its terminology very clear in the fol¬lowing words:

So, if they (the Companions) believe in the like of what you (the Prophets) believe in, they have certainly found the right path – 2:137.

It means that the kind of ‘Iman the noble Sahabah had is the only ‘Iman which deserves to be called ‘Iman bil-lah. And it is obvious that ‘Iman bir-rasul was a great pillar of the edifice of their ‘Iman. Therefore, the words: مَن اٰمَنَ بِاللہِ (whoever believes in Allah) are inclusive of the belief in the Messenger of Allah.

Commentary

1. The words: إِنَّ اللَّـهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلَاثَةٍ in verse 72, translated here literally as ` Allah is the third of the three,’ refers to Sayyidna Masih (Jesus Christ), Ruhul-Quds (The Holy Spirit) and Allah, or to Masih, Maryam (Mary) and Allah – with all three taken as God (Refuge with Allah). Thus, Allah becomes a one-third partner with them, then all three of them become one, and that one is three. This unity in trinity, with three persons in one godhead, is the common belief of Christians. They explain this belief which is supported by neither reason nor revelation with a language that is kept circuitous and ambiguous. When not un-derstood, they declare it to be reality beyond comprehension. (Shabbir Ahmad Usmani – Notes)
2. In verse 75, by saying: قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّ‌سُلُ (There have been messen¬gers before him), the assigning of godhood to Sayyidna Masih (عليه السلام) has been refuted. Prophets came to this world. They completed their mission. Then, they were gone. They were not eternal which is the mark of godhood. Similarly, Sayyidna Masih, may peace be upon him (being human like them) was not eternal. So, he cannot be what God is.

A little reflection will show that everyone who needs to eat and drink almost depends on everything in the world. We cannot say that the earth, the air, the water, the sun and the animals are what we do not need. Look into your own self. There is that grain of food outside you, then begins its journey from the entry into the stomach to the next destination of its digestion. Think of all those factors involved and things required directly and indirectly in this complex procedure. Then, there will be a chain of effects generated through eating and no one can tell precisely how far will they go. So, by pointing out that Sayyidna Masih and his pious mother used to eat, the Holy Qur’an has referred to the endless chain of needs it entails. The argument, thus runs that Masih and Maryam, may peace be upon them both, were not free of the need for eating and drinking which is proved by observation and authentic narrations (not denied by even Christians). And anyone who is not free from the need of eating and drinking cannot be free from anything in this world. How then, a human person, who like all human beings is not free of the need to depend on the chain of causa-tion for survival, could become God? This is a strong and clear proof which can be understood by the educated and the uneducated alike – that is, eating and drinking is contrary to godhood. Though, not eat¬ing too is not a proof in favour of godhood, otherwise all angels would become gods! (Refuge with Allah) (Tafsir Usmani)

3. Was Sayyidah Maryam a prophet or saint? This is a debated issue. In the present verse (75), the complimentary use of the word “Siddiqah” (truthful) obviously seems to indicate that she was a godly person, not a Nabiyy ( prophet) – because on a complimentary occasion, what is mentioned is the higher rank. If she had the station of pro¬phethood, the word used for her at this place would have been “Nabiyyah”- but, the word used here is “Siddiqah” which is the station of sainthood or godliness (abridged from Ruh al-Ma` ani).

According to the majority of Muslim scholars, the station of Nu-buwwah (prophethood) has never appeared among women. This mis¬sion has been particular with men:

And We have not sent any (one) before you but men to whom We revealed from among the peoples of the towns – Surah Yu¬suf, 12 : 109. (Tafsir Usmani)

The Crookedness of Bani Isra’il : Yet Another Aspect

It will be recalled that, in previous verses, mentioned there was the contumacy of Bani Isra’il along with their tyranny and injustice with reference to what they did to their benefactors, the prophets sent by Allah who had come to show them the way to succeed in this life and in the life to come. But, they mistreated them, by falsifying some and killing others: فَرِ‌يقًا كَذَّبُوا وَفَرِ‌يقًا يَقْتُلُونَ (70)

The present verses expose another aspect of the crooked ways of Bani Isra’il. So astray were they that they, not content with one ex¬treme mentioned above, reached for another when they committed excess in showing reverence for messengers of Allah by making them nothing short of God: لَّقَدْ كَفَرَ‌ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّـهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ. It means that the section of people from the Bani Isra’il who said that Allah is exactly Je¬sus the son of Mary had become disbelievers. Mentioned this far is the saying of the Christians only. Elsewhere, the Jews too have been cen¬sured for the same kind of excess and error: قَالَتِ الْيَهُودُ عُزَيْرٌ‌ ابْنُ اللَّـهِ وَقَالَتِ النَّصَارَ‌ى الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ اللَّـهِ (And the Jews said, “Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allah” and the Christians said, “Masih (the Christ) is the son of Allah.”

The word “Ghuluww” used at the beginning of verse 5:77 قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ (Say, “0 people of the Book, be not excessive in your faith” ) means to cross limits. “Ghuluww” or excess in religion refers to the crossing of limits drawn by religion in matters of belief and deed. For example, there is a limit to paying homage to prophets. The farthest one can go is to take them as the best among God’s creation. That is the limit. Going over and beyond this limit, calling those very proph¬ets God or son of God is excess in matters of belief.

Bani Isra’il : Their Cycle of Excess and Deficiency

The behaviour of the people of the Bani Isra’il towards prophets and messengers of Allah had been a mixture of opposites. They could become as neglectful and irreverent as to falsify or even kill them while it would be they themselves who would stretch the limits of their exaggerated reverence for them by calling them God or son of God. This syndrome of excess and deficiency in group behaviour is a sign of ingrained brutality. There is a well-known saying among Arabs: اَلجاھِلُ امَّا مفرِط اَو مُفَرِّطُ which means that an ignorant person never stays on modera¬tion. He would either go for اِفرَاط ` Ifrat’ (excess) or for تَفریط ` Tafrit (deficiency). Ifrat means to cross the limit while Tafrit means to fall short in doing one’s duty. These actions on two extremes may have come from two different groups of the Bani Isra’il, or it is also possible that one single group acted in two different ways with different prophets whereby some were subjected to their falsification, even killing, while some oth¬ers were equated with God.

Addressing the people of the Book in this verse, the guidance given to them and their generations to come right through the Last Day, has the status of a basic principle to be kept in sight while following a re¬ligion for the slightest deviation from it makes one be lost forever. Therefore, let us first explain a few basic things about it.

The Method of Knowing and Reaching Allah

The most significant truth of our life is that Allah جَلَّ شَانَہُ Jalla Sha’nuhu is the Creator and Master of all universes of existence and whatever they contain. He is One. To Him belongs all there is and for Him is to command. It is He alone man must obey. But man, the lump of clay come alive, is still wrapped up in layers and layers of materialism. How can he reach out to the One so pure and pristine? Or, how could he get an access to sources of His will and guidance? For this, Allah جَلَّ شَانَہُ Jalla Sha’nuhu has, in His grace, appointed two sources of knowledge through which man can get to know what is liked and disliked by Al¬lah Almighty and what it is that man must do and what is it that man must avoid. The first source is that of the Books of Allah which have the status of Law and Guidance for all human beings. Then, as the second source, there are those special and welcome servants of Allah whom Allah Almighty has chosen from among human beings, and He has sent them to people as the practical models of His likes and dis¬likes and the practical keys to His Books. In religious terminology, they are called “Rasul” (messenger) or ` Nabiy’ (prophet).

This is because a book, no matter how exhaustive, can never be sufficient for the complete grooming of man. The fact is that it takes a man to be the natural groomer and nurturer of another man. There-fore, it has been the practice of Allah that He has allowed two orders to flourish in the mission of reforming and training men in the art of living. These are: (a) The Book of Allah, and (b) The Men of Allah – in¬cluded wherein are the blessed prophets, then their deputies, the ` Ulama and the Mashaikh. About this order of ` Rijalullah’ (men of Al¬lah), people have been victims of excess and deficiency since ancient times. Particularly, the different sects that mushroomed in religions were all products of this error of approach through which somewhere they were inflated beyond the required limit hitting the outer frontiers of the worship of such men. At other places, they were totally ignored and bypassed by saying: ‘For us, the Book of Allah is enough’ (حَسبُنَا کِتاب اللہ), apparently a true declaration, but by misinterpreting it to negate the importance of prophets they made it as their motto. At one ex¬treme a Messenger of Allah, a Rasul – even Pirs and Faqirs – were taken to be the knowers of the unknown and seers of the unseen, as if they were (God forbid) the very possessors of God’s own attributes. People started with worshipping live Pirs and landed into the worship of their graves as well. Then, there was that other extreme when even a Rasul of Allah was given the status of what would be a mere courier or postman. Thus, the essential message of the verses under reference is that the offenders against the honour of prophets are no less in their disbe¬lief than are those who raise them far above the limits set for honour¬ing them and go about saying that they were equal to Allah. Verse 77 which says, “do not be excessive in your faith,” is a preface to this very subject. It makes it very clear that دین Din is, in reality, the name of a few limits and restrictions. The way it is a crime to remain deficient or negligent within those limits, so it is a crime to cross and exceed them. The way it is a grave sin to reject and insult the messengers of Allah and their deputies, in the same way, it is a much graver sin to take them to be the owners of Allah’s own attributes or their equal sharers with Him.

Justified Intellectual Research is no Excess

In verse 77, the word:    (unjustly) appears along with the statement: (Do not be excessive in your faith). According to in¬vestigative scholars of Tafsir, this word has been used here for empha¬sis because an excess in religion is always unjust. The probability of its being just does not simply exist. ` Allamah al-Zamakhshari and oth¬ers have identified two kinds of Ghuluww or excess at this particular place: (1) The unjust and false which has been prohibited here; (2) The just and permissible, as an example of which, he has named deep in¬tellectual research – or as it has been the way of the scholastic theolo¬gians (Mutakallimin) of Islam in matters relating to articles of faith, or that of Muslim jurists in matters relating to juristic rulings. Accord¬ing to him, even this is, though, Ghuluww (excess) but, an excess which is just and permissible – while, the considered position of the majority of scholars is that it simply does not fall within the definition of Ghuluww (excess). Finally, we can say that deep insight and de-tailed investigation in questions relating to the Qur’an and Sunnah should remain within the limits as proved from the Holy Prophet HHHHH and from the Sahabah and Tabi` in – if so, that is not Ghuluww (excess). And what reaches the limits of Ghuluww is blameworthy here too.

Bani Isra’i1 Asked to Follow the Path of Moderation

Addressing the Bani Isra’il at the end of the verse (77), it was said: وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا أَهْوَاءَ قَوْمٍ قَدْ ضَلُّوا مِن قَبْلُ وَأَضَلُّوا كَثِيرً‌ا that is, they should not follow the de-sires and whims of a people who had themselves gone astray before them, and had made others go astray as well. The reason why they fell into that error was given immediately after by saying: وَضَلُّوا عَن سَوَاءِ السَّبِيلِ that is, these people, by moving away from the right path, had lost it. This straight path was the path of moderation between the two extremes of excess and deficiency. Thus, two things have been accom¬plished in this verse: It points out to the fatal error made by crossing over the norm, or lagging far behind it, and stresses upon the need to stay firm on the straight path, the ideal path of moderation.

Sequence of Verses

Mentioned earlier was the friendliness of Jews with disbelievers. Mentioned now is their hostility towards Muslims in tandem with the disbelievers – which was the real cause of that friendship (the enemy of my enemy is my friend! ). And since the Qur’an upholds justice univer¬sally, it has not counted everyone even among Jews and Christians as being in the same lot. Whoever among them had some good quality, that was acknowledged openly – for example, the presence of a particu¬lar group among the Christians which did not have the kind of preju¬dice the Jews were known for, and the statement about the Christians who had responded heartily to the call of truth and for which they were considered worthy of the best of praise and reward. This particu¬lar group was that of the Christians of Ethiopia who did nothing which could cause problems for Muslims who had migrated to Ethiopia from their home in Makkah, before the Hijrah to Madinah. Any Christian, other than them, who is like them, shall also be legally counted as one of them. As for those who had accepted the truth, they are the King of Ethiopia, Najashi (Negus) and his courtiers who wept on hearing the Qur’an in their own country and embraced Islam. After that, a deputation of thirty men from there came to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) who recited the Qur’an to them which they heard in tears and took their Shahadah as Muslims. This is the Cause or Back-ground of the revelation of this verse.

Some Votaries of the Truth among the People of the Book

Mentioned in these verses are those among the people of the Book who, had no feelings of malice or enmity for Muslims because of their godliness and tilt towards truth. But, people of such quality – like Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn Salam – were very rare, rather almost nonexistent among the Jews. Speaking comparatively, there were more such people among the Christians. Specially so, during the blessed pe¬riod of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، there was a large number of such people in Ethiopia which included King Najashi and his civil ser¬vants. For this reason, when the Muslims of Makkah al-Mukarramah were fed up with being continually oppressed by the Quraysh, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) advised them to migrate to Ethiopia saying that he had heard that the King of Ethiopia himself was no oppressor of people, nor did he allow anyone to oppress others, therefore, Mus¬lims should go there for some time.

Following this advice, the first group of eleven persons started their journey towards Ethiopia. Included in the group were Sayyidna ` Uthman ibn ` Affan and Sayyidah Ruqaiyyah, his respected wife and the daughter of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . After that, a large car¬avan of Muslims comprising of eighty two men in addition to women, led by Sayyidna Ja’far ibn Abi Talib (رض) reached Ethiopia. Received there nicely and gently by the King and his people, they started living there in peace.

But, the wrath of the Quraysh of Makkah knew no bounds. They could not bear by the idea that Muslims persecuted by them could live in peace in some other country. This they did not wish to allow. They sent a deputation of their men, with gifts as customary, to the King of Ethiopia with the request that he should expel Muslims from his coun¬try. But, the King of Ethiopia decided to first investigate into the matter. He talked to Sayyidna Ja’far ibn Abi Talib and his companions about Islam and its Prophet. When he heard about the life of the Holy Prophet              صلى الله عليه وسلم and the teachings of Islam, he found these true to the prophecy of Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) and Injil which contained the glad tidings of the coming of the Last of the Prophets, Sayyidna Mu¬hammad al-Mustafa (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) a brief outline of his teachings, and his physical features as well as those of his Companions (for ready identification). Impressed with and convinced by what he found out, he returned the gifts brought by the Quraysh deputation telling them plainly that he could never order such people to leave his country.

The Effect of Sayyidna Ja` far’s Presentation on Najashi

Sayyidna Ja’far (رض) had succeeded in presenting a brief but very com¬prehensive portrayal of Islam and its teachings in the court of Najashi, the King of Ethiopia. Then, there was their very stay (as Muslim role models) in Ethiopia which had generated not only in his heart but in the hearts of his officials and common people genuine feelings for Islam and its Prophet. Consequently, when the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) migrat¬ed to Madinah al-Tayyibah and the news that they were comfortable and at peace there reached Ethiopia the immigrating guests of the country decided to go to Madinah. Then, Najashi, the King of Ethiopia sent with them a deputation of leading scholars and missionaries from among his co-religionists to present his compliments before the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . This group was comprised of seventy persons, out of which, there were sixty from Ethiopia itself, and eight from Syria.

The Visit of Ethiopian Delegation

Attired in the coarse robes of monks, this deputation presented itself before the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . He recited Surah Yasin before them. As they heard it, tears kept flowing from their eyes. They all said how similar that was to what was revealed to Sayyidna ‘Isa (عليه السلام) . All of them embraced Islam.

After their return to Ethiopia, King Najashi also embraced Islam. He sent his son as the leader of another deputation to the Holy Proph¬et (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ، with a letter from him. Unfortunately, the boat carry¬ing them was drowned in the sea. In short, the King of Ethiopia, its officials and citizens did not only treat Islam and Muslims gently, fair¬ly and justly, but they themselves embraced Islam finally.

According to the majority of commentators, the verses cited above were revealed about these blessed souls:

And you will certainly find that the closest of them in friend-ship with the believers are those who say, “We are Chris¬tians.”

And about the verses which follow, and in which their weeping in fear of Allah and their acceptance of the truth has been described, the majority of commentators also agree that – though these verses have been revealed about Najashi and the deputation sent by him – yet, its words are general. Therefore, its legal force covers and includes all such Christians who are devoted to truth and justice similar to the people of Ethiopia. That is, they were followers of the Injil before Is-lam, and after the coming of Islam, they became followers of Islam.

Though, there were some people of this class even among Jews who adhered to the Torah since the period of Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) ، but when came Islam, they entered the fold of Islam. However, the number of such people was so small that it cannot be considered significant in the context of communities and nations. As for the rest of the Jews, they were the foremost in their hostility towards Muslims. Therefore, their attitude was identified at the very beginning of the verse by saying:

You will certainly find that the most hostile people against the believers are the Jews …

Limits of Interpretation

To recapitulate, it can be said that a particular group of the Chris¬tians has been praised in this verse, a group which was God-fearing and upright in matters of truth. It includes King Najashi, his officials and citizens – as well as other Christians who had these qualities, or would have in times to come. But, it does not mean – neither based on what the text says, nor could it possibly be – that the Christians have to be taken as friends of Muslims, no matter how astray they go and how aggressive in their anti Islam hostility they become, and yet Mus¬lims will have to extend their hand of friendship towards them. This interpretation, as obvious, is false and is absolutely against facts. Therefore, Imam Abu Bakr Al-Jassas (رح) has said in his Ahkam al-Qur’an: that the thinking of some people who take the praise of Christians in this verse in an absolute sense and consider them better than the Jews, again in an absolute sense, is open ignorance – because a com¬parison of the religious beliefs of the two groups will show that the Christians are more pronounced in being Mushriks (as ascribers of partners in the divinity of Allah); and as for their dealings with Mus¬lims are concerned, common modern-day Christians have not been any less than Jews in their anti-Islam activities. However, it is correct that there have been a good many God-fearing and truth-loving. people among them. That is why they had the Taufiq to accept Islam and be-come Muslims. It must be kept in mind that these verses were re¬vealed to show this particular difference between the two groups. The Qur’an has itself pointed out to this fact at the end of this very verse (82) in the following words: ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّ مِنْهُمْ قِسِّيسِينَ وَرُ‌هْبَانًا وَأَنَّهُمْ لَا يَسْتَكْبِرُ‌ونَ “That is because among them there are priests and monks and because they are not arrogant (which could make them unwilling to listen and think).” Comparison makes it clear that this was not the condition of Jews. They were not God-fearing and truth-loving. Their scholars and rab¬bis were far removed from renouncing the material pleasures of mortal life for the sake of knowledge and religion, instead of which, they had harnessed their knowledge and learning as a source of accumulating material benefits. This lust for the mundane had gripped them to the extent that they did not care to make a distinction between the true and the false or the lawful and the unlawful.

Those who side with Truth are the moving

spirit of a community

The statement given in the verse also tells us something crucial about the life of a community or nation (of true believers) – , that its `.Ulama’ and Mashaikh are its real movers and makers, the very spirit of the system. Until such time that there are present in the society (genuine) ` Ulama’ and Mashaikh, who would not follow their worldly desires (in matters of Din and public good of Believers) motivated by nothing but the fear of Allah and answerability before Him, then, the community or nation in which they are shall never be deprived of real good and real blessing.

Sequence of Verses

Upto this point, the subject revolved around the people of the Book. Onwards, there is a return to subsidiary injunctions some of which were taken up early in the Sarah, and some others also in between. Also reported is a particular link as relevant to -the occasion – that monasticism has been mentioned in a complimentary sense a little earlier (82), though it is there in terms of a particular feature in it, which is the abandonment of worldly desires. But, since there was a probability that someone may take the whole concept of monasticism as praiseworthy, it was considered appropriate at this point that the making unlawful of what Allah has made lawful be forbidden. (As abridged from Bayan a1-Qur’an by Mau1na Ashraf ` Ali Thanavi)

Leaving the worldly pleasures, when permissible

The verses appearing above tell us that the renunciation of worldly life and the abstinence from appetites and passions is favourable within a certain limit, but any transgression of the Divinely-ordained lim¬its in this matter too shall be blameworthy حَرَام and haram (unlawful, for-bidden). Details are being given below.

How Halal is turned into حَرَام haram : The Three Forms

There are three forms in which something made Halal (lawful and good) by Allah could be declared as حَرَام haram (unlawful and evil): (1) BE¬LIEFWISE, that is, something is taken to be حَرَام haram by believing it to be so. (2) VERBALLY, that is, something is taken to be حَرَام haram for oneself by saying so – for instance, someone swears that he will not drink cold water, or would not eat such and such Halal food, or would not do something which is permissible. (3) PRACTICALLY, that is, someone who neither believes nor says anything, yet decides in prac¬tice that he or she would abandon something Halal forever.

1. Under the first situation, if that thing being Halal stands confirmed by absolute proofs, then, the person who takes it to be حَرَام haram shall become a disbeliever (kafir) because of that open contravention of the Divinely-ordained law.
2. And under the second situation, if someone has made something حَرَام haram for oneself by declaring it with words of oath, the oath will become effective. There are many words of oath details of which appear in Fiqh books – for example, someone clearly says: ` I swear by Allah, I will never eat that’ or ` by Allah, I will not do that’ or one might say, ` I make taking this or doing that حَرَام haram for me.’ The rule which governs such actions is that taking such oaths unnecessarily is a sin. If taken, one must break the oath and make amends by paying the Kaffarah (expiation) of that oath, the detail about which will appear later.
3. The third will be a situation in which no Halal has been made حَرَام haram either by belief or word of mouth, but practically what one does is similar to what is done with something حَرَام haram, that is, takes it as obligatory to abandon it forever. The rule in this case is: If one takes the abandonment of the Halal to be an act of Thawab (merit, reward), then, it is Bid’ah (innovation in established religion) and Rahbaniyah (monasticism) – which is a grave sin as categorically laid down (Mansus) in the Qur’an and Sunnah; and acting against it is Wajib (necessary as an obligation); and adhering to such a restriction is an act of sin. Of course, if such a restriction is not there with the inten¬tion of Thawab, instead, it is there for some other reason, such as, some physical or spiritual sickness because of which one abandons something permanently, then, there will be no sin in doing so. Reports about some noble Sufis and other pious elders that they had aban¬doned some Halal things are all included under this third kind as they had found them to be harmful for their desiring self, or were advised by a pious elder to abstain from it as harmful in their case which they abandoned as a treatment and remedy. If so, it does not matter.

The Correct Attitude towards Halal Things

At the end of the first verse (87), it was said: وَلَا تَعْتَدُوا إِنَّ اللَّـهَ لَا يُحِبُّ الْمُعْتَدِينَ that is, ` and do not transgress the limits set by Allah because Allah does not like such transgressors.’ Here, transgressing means that one abandons something Halal, without any valid excuse, as an act of Thawab. This is something an ignorant person takes to be Taqwa, fear of Allah, while, in the sight of Allah, that is transgression, which is impermissible. Therefore, it was said in the next verse (88): وَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ الَّذِي أَنتُم بِهِ مُؤْمِنُونَ that is, `(eat from the good and pure sustenance Allah has blessed you with) and keep fearing Allah whose believers you are.’ Stated clearly in this verse is that leaving off good and pure things as a source of Thawab (reward) is no Taqwa. Rather, quite contrary to that, Taqwa lies in using them as the blessings of Allah and showing one’s gratitude for them. However, if something is abandoned as a cu¬rative measure against a physical or spiritual disease, that does not count here.

Sequence of Verses

Mentioned earlier was the taking of Halal things as unlawful. Since statements to this effect are sometimes sworn, therefore, the in-junction about taking of oaths follows in the present verse.

Three Forms of Oaths and their Injunctions

1. Some forms in which oaths are taken have been described in this verse. Some have appeared in Surah al-Baqarah as well (Ma` ariful-Qur’ ا an, Volume I, Verse 2:225, pages 562-563). The gist of all these is that false swearing about a past event knowingly is, in the terminology of Mus¬lim jurists, Yamin Ghamus (disastrous oath) – for instance, if a person has done something, and he knows that he has done it, and then he knowingly swears that he has not done it. This is false swearing, a grave major sin the curse of which falls in the present life and in the life-to-come. But, there is no Kaffarah (expiation) necessary for it. Taubah (repentance) and Istighfar (seeking forgiveness from Allah) are, however, necessary. That is the reason why the Muslim jurists call it the disastrous oath. Ghamus literally means that which drowns. This kind of oath drowns man into sin and its curse, a disaster for one’s present and future life.
2. The second form is that someone declares on oath that a past event was true, as based on his knowledge, while it was actually false – for example, he learnt from someone that a certain person has come and trusting him, he declared on oath that the person has come, then, he came to know that this was contrary to what had actually hap¬pened. This is called Yamin Laghw لَغو (ineffectual oath), that which is not counted. Similarly, if a word denoting oath, such as ` by’ or ` I swear,’ comes to be said unintentionally, that too is known to be what is ` ineffectual oath.’ It brings neither Kaffarah (expiation) nor sin.
3. The third form of oath is that one declares on oath that he would or would not do something in the future. This is known as al-Yamin al-Mun’aqidah (Binding oath). The rule which governs it is that, in the event the oath is broken, Kaffarah (expiation) becomes necessary – and under some situations, it brings sin as well, while in some others, it does not.

At this place in the present verse of the Qur’an, ` Laghw’ (ineffectual, not counted) obviously means the oath which brings no Kaffarah (expiation) – whether a sin, or not; because it has been men¬tioned in contrast with : عَقَّدتُمُ الاَیمَانَ (the oaths you have bound yourselves with). This tells us that the accountability (Mu’akhadhah) mentioned here is only the accountability in the present world which comes in the form of Kaffarah (expiation). Then, in Surah al-Baqarah, it is said: لَّا يُؤَاخِذُكُمُ اللَّـهُ بِاللَّغْوِ فِي أَيْمَانِكُمْ وَلَـٰكِن يُؤَاخِذُكُم بِمَا كَسَبَتْ قُلُوبُكُمْ (And Allah does not hold you accountable for what is not countable from among your oaths, but holds you accountable for what your hearts have designed – 2:225). Here, ` Laghw’ (what is not countable) means an oath which slips out from one’s tongue without intention or volition, or an oath one takes about something assuming it to be true while it turns out to be false actually. Then, mentioned in contrast, is the other oath in which an intentional lie has been told. This is known as Yamin Ghamus explained earlier. Therefore, as for Yamin Laghw, it brings no sin, according to this verse – instead, what brings sin is Yamin Ghamus where the lie is intentional. Thus, the sin mentioned in the verse from Surah al-Baqarah refers to the sin one shall incur in the Hereafter for disobeying the Divine injunction. And in the present verse of Surah al-Ma’idah, the injunction concerns present life of the world, where Kaffarah (expiation) is required. The outcome is that Allah does not hold you accountable for what is not countable in your oaths, that is, does not make it obligatory for you to make amends for them by paying Kaffarah (expiation). Instead, Kaffarah is made necessary against the particular oath which has been accomplished about doing or not doing something in the future – and then, it has been broken. After that, the details of how Kaffarah has to be given is described in the following words كَفَّارَ‌تُهُ إِطْعَامُ عَشَرَ‌ةِ مَسَاكِينَ مِنْ أَوْسَطِ مَا تُطْعِمُونَ أَهْلِيكُمْ أَوْ كِسْوَتُهُمْ أَوْ تَحْرِ‌يرُ‌ رَ‌قَبَةٍ (89). Three options have been given here which one may choose at one’s discretion: (a) feed ten poor persons two average meals, or (b) clothe ten poor persons (sufficient to give them proper cover, such as, a garment for the lower body and another for the upper), or (c) free a slave (if in possession).

Said immediately after is: فَمَن لَّمْ يَجِدْ فَصِيَامُ ثَلَاثَةِ أَيَّامٍ (And whoever finds none shall fast for three days). It means if some breaker of such an oath does not have the ability to bear the cost of this financial expiation (Kaffarah) that is, one who does not have the means to feed ten poor persons, or clothe them, or free a slave, then, his or her Kaffarah is to fast for three days. In some narrations, for the fasts mentioned at this place in the text, the command is said to be that of ‘three consecutive days.’ Therefore, according to Imam Abu Hanifah and some other Imams, it is necessary that the three fasts against the Kaffarah (expiation) of Oath should be consecutive.

In this verse, the first word used in connection with the Kaffarah of Oath is: “It` am” which, according to Arabic usage, could either mean ` feed’ or ` give food’ to someone. Therefore, as determined by the Fuqa¬ha’ (Muslim Jurists), may the mercy of Allah be upon them, the sense of the verse is that the person giving Kaffarah can choose either of the two options. He can invite ten poor persons and feed them; or, he can give the food in their possession (literally in milkiyat or ownership). But, in the first situation, it is necessary that he should feed ten poor persons two meals of the day to their fill and satisfaction from the av¬erage food he usually eats with his family at home. And in the second situation, he should give to each of the ten poor persons at the rate of one Fitrah per person, that is 1-3/4 kilograms of wheat, or its cost in cash. He can go by any one of the three he likes. But, fasting can be sufficient only when one does not have the ability to take any of the three options.

Paying Kaffarah, before Oath is Broken, is not Valid

Towards the end of the verse, the need to observe caution has been commanded about two things. The first one appears in: ذَلِكَ كَفَّارَ‌ةُ أَيْمَانِكُمْ إِذَا حَلَفْتُمْ (that is expiation for your oaths when you have sworn). According to Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) and other Imams, it means: When you give a sworn statement about doing or not doing something in the future – following which occurs its violation – then, its Kaffarah is what has been mentioned above. The essence of the statement is that the Kaffa¬rah should be given after the oath has broken. A Kaffarah given before the breaking of the oath will not be valid. The reason is that the cause which makes Kaffarah necessary lies in the breaking of the oath. As long as the oath does not break, Kaffarah just does not become neces¬sary. As there is no Salah before its time, and there is no Ramadan fast before the month of Ramadan, so it is with the Kaffarah of Oath which cannot be given before the oath breaks.

After that comes the second note of caution: (And take care of your oaths). In this sense of guarding an oath it would mean: If you have sworn to something, then do not break your oath without a legal or physical necessity. Some other respected scholars have said that it means that one should not hasten to give a sworn statement. One should guard and protect one’s oath, as if kept in reserve. Unless it be under severe compulsion, one should not take oaths casually. (Mazhari)

Linkage of Verses

Earlier, considered abandonment of Halal things was prohibited. Prohibited now is the use of some Harm things.

Creation of the Universe is for the Benefit of Human Beings

Through these verses, the purpose is to tell that the Master of the Universe has created it to serve human beings. Everything in it has been appointed to take care of their wishes. They are the served ones in this Universe. There is only one restriction placed on them: Do not transgress the limits set by Allah when you benefit from what He has created. Abstaining from good and lawful things made Halal for you is mannerlessness and ingratitude; and the contravention of what has been prohibited in a certain form is disobedience and rebellion. A ser¬vant of Allah must make use of what has been created for him or her following the instructions of the Creator and Master. This is the ` abdiyyah (the state of being a slave of Allah, which requires total sub-mission to as related to Allah which is the highest possible achieve¬ment human beings can look forward to).

The first verse (90) describes the prohibition of four things: (1) Drinking, (2) Gambling, (3) Idols and (4) Divining Arrows. Another verse on this subject in almost similar words has appeared in Surah al-Baqarah as well [ Ma’ariful-Qur’an, Volume I, Verse 2:219, Pages 539-553]. There too, as here, these four things have been called “Rijs” (filth). In the Arabic language, the word “Rijs” refers to something foul, which is disgusting for human taste. All four things mentioned here are, for anyone with commonsense and good taste, repulsive and disgusting.

An Explanation of “Al-Az lam”

One of the four things is Azlam which is the plural of Zalam. Azlam is the name of the arrows which were used to draw lots in gam¬bling, an Arab practice at that time. The custom was that ten people would get together as partners and slaughter a camel. Then, rather than distribute ten equal shares from the meat to each participant, they had a way of gambling with the exercise. They had ten arrows, out of which they would pick out seven and mark them out with signs indicating the number of some shares on each – some arrow would have one, others would have two or three. The three remaining ar¬rows were kept blank. They would put all these arrows in the quiver and give it a good shake. Then, for every participant, they would draw out one arrow from the quiver. If the arrow so drawn had a certain number of shares marked on it, the recepient of the arrow became de-serving of that many shares. Whoever drew a blank arrow in his name would remain deprived of a share. This is similar to many kinds of lot¬tery-based games and enterprises common today. Drawing lots in this manner is Qimar or gambling which is حَرَام haram according to the Qur’an.

The Permissible Way of Drawing Lots

However, there is one way of drawing lots which is permissible, and proved from the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) According to this method, when the rights everyone has are equal and the shares too have been distributed equally, then, the shares can be determined by drawing lots. Let us take an example – a house has to be divided among four sharers so we come up with four equal shares in terms of the price. Now, we have to determine as to who keeps which share. If it cannot be done by mutual compromise and consent, it is also possi-ble that we can settle this by drawing lots whereby whoever gets a cer¬tain portion of the house as his share may have it. Or, the number of people eager to have something is one thousand, and the rights everyone has are equal, but the number of what has to be distributed is only one hundred. In this condition, the matter can be decided by drawing lots.

As for the prohibition of the pagan custom of distributing meat by drawing of lots through divining arrows, it has already appeared in a verse of Surah al-Ma’idah itself, that is: وَأَن تَسْتَقْسِمُوا بِالْأَزْلَامِ (and that you determine shares through the arrows – 5:3).

In short, two out of the four things declared Harm in this verse, that is, ` Maisir’ (gambling) and ` Azlam’ (divining arrows), in terms of the outcome, are just the same. As for ` Ansab’ (altar-stones), the word Al-Ansab is the plural of Nusub. It refers to what has been made to stand as an object of worship, whether an idol, a stone or tree.

Physical and Spiritual Disorders Caused by Drinking and Gambling

The main objective in this verse, as evident from the background of its revelation and the verse which follows it, is to indicate that drink¬ing and gambling, being agencies of corruption, have been made حَرَام har¬am. The addition of altar-stones or idols to this list is there for listen¬ers to understand that this matter of drinking and gambling is as serious a crime as the worship of idols.

In a Hadith from Ibn Majah, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is reported to have said: شَارِبُ الخمرِ کَعَابِدِ الوَثنِ , that is, one who drinks is (a crimi¬nal) like the one who worships idols. In some narrations, the words appear as: شَارِبُ الخَمرِ کَعَابدِ اللَّاتِ وَ العُزَّی ، that is, one who drinks is like the one who worships (the idols) Al-Laat and Al-‘Uzza.

In brief, by saying رِ‌جْسٌ مِّنْ عَمَلِ الشَّيْطَانِ that these things are filth, a work of Satan, taken up first were their spiritual ills. The sense is that indulgence in these activities is disgusting. This is a trap of Sa¬tan. Whoever walks in never walks out, only to become a victim of many more vices. Then, the command given was: فَاجْتَنِبُوهُ (Therefore, re¬frain from it) since the nature of these indulgences requires it. In the end it was said: لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ (so that you may be successful). It means that one’s chances of succeeding and prospering in the present world and in the Hereafter depend on doing just that – abstain.

The second verse (91) describes the physical and outwardly visible defects of drinking and gambling: إِنَّمَا يُرِ‌يدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَن يُوقِعَ بَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ فِي الْخَمْرِ‌ that is, the Satan wants nothing but to plant enmity and malice between you through drinking and gambling.

In fact, these verses were revealed in the background of events when actions taken under the influence of hard drinks became the cause of mutual anger and aggression. Things like this do not simply happen by chance. When drunk, man loses reason and would compulsively act in that manner.

So it is with gambling. No doubt, the loser takes the loss on the gambling counter, but malice and anger against the adversary contin¬ue influencing his behaviour. Explaining this verse, Sayyidna Qata¬dah (رح) says: It was the habit of some Arabs that they would bet all their belongings, even family, and lose them, after which, they would live a sorry life.

Towards the end of the verse, yet another drawback of this addic¬tion has been pointed out in the words: وَيَصُدَّكُمْ عَن ذِكْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ وَعَنِ الصَّلَاةِ (and to prevent you from the remembrance of Allah, and from Salah).

Obviously, this is a spiritual harm brought by drinking and gam¬bling which has been mentioned again after mentioning their worldly bad effects. It may be a hint to the fact that the real harm is the spiri¬tual harm, because the real life is the eternal life of the Hereafter for which one should be more careful and concerned. A wise person should take the betterment of that life as the real betterment and the suffering of that life as the real suffering. As for this worldly life, its time span is very limited. Within these limitations, neither good nor bad stand out as something to be proud of or pine about – because both con¬ditions will vanish in a very short time.

It can also be said that negligence towards the Dhikr of Allah or the Salah is harmful both in this world and in the Hereafter and for the body and soul too. That it is harmful for the Hereafter and the soul of a person is all too obvious – one who skips Salah forgetting all about Al¬lah ruins his life to come and causes his soul to become dead. A little reflection will show that the person heedless to Allah makes his own life a curse for himself. When one turns away from Allah and makes the acquisition of wealth and recognition his ultimate objective in life, they bring so many involvements with them which result in sorrows and concerns. Once in them, one becomes deprived of his chosen objec¬tive of peace and comfort through worldly possessions. Thus men of the material are never at peace with or without what they work for in their lives. In contrast to them is one whose heart is lit with the thought of his Creator and the bliss of his Salah. Wealth and power and office come to him with all peace and comfort they can bring. But, if they go away, nothing happens to their hearts. They are not affect¬ed by the change, for things are no happiness and losses are no sorrow as they are visiting guests of the doers of the right.

In short, if we were to think about the neglect of the Dhikr of Allah and the Salah, we shall come to the conclusion that its effects are equally bad for our life in the present world as well as in that of the Hereafter. Therefore, it is possible that by saying: رِ‌جْسٌ مِّنْ عَمَلِ الشَّيْطَانِ (… filth, a work of Satan), the purpose could be to state the other-worldly and spiritual harmfulness exclusively; and by saying: يُوقِعَ بَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ (Satan wants nothing but to plant enmity and malice between you), the aim could be to point out to worldly and physical evils exclu¬sively; and by saying: يَصُدَّكُمْ عَن ذِكْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ وَعَنِ الصَّلَاة (to prevent you from the re-membrance of Allah, and the Salah), the objective could be to mention the total destruction of the life in this world and in the Hereafter both.

It will be noticed here that Salah has been mentioned separately – though, Salah is a part of the Dhikr of Allah. What is the wisdom behind mentioning Salah distinctly? The answer is that Salah has been mentioned separately because the text aims to indicate that Salah is important in its own place and certainly the superior most among all kinds of Dhikrullah (the remembrance of Allah).

After having described the physical and spiritual drawbacks of drinking and gambling, the way in which people have been asked to stay away from these indulgences is certainly disarming and heart-winning. It is said:    فَهَلْ أَنتُم مُّنتَهُونَ (Would you, then, abstain?).

Described in the first two verses (90:91) was the unlawfulness of drinking and gambling, and its strict prohibition – an article of Divine Law, so to say. To make the word of law easy to act upon,

Sequence of Verses

A report from Sayyidna Abu Hurairah (رض) appearing in the Musnad of Ahmad, quoted in Al-Lubab, says: When the Verse forbidding drinking and gambling had been revealed, some people asked the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) that there were many people who drank wine and lived off earnings from gambling and then died before these were forbidden.          What would happen to them, now that we know about these being حَرَام haram? Thereupon, the verse : لَيْسَ عَلَى الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا (On those who believe and do good deeds, there is no sin …) was revealed.

In a verse appearing earlier (87): يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تُحَرِّ‌مُوا طَيِّبَاتِ ( O those who believe, do not make unlawful good things …), the making of good things unlawful was prohibited. Now, in the verse (94) : يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَيَبْلُوَنَّكُمُ اللَّـهُ بِشَيْءٍ ( those who believe, Allah shall certainly test you with some … ), it is said that it is Allah Who has that absolute power to de¬clare particular things unlawful in particular circumstances. (Bayan al Qur’an)

Commentary

Scholars have said that there are several degrees of Taqwa (abstaining from what is likely to harm the purity of one’s faith). Sim¬ilarly, the degrees of faith and belief are also different in terms of per¬sonal strength and weakness. The touchstone of experience and the inviolable authority of the Shari’ ah both prove that the more one pro¬gresses in the remembrance of Allah (Dhikr), concern for life here and hereafter (Fikr), good deeds (Al-Amalus-Salih) and Jihad in the way of Allah (Al-Jihad fi Sabilillah), the more filled his heart is with the fear of Allah and the awe of His greatness and majesty, with his faith and belief becoming firm and fortified more than ever. Thus, there are de¬grees of one’s ascent onto the pathways of Allah (referred to as Sayr¬ilallah by spiritual masters). The considered repetition in verse 93 of the basis of Taqwa (fear of Allah) and ‘Iman (faith) is a pointer in this direction. Finally, at the end of the verse, what stands identified is the seeker’s last station – Ihsan (righteousness at its best) – and the re-ward for it too, which is, the love of Allah. (Tafsir Usmani)

Rulings:

1. The game صَید (Sayd) which is حرام haram (unlawful) in the حرَم Haram (the precincts of the Sacred Mosque) and in اِحرَام Ihram (the state of con¬secration for Hajj or ` Umrah) is general in sense. It may be eatable, that is, a Halal (lawful) animal, or one uneatable, that is, a حَرَام haram (unlawful) animal (as generalized in the verse).
2. Sayd صَید ، that is, game, is the name of animals which are wild and who habitually do not live close to human beings. Thus, as for those which are naturally domesticated, such as, sheep, goats, cows and camels, slaughtering and eating them in Ihram is cor¬rect.

However, animals that have been exempted by a specific rule can be trapped and killed. It is Halal, for example, the hunting of sea (or water) game as permitted by Allah Ta` a1a: أُحِلَّ لَكُمْ صَيْدُ الْبَحْرِ‌ (lawful for you is the game of the sea). This applies to some land animals, crawlers and birds as well, such as, the wolf, the biting dog, the crow, the kite, the snake and the scorpion. Simi¬larly, permissible is the killing of an attacking beast. Their ex¬emption has been mentioned in Hadith. This tells us that the letter Alif-Lam in’ اَلصَیدُ ‘ (Al-Sayd – 5:95) is that of Ahd.1

1. The Lam of ` Ahd indicates that the word is used in a restricted sense and not in a general sense. Here it means that all types of games are not prohibited, but the prohibition is restricted to some of them. (Muhammad Taqi Usmani)
2. It is permissible for a Muhrim (person in Ihram) to eat from Ha¬lal game which has been hunted in a state other than that of lh¬ram and in a place other than that of the sacred precincts of the حَرَم Haram – subject to the condition that this person (in Ihram) has not been an assistant or adviser or guide in the hunting and killing of that game. This is exactly what the Hadith says. In addition to that, there is an indication towards this rule in the words: لَا تَقتُلُوا (la taqtulu: do not kill) in this verse (95) – because what is said here is “la taqtulu” (do not kill) and not لَاتَاکُلُوا ` la ta’kulu’ (do not eat).
3. The way it is obligatory (Wajib) to pay compensation (Jaza’ ) against killing land game in the sacred precincts of the Haram (Sacred Mosque) intentionally, similarly, it is also obligatory (Wajib) if done by mistake or forgetfulness. (As deduced in Ruh al Maini)
4. The compensation (Jaza’ ) which becomes obligatory (Wajib) the first time shall remain equally obligatory (Wajib) in such killing a second or a third time as well.
5. The substance of the compensation (Jaza’ ) is that, after having determined the (facts of) time and place of the killing of this an¬imal, one should get an estimate of the cost of this animal from two just person, which is better, but, it is also permissible that he can have only one just person do it. Then, there are other details: If the killed animal is inedible (that is, حَرَام haram), then, this obligatory cost will not be more than the cost of a she-goat.

And if the animal was edible (that is, Halal), then, whatever the estimate (of cost), the whole of it will be obligatory (Wajib). Now, beyond these two situations, he has three options: (1) Whether he buys an animal at this price keeping in view the (standard) conditions which govern a sacrificial animal, and af¬ter slaughtering it properly within the sacred precincts of the حَرَم Haram (the Sacred Mosque and its environs), distributes it to persons poor and needy; or, (2) gives grains equivalent to the price of the animal, in accordance with the conditions of Sadaq¬atul-Fitr, at the rate of 1/2 Sa` per poor and needy person; or, (3) keeps as many fasts as would be the number of poor and needy persons to whom the amount of grains could reach at the rate of 1/2 Sa` per person. As for the distribution of the grains and the keeping of fasts, there is no restriction that these be done with-in the sacred precincts of the Haram. And in case the obligatory (Wajib) amount is a price less than 1/2 Sa`, then, one has the choice of either giving it to a poor and needy person, or keep a fast. Similarly, if one is left with less than 1/2 SW even after giv¬ing at the rate of 1/2 Sa` per poor and needy person, still then, one has the choice of either giving the remainder to one poor and needy person, or keep a fast. The weight of 1/2 Sa` is the equivalent of 1.75 Seers or 1.62 kg approximately (usually rounded as a matter of precaution).

7. If in lieu of giving the share of the number of poor and needy persons arrived at in the said estimate, one were to feed them two meals of the day, to their fill and satisfaction, that too will be permissible.
8. If an animal matching the cost arrived at in the estimate was selected for slaughter – but, some amount was left over – then, in this remainder, on’e has the choice of either buying another animal, or giving grain against it, or fasting in terms of the dis¬tributability of the grains. As compensation (Jaza’ ) is obligato¬ry in killing, similarly, in the case of such an animal becoming wounded, an estimate would have to be taken to determine how low the price of the animal has become as a result of its being wounded. Once again, in this amount of the cost, the same three options will be permissible.
9. The animal the hunting of which is حَرَام haram (unlawful) for a Muhrim (one in the consecrated state of Ihram), its slaughter¬ing is حَرَام haram too. If the Muhrim were to slaughter it, its legal status will be that of carrion, dead animal. (In ` la-taqtulu,: [ do not kill ] there is a hint towards slaughter being like killing).
10. If the place where the animal was killed was a forest, then, the estimate will be made in terms of the habitation close to it.
11. Pointing to, guiding along or assisting in hunting is حَرَام haram (unlawful) as hunting itself.

Four Sources of Tranquility

The first verse (97) mentions four things as the cause of constancy, survival and tranquility for people.

The first is the Ka’bah. In Arabic, Ka’bah is the name of a place which is square. Another house made by the Arab tribe of Khath’am carried the same name, that is, al-ka’bah-al-Yamaniyah, to be exact. Therefore, to distinguish the Baytullah (House of Allah) from this place, the words: الْبَيْتَ الْحَرَ‌امَ (Al-Baytul-Haram: The Sacred House) were added to the name of the Ka’bah.

The word “Qiyam” and Qiwam are verbal nouns. They refer to that on which the stability and survival of something depends. Therefore, ” قِيَامًا لِّلنَّاسِ ” in the text comes to mean that the Ka’bah and its adjuncts are the cause and source of the stability and survival of people.

Lexically, the word: النَّاسِ (annas) is used for people in general. At this place, because of the topical context, they could mean the people of Makkah proper, or the people of Arabia and the peoples of the world as well. Obviously, it includes human beings of the whole world – howev¬er, the people of Makkah and the people of Arabia do have a unique status. Therefore, the sense of the verse would be that Allah Ta` ala has made Ka’batullah کعبۃُ اللہ (The Ka’bah of Allah) and what is mentioned later, the source of stability, survival and tranquility for people. As long as people of the world from each country, each region and each di¬rection keep turning their orientation towards Baytullah to say their Salah, and the Hajj of Baytullah continues to be performed by those on whom its performance has become obligatory (fard) – until then, this whole world will keep going and stay safe. And if, there ever comes that fatal year when no one makes Hajj, or no one turns towards Bay¬tullah to offer Salah, then, the whole world will be overtaken by mass Punishment.

Baytullah is the Mainstay of the Universe

The respected master of Tafsir, ‘Ata’ has stated the subject in the words which follow: لَو ترکوہ عامًا واحدا لم ینظروا یؤخروا (Al-Bahr Al-Mubit). This tells us that, significance-wise, Baytullah is the pillar of this whole world. As long as people keep turning towards it and Hajj keeps being performed, the world will stay. And if, this reverence of Baytullah were to terminate at some time, the world will also be terminated. Howev¬er, there remains the question: What is the connection and linkage be¬tween the universal system and Baytullah? But then, knowing its re¬ality is not necessary – who knows the reality behind the mutual connection of magnet and iron and lightening and straw? But, it is a reality proved through observation. It cannot be rejected. The comprehension of the reality of the mutual linkage between Baytullah and the universal system is also not within the reach and control of mortal man. That can be known only when the Creator of the universe tells us about it. That Baytullah is the cause of the survival of the whole universe is a thing of the spirit. Physical insight or formal research cannot reach it. But, its being the cause of peace and tranquility for Arabia and the people of Makkah stands proved by long experiences and observations.

Baytullah : Symbol and Substance of Peace

Peace is generally maintained in the world through government laws and its implementation. That is why robbers, thiefs, killers and plunderers do not dare. But, during the Arab Jahiliyyah, there was no formal government nor was there some general law to maintain public peace. Whatever political system there was, it was based on tribal con-siderations. One tribe could attack the life, property and honour of another tribe anytime at its choice. Therefore, no tribe had the occasion to enjoy peace and tranquility any time. Allah Almighty, with His per¬fect power, made the Baytullah in Makkah al-Mukarramah stand as a regular government ushering peace and tranquility. As anyone in his right frame of mind would not dare breaking the law of a strong gov¬ernment in our day, so it was, even during those days of ignorance, that Allah Almighty had impinged the reverence of the Baytullah on the hearts of common people in a manner that they would throw all their personal desires and emotions behind their backs when it came to upholding its honour and station.

So, this was Arab Jahiliyyah, the so called Age of Ignorance, pro¬verbial for tribal prejudices and long drawn wars. But, such was the reverence for Baytullah and its adjuncts which Allah had placed in their hearts that they would say just nothing to even their sworn ene¬my despite their anger and chagrin – if the enemy had entered the Haram. A son who met the killer of his father in the Haram would lower his gaze and walk away from him.

Similarly, as much respect was also given to a person who had embarked on his Hajj and ` Umrah or who had been carrying animals for sacrifice in the Haram. The result was that even the worst person around would not hurt him in anyway – to the limit that they would say nothing to even a sworn enemy if he was in a condition when signs of his being on Hajj and ` Umrah, such as the garments of Ihram or garlands, were all too visible.

Take an example. The year was Hijrah 6. The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) accompanied by a group of his Sahabah entered into the Ihram of ` Umrah and started for his journey towards Baytullah. He stopped at Hudaybiyah close to the Haram limits and sent Sayyidna ` Uthman al-Ghani (رض) to Makkah along with some colleagues so that they can tell the chiefs of Makkah that Muslims have come at this time not for fighting but for performing ` Umrah, therefore, they should not be ob¬structed.

It was after a good deal of debate that they sent a representative of theirs to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . When he saw him, he said: This person is an upholder of the sanctities of Baytullah, therefore, the sacrificial animals marked for sacrifice should be brought before him.

When the representative saw these sacrificial animals, he conceded that such people should never be stopped from going to Baytullah.

So, as said earlier, Allah Almighty had placed such awe of the ven¬erated Haram – even during the days of Jahiliyyah – that it became the very cause and source of peace and tranquility. As a direct result of this reverence, only those who either went in and out of Haram, or those who came for their Hajj and ` Umrah with some sign of the intended pilgrimage on them, were the ones who remained protected – outsiders did not benefit from this peace and tranquility. But, in Ara¬bia itself, the way they honoured the site of Baytullah and its environs universally, they would also give equal respect to the months of Hajj. They called these, the Sacred Months. Some had included the month of Rajab along with them. During these months, fighting and killing – even outside the Haram – was considered by the whole Arabia as pro¬hibited, from which they would abstain.

1. Therefore, the Holy Qur’an has included three more things as being قِيَامًا لِّلنَّاسِ (stability for people) along with the Ka’bah. The first is: الشَّهْرَ‌ الْحَرَ‌امَ , that is, the Sacred Month. Since the word, شَّهْرَ‌ (shahr: month) has been placed here in its singular form, most commentators say that it means the month of Dhul-Hijjah at this place, the month during which the rites of Hajj are performed. Some commentators have said that, though the word used is singular, but it signifies category where-by all Sacred Months are included here.
2. Mentioned secondly is “al-hady” الْهَدْيَ which refers to an animal sacri¬ficed in Haram. It was common Arab practice not to check and ob¬struct anyone carrying such sacrificial animals who could travel on in peace and be able to do what he intended to do. Thus, ` sacrificial ani¬mals’ also became a cause of the establishment of peace.
3. The third thing is الْقَلَائِدَ “Al-Qala’id.” The word is the plural form of Qiladah. It means a garland. There was a custom in the age of Arab Jahiliyyah that a person who went out for Hajj would put a garland round his (sacrificial animal) neck as a sign so that people may know that here was someone going for Hajj and that he should not be molested. Similarly, they would put garlands round the necks of their sacrificial animals too. These were also known as the قَلَائِدَ Qala’id. So, the Qala’id also became a source of peace and tranquility.

A little thought will show that ` the sacred month,”the sacrificial animal,’ and ` the Qala’id’ are all adjuncts or auxiliaries of the Baytul¬lah. Reverence for them is part of the reverence of Baytullah. Allah Ta` ala has made the combination of these a source of stability (even constancy and resilience) in all matters relating to the worldly and otherworldly life of the people of Arabia, and that of the people of Mak¬kah particularly – as well as, for all humanity in general.

While explaining the expression: قِيَامًا لِّلنَّاسِ (stability for people), some commentators have said that it means that the Baytullah and the Sacred Haram around it has been made a place of peace for everyone. Others have said that it refers to the extended means of sustenance for the people of Makkah, for what is not grown or made there indigenous¬ly keeps reaching them from all over the world by the grace of Allah Ta` ala. Still some others have said that people of Makkah known as the custodians of Baytullah were held in great esteem as special peo¬ple serving the House of Allah, therefore, it is the particular distinc-tion of these people which has been identified in the Qur’anic expres¬sion translated as ` stability for people.’

Imam al-Razi has said that there is no contradiction in all these sayings which are included within the sense of قِيَامًا لِّلنَّاسِ (stability for people) since Allah Ta` ala has made Baytullah the source of better¬ment, prosperity and success (both materially and spiritually) for the stay, survival, stability, sustenance and return (to it, as well as, through it to the final destination of the Hereafter) for all peoples. And as for the people of Arabia, particularly those of Makkah, they have been blessed by Allah with its outward and inward blessings.

At the end of the verse, it was said: ذَٰلِكَ لِتَعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ يَعْلَمُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْ‌ضِ وَأَنَّ اللَّـهَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ (All this so that you may learn that Allah knows what is in the heavens and what is in the earth, and that Allah is All-Knowing in respect of everything). It means that Allah has made Bay¬tullah and its adjuncts the source of stability, survival, peace and tranquility for people, something the people of Arabia keep witnessing par¬ticularly. This has been said so that everyone should know that Allah Ta` ala knows everything in the earth and the heavens and He alone is capable of managing and administering it.

In the fourth verse (100), it was said: قُل لَّا يَسْتَوِي الْخَبِيثُ وَالطَّيِّبُ (Say, “The bad and the good are not equal … ). In Arabic, the words “Tayyib” and “Khabith” are antonyms. Tayyib refers to what is the best and purest in everything and Khabith to what is the most condemned and evil. In this verse, as held by the majority of commentators, Khabith means حَرَام haram or impure, while Tayyib means Halal and pure. Thus, the verse would come to mean that with Allah Ta` ala, rather with every-one having sound reason and good taste, pure and impure or Halal and haram cannot be equal.

In view of the general sense of Khabith and Tayyib at this place, it is inclusive of wealth and property which is Halal or حَرَام haram, and hu¬man beings who are good or bad, and deeds and morals which are vir¬tuous or vicious, all of the three. The sense of the verse is clear from the truth that good and bad are not equal. According to this natural law, Halal and حَرَام haram and pure and impure things are not equal in the sight of Allah Ta` ala, similar to which, also not equal are good and bad deeds and morals, similarly again, also not equal are virtuous and vi¬cious human beings.

Following immediately in this verse (100), it was said: وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَكَ كَثْرَ‌ةُ الْخَبِيثِ (even though you are attracted by the profusion of the bad). It means that, though onlookers are sometimes awed by the abundance of things evil and impure, they would even go on to take these very things to be good just because they have spread out all over and be-cause they seem to be winning the day, but, this is only a disease of human knowledge and consciousness, and certainly a shortcoming of the inherent feeling for the right.

The Background of the Revelation of the Verse

Reporting the background of the revelation of this verse, some nar¬rations say that when liquor, and its buying and selling too, was pro¬hibited in Islam, a dealer in liquor who had some cash savings from that business asked the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) Ya Rasul Allah, I have with me this saving from my liquor business, if I were to spend this in some good and pious cause, would that be beneficial for me?

The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: If you will spend it in Jihad or Hajj or something similar, it would not even be worth the weight of the tiny feather of a mosquito, for Allah Ta` ala does not accept anything other than what is pure and Halal (lawful).

This devaluation and depreciation of wealth is in terms of the Hereafter. If we look a little deeper and keep the ultimate end of things in sight, we shall discover that Halal and حَرَام haram wealth or property are not equal even in the businesses of this mortal world. The kind of benefits, favourable consequences, real comfort and bliss which come through Halal, never do and never can come from حَرَام haram.

Citing Ibn Abi Hatim, Tafsir Al-Durr Al-Manthur reports that when Sayyidna ` Umar ibn ` Abd Al-Aziz, the rightly-guided Khalifah of the age of the Tabi` in, stopped impermissible taxes imposed by the oli¬garchy before him, returned monies and properties taken illegally to the rightful owners, the government treasury became empty and the graph of usual income came very low. Then, the governor of a province wrote a letter to him in which he complained about the low income of the public treasury and asked him as to how would the affairs of the government run under such circumstances. Sayyidna ` Umar ibn ` Abd al-` Aziz            رحمۃ اللہ علیہ         answered him by quoting this very verse: لَّا يَسْتَوِي الْخَبِيثُ وَالطَّيِّبُ وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَكَ كَثْرَ‌ةُ الْخَبِيثِ ; (The bad and the good are not equal, even though you are attracted by the profusion of the bad). He also wrote: People before you had used injustice and oppression to fill the treasury, now you match it by establishing equity and justice and let the holding of your treasury stand reduced. And do not care. The expenditures of our government shall be met within this reduced income.

Though the cause of the revelation of this verse is a particular event, the basic message of the verse is that numbers being low or high do not mean much. Matters cannot be measured by majority and minority and a human hand-count of fifty one against forty nine cannot go on to become the touchstone of that which is right and true.

In fact, if we were to even casually look into the state of affairs pre¬vailing around every section of society in the world, then, we shall see less of good and more of evil. Compare belief with disbelief; godliness, purity, honesty and trust with sinfulness and debauchery; justice and equity with injustice and oppression; knowledge with ignorance; rea¬son with unreason – one is bound to find more of the later in all these comparisons. This leads us to become certain that the numerical abundance of something, group or party cannot be an absolute proof of its being good or true. Instead of that, the good in that thing or group or party depends on relevant particulars and states. If they are good, they are good, and if they are bad, they are bad. This is the reality the Holy Qur’an has stated clearly by saying: وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَكَ كَثْرَ‌ةُ الْخَبِيثِ (even though you are attracted by the profusion of the bad).

Of course, Islam too has declared numerical majority to be decisive on some occasions, and that too where there be no ruling authority competent enough to decide by the power of argument and the assess¬ment of intrinsic qualities. On occasions like this, in order to resolve the disputes among masses of people, majority vote is resorted to. Take the example of the problem of appointing an Imam or leader in a situation when there is no Imam or Amir or leader present to give a decision. Therefore, on some occasions, majority opinion has been pre¬ferred to ward off possible dispute and resolve matters peacefully. It never means that what has been adopted by a majority of people should become Halal and permissible and true.

At the end of the verse it was said: فَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ يَا أُولِي الْأَلْبَابِ (So, fear Allah, O men of understanding). By addressing the men of understanding this verse indicates that it is not the attitude of the men of wisdom to be attracted to something because of its numerical or quantitative abundance, or to take the majority as the touchstone of what is true and correct. Intelligent people would not do something like that. Therefore, it is to caution all people of understanding against these at-titudes that they have been commanded with: فَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ (fear Allah).

The Prohibition of Asking Unnecessary Questions

These verses warn people who keep investigating unnecessarily into Divine injunctions. So fond and bent are they in this exercise that they would go to the outer limit of asking questions even about in-junctions which have not been prescribed at all and for which there is really no genuine need that they be asked. In this verse, such people have been instructed not to ask questions lest they are subjected to some trial, or they have to face disgrace as a result of the disclosure of their secrets.

The Background of the Revelation

As narrated in Sahib Muslim, the background or the cause of the revelation of these verses is as follows. When the verse concerning the obligation of Hajj was revealed, Sayyidna Al-Aqra` ibn Habis (رض) asked: ` Have we been obligated with Hajj every year?’ The Holy Proph¬et (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did not answer that question. He asked again. The Holy Prophet still remained silent. When he asked a third time, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) reprimanded him by saying: If, in answer to your question, I had said, ` Yes, the Hajj is obligatory every year’ – so it would have become, and you would have been unable to do it. After that, he added: Things about which I give you no com¬mand, leave them as they are. Do not ask questions by digging and prying into them. Communities before you have been damned eternal¬ly through this very proliferation of questioning because they, ques¬tions after questions about what Allah and His Messenger did not make obligatory on them, and in consequence of their unnecessary en¬quiry, these optional things were made obligatory – and then, they got involved in the unfortunate practice of disobeying these. Your estab-lished routine should be: Do what I order you to do, with the best of your ability, and leave what I order you not to do (that is, do not dig and pry into things about which no injunctions are given).

There is No Nubuwwah (Prophethood) and Wahy (Revelation) after the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

It has also been tacitly said in this verse: وَإِن تَسْأَلُوا عَنْهَا حِينَ يُنَزَّلُ الْقُرْ‌آنُ تُبْدَ لَكُمْ : ` and if you ask about them while the Qur’an is being revealed, they will be disclosed to you (through revelation).’ Here, by restricting it with the time duration of the revelation of the Qur’an, the indication given is that it will be after the completion of the revelation of the Qur’an, that the process of Prophethood (Nubuwwah) and Revelation (Wahy) will be discontinued.

Though, after the discontinuation of this process of Prophethood and Revelation, the consequences that new injunctions may come, things not obligatory may become obligatory or someone’s secret may be disclosed through revelation are not likely to take effect – but, mint¬ing unnecessary questions, falling for investigations into them or asking about things for which there is no need, shall still remain prohibit¬ed, even after the discontinuation of the process of Prophethood. The reason is simple. This is a waste of time – your own and that of others. The Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم          has said:

One of the qualities making someone a good Muslim is that one leaves what is unnecessary.

This tells us that many of our brother Muslims who keep investi¬gating into unnecessary subjects, such as, the name of the mother of Sayyidna Musa (عليه السلام) or the precise length and breadth of the Ark of Sayyidna Nuh (عليه السلام) ، indulge in what has no effect on one’s conduct in life. Therefore, asking such questions is blameworthy – especially when it is already known that people who tend to ask such questions are mostly unaware of the basics of their religion. The problem is that falling for what is wasteful invariably results in making one stay de¬prived of doing what is necessary. As for the large body of work left by Muslim jurists in which they have answered assumed religious prob¬lems and questions, it was not something unnecessary. Later events proved that they were needed by future generations. Therefore, they do not fall under the purview of wasteful or meaningless questions. It is also a part of Islamic teachings that one should not indulge in any activity, whether intellectual or practical, a task or a conversation, and waste precious time through it, unless there is some gain to be made from it in terms of the worldly or other-wordly life.

The Definition of Bahirah and Sa’ibah

The names Bahirah, Sa’ibah, WasiIah and Hami are connected with customs prevailing during the days of Jahiliyyah. Commentators dif¬fer in their exegesis. It is possible that all these words were applied each to a different situation. We limit ourselves to the explanation given by Sayyidna Said ibn al-Musaiyyib (رض) as it appears in the Sahih of Al-Bukhari:

BAHIRAH, an animal the milk from which was dedicated in the name of idols, and was not used by anyone personally.

SA’IBAH, an animal which was released in the name of idols, like a bull in some rural areas of our time.

HAMI, a male camel having copulated with a particular number, which was also released in the name of idols.

WASILAH, a she-camel giving birth to female offspring continuously, uninterrupted by the birth of a male, was also released in the name of idols.

In addition to doing what was Shirk, these people were challenging the right of benefiting from the meat of an animal, or its milk, or rid¬ing it, declared permissible by Almighty Allah, and placing their own restrictions on their being lawful or unlawful – as if the office of mak¬ing Divine laws belonged to them! And the cruel joke was that they took these polytheistic customs of theirs to be the source of attaining the pleasure and nearness of Almighty Allah. The answer to this was: Almighty Allah had never appointed these customs. If their elders did it, they fabricated lies against Him, and the ignorant masses accepted them. In short, a two-pronged warning has been given here by saying that the way it is a crime to invite hardships in Divine injunctions by asking purposeless questions, similarly, it is much more serious a crime that one goes about proposing things as Halal or حَرَام haram based on one’s personal opinions and desires without the will and command of the Law-Giver. (Tafsir Usmani )

Sequence of Verses

Mentioned earlier was one ignorant habit of the disbelievers who were very rigid in their customs. There were many more of such habits which made Muslims grieve. Therefore, the text now addresses Mus¬lims asking them not to worry about others. They have been asked to correct themselves first – and then try to reform others within the limit of what they can do. Onward from there, that their efforts bear fruit is something beyond their control. Therefore, for them the best course is: Do your own job and not the job of others.

The Background of the Revelation of the Verses

Following forefathers was one of the many customs of Jahiliyyah which had involved them in all sorts of evils, and equally deprived them of all kinds of virtues too. As reported in the Tafsir Al-Durr Al-Manthur from Ibn Abi Hatim, if a lucky person listened to the truth and embraced Islam, he was put to shame on the plea that he had proved his forefathers to be no good since he took to another way at the cost of the way of his forefathers. It was this compounded error of theirs whereupon the following verse was revealed:

And when it is said to them, “Come to what Allah has sent down, and to the Messenger;” they say, “sufficient for us is what we have found our forefathers on.”

In other words, when they were asked to turn to the truth and to the injunctions revealed by Allah Ta` ala, and to the Messenger who is, in all possible respects, the guarantor of good for them, then, they have no answer to give but that the customs on which we found our forefathers are sufficient for us.’

This is the master argument of Shaytan which made millions of people fall into error despite having at least average sense, knowledge and skills. Answering it, the Qur’an said: أَوَلَوْ كَانَ آبَاؤُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ شَيْئًا (Is it so, even if their forefathers knew nothing … ). For those who would care to ponder, this one sentence of the Qur’an has provided a correct principle to uphold when following a person or group or party – a principle which brings sight to the unsighted and reality to the ignorant and the heedless. It makes sense if those who do not know follow those who do, the uninitiated follow the experienced and the ignorant follow the learned. But, what does not make sense is that one elects to move away from the standards of knowledge, reason and guidance and ends up making the following of forefathers as preferred practice – without realizing as to where this leader of theirs is and to where would he take them yet having the compulsion to tag along behind him?

This is how some people take a mob of people as the yardstick of right and wrong. Wherever they see a lot of people going, they will start moving in that direction. This too is absurd – because the majori¬ty of people in this world is always that of those who are not the wisest or the smartest or the most virtuous in deeds. Therefore, following a mob of people cannot become the criterion of distinction between truth and untruth or good and bad.

Following an Undeserving Leader is Asking for Trouble

This sentence of the Qur’an gives everyone a clear lesson in wisdom – that none of these criterions are at all sufficient to help in choosing someone as a leader to be followed. The correct attitude is that every-one should first determine the aim of his life and the direction of his journey in it. Then, in order to achieve that purpose, he has to look for a person who has the knowledge of that direction and is himself pro¬ceeding to it. When one finds a person like that, then, tagging along behind him can certainly take one all the way to his destination. This is the reality underlying what we know as the Taqlid (following) of the Mujtahid Imams. They know دین Din and they follow it too. Therefore, those who do not know can, by following them, achieve the main pur¬pose of religion, that is, the obedience to Allah and His Messenger, and the following of their commands. As for one who is already astray, who does not himself know the destination, or is knowingly going in a direction opposite to the destination, then, following him shall be, in the sight of every wise person, a waste of one’s efforts and deeds, rath¬er the signing of one’s own warrant of destruction. It is a pity that in the present age of so-called knowledge and enlightenment, even the people of education and foresight are ignoring the fact that the great¬est cause of world upheaval is the locked following of leaders who are incompetent, undeserving, and false.

The Criterion of Leadership

This sentence of the Qur’an gives two clear criterions of choosing a leader. These are having Knowledge (` Ilm) and Guidance (Ihtida’ ). Knowledge means the knowing of the desired purpose or destination and the knowing of the methods to reach it, while having Guidance means moving towards the chosen objective. Combined together, it would mean constant effort based on sound knowledge.

To explain, it can be said that it is necessary to first find out – before making the choice of a leader – if he is fully conversant with the objectives and methods chosen to be followed. Then, it has to be seen whether he himself is traveling on the same path and in the same di¬rection. And then, it has to be determined whether or not his conduct is in accordance with his knowledge. So, in order to take someone as a leader to be followed, it is necessary to test him on the anvil of sound knowledge and steady conduct. None of the other options based on an¬cestry and lineage, or being in the lead followed by masses of people, or being wealthy through money or property, or being in power and authority, not one of them is worthy of being considered as the criteri¬on of leadership in the real sense.

An Effective Method of Criticism

At this place, the Qur’an has pointed out to the error of people who are used to following their ancestral customs blindly. However, right along with it, it has told us about an effective method which can be used when needed to identify the error of the other person, so that the addressee is not hurt or provoked. It will be noticed that the comment made in the text is not direct. It does not say that their forefathers were ignorant or astray. Instead of that, it employs a subtle interroga¬tive style in asking if the practice of following one’s forefathers could be reasonable in a situation when they did not have either knowledge or guidance.

Comfort for the Reformers of People

In the second verse (105), Muslims who sacrificed a great deal in their concern for reforming people have been comforted by saying that they had done their best to spread the call of truth and they had done their duty of conveying to people what was good for them. Now, if there were people who chose to stick by their error, that was not for them to worry about for their going astray will bring no loss to them. It was said:

0 those who believe, take care of your own selves. Those who have gone astray cannot harm you, if you are on the right path.

These words of the verse, if looked at outwardly, sometimes are taken in the sense that it is enough for one to only take care of one’s own conduct, and just correct it when necessary. This would leave out the others who may keep doing what they do – there was no need to think about that. Such thinking is contrary to a great many very clear statements of the Qur’an where Bidding the Fair (al-amr bil-ma` ruf) and Forbidding the Unfair (al-nahy ‘anil-munkar) has been declared to be an important duty in Islam and a singular distinction of the Mus¬lim community. When this verse was revealed, some people faced doubts. The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) clarified by saying that the verse was not contradictory to the injunctions regarding the Bidding of the Fair. If they were to leave the mission of Bidding the Fair, they will be answerable for that. Therefore, Sayyidna Said ibn Jubayr (رض) has, in his Tafsir of the Verse as reported in Al-Bahr Al-Muhit, said: Keep doing what your religion obligates you with, which includes Jihad and Al-amr bil-ma` ruf (Bidding the Fair). If, even after doing all this, those who remain astray could bring no loss on you. A little deliberation in the words: إِذَا اهْتَدَيْتُمْ (if you are on the right path) of the Qur’an itself makes this explanation all the more clear as the converse of it shows that one who has abandoned the duty of Bidding the Fair is obviously not on the right path.

Reported in Tafsir Al-Durr Al-Manthur, is an event relating to Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar (رض) . Someone mentioned before him a serious dispute between certain people he named who were call¬ing each other Mushriks (polytheists). Sayyidna Ibn ` Umar (رض) said: Do you think I am going to tell you to go and fight them? Never! Go, talk to them softly. If they listen, fine. If not, stop worrying about them. Get busy taking care of your own selves. After having said that, it was this very verse that he recited as the confirmation of his answer to their statement.

Sayyidna Abu-Bakr  رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہ on Checking of Sins

Sensing the doubt generated by a surface view of the words of the verse, Sayyidna Abu-Bakr (رض) said in a Khutbah (address): You people recite this verse and use it out of context – that Al-amr bil-Ma` ruf (Bidding the Fair) is not required. Understand it very clearly that I have myself heard the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) say that people who see a sin being committed and do not try to stop it (to the best of their ability) then, it is likely that they too are seized by the divine punishment along with the actual sinners.

This narration is there in Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah. However, the words in Abu Dawud appear as follows: those who see an oppressor oppressing and do not stop him from his oppression (to the best of their ability), then, Allah Ta` ala will seize everyone in punishment.

The Meaning of Ma` ruf مَعرُوف and Munkar مُنکَر

From the details given earlier, we know that it is the duty of a Muslim that he should do what he can to check what is not permissi¬ble, or, at the least, show his dislike for it. Let us now find out what is Ma` ruf and Munkar.

The word, Ma` ruf is from Ma` rifah and the word, Munkar is from In¬kar. Ma` rifah means to know, and to understand and recognize something after deliberation. In contrast, there is Inkar which means not to know, and not to understand and recognize something. These words are taken to be antonyms. The Holy Qur’an says: يَعْرِ‌فُونَ نِعْمَتَ اللَّـهِ ثُمَّ يُنكِرُ‌ونَهَا (16:83). It means that they recognize the blessings of Allah by seeing the manifestations of His perfect power, but thereafter they deny them as if they do not know them. This tells us that, lexically, Ma` ruf signi¬fies something well-recognized while Munkar refers to something un¬recognized. Keeping this congruity in view, Imam a1-Raghib al-Isfahan has, in his Mufradat al-Qur’an, given the meaning of Ma‘ruf and Munk¬ar as used in the terminology of the Shari’ ah. According to him, Ma` ruf refers to what is known to be good in the light of reason (` Aql) and revelation (Shar`). And Munkar means what is strange and unrecognized, that is, what is taken as bad. Therefore, Al-Amr bil Ma` ruf comes to mean bidding toward the Fair, while, Nahy ‘anil-Munkar signifies forbidding from the Unfair.

There is nothing Legally Unfair in the sayings of the Mujtahid Imams

But here, the use of the words, Ma` ruf and Munkar, in place of sin and reward or obedience and disobedience, may perhaps be indicating towards the possibility that there can be two opinions in matters which are deep and in problems which require Ijtihad due to brevity or ambiguity left in the Qur’an and Sunnah – the basis on which sayings of Muslim jurists (fuqaha’ ) differ – therefore, they are excluded from this scope. The brilliance of Ijtihad done by the great Mujtahid Imams is an accepted fact among scholars and jurists of Muslim Ummah. If two views are different about a religious problem, none of them can be considered to be censurable in Shari` ah1 (al-munkar ash-Shar` i). In fact, both the sides are included under Ma` ruf. In such problems, a person who considers one opinion weightier does not have the right to reject and censure the other in the manner it is done in the case of sin. This is the reason why, despite many differences in matters of Ijtihad and opposing opinions, it has not been reported anywhere that the no¬ble Saba-bah and Tabi` in ever called each other sinners. Debates, dia¬logues, and polemics – they had all that. They presented their point of view, explained the reasons for their preference and did not hesitate in questioning what others had to say. But, nobody took anyone to be a sinner just because of this difference of opinion.

1. It must be noted here that the author is referring to the views expressed by the competent mujtahids who are equipped with deep knowledge of the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah and have expressed their bona fide view after doing their best to reach the truth. Conversely, if an incompetent person, Iacking the standard of knowledge required for ijtihad, declares a view based on his whims and conjectures, his view cannot be taken as a view based on ijtihad, therefore, he cannot claim immunity from ‘Nahy anil munkar’. (Muhammad Taqi Usmani)

To put it briefly, it can be said that on occasions where Ijtihadi dif¬ference exists, every knowledgeable person (having the optimum sub¬ject knowledge) has the choice to take a side which is weightier in his sight. This much he can do. But, no one has the right to reject and censure what someone else has done by taking it as Munkar (evil and sinful). From here we learn that all those writings which spread mutual hatred and hostility in Ijtihadi problems and issues are not in¬cluded under the purview of Al-Amr bil-Ma’ ruf or Nahy ‘anil-Munkar (Bidding the Fair and Forbidding the Unfair). Opening a war front on the basis of such religious issues can only be because of unawareness or ignorance.

Sequence of Verses

Prior to this, there were injunctions relevant to religious considera¬tions. Now some injunctions relevant to worldly considerations have been mentioned. The hint given is that the way Allah Ta` ala, in His mercy, helps His servants with better life in the Hereafter, He also takes care of better sustenance for them in the present world. (Bayan al-Qur’an)

The Background of Revelation

The event in the background of the revelation of the cited verses is that Budayl, a Muslim accompanied by Tamim and ` Adiyy, who were Christians at that time, travelled to Syria on a business visit. After reaching Syria, Budayl became sick. He made out a list of his things in writing and put it in his baggage. He did not inform his compan¬ions of the trip about it. When his sickness became serious, he called his Christian trip companions and made a will before them that they should deliver everything to his heirs. When they returned, they delivered everything to them. But, they took out a silver bowl which was polished with gold, or had gold inlay work on it, from the belongings. When the heirs found the list of things in the baggage left for them by the deceased, they asked the caretakers of the will if the deceased had sold something from the property, or was he very sick which may have compelled him to make unusual expenses. They answered their in¬quiry in the negative. Finally, the case came up for hearing before the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . Since the heirs had no witnesses, the two Christians were put under oath. They declared that they had neither committed any breach of trust in what belonged to the deceased, nor had they hidden any of his things. In the end, based on the oath, the verdict was given in their favour. After the passage of some time, it was found that the two of them had sold that bowl to a goldsmith in Makkah. When asked, they said that they had bought it from the de-ceased. Since they had no witnesses at the time of purchase, they pleaded, they did not mention it earlier lest they be falsified.

The heirs of the deceased appealed in the court of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) Now, contrary to the earlier situation, the executers of the will were claiming to have purchased the missing item while the heirs were denying it. In view of the absence of evidence, two persons closest of the deceased gave a sworn statement that the bowl was owned by the deceased and that the two Christians were liars in their oath. So, the amount of money for which they had sold it (1, 000 Dir¬hams) was made to be handed over to the heirs.

Commentary

‘These verses are meant to give general instructions to the Muslims with regard to making will before death. The advice given is that the will should be evidenced by witnesses, so that they may prove the will in case of a dispute after the death of the testator. It has also been advised that two pious Muslims are chosen for witnessing the will. However, if the Muslim witnesses are not available, non-Muslim witnesses may also serve the purpose. The words ‘two witnesses from you” signi¬fy the preference of Muslim witnesses, but the following words “or of two others not from you” point out to the permissibility of non-Muslim witnesses.

Then, the words “if you have some doubt” refers to a situation where the legal heirs of the deceased have a claim against the execu¬tors of the will, as in the case of Budayl the heirs claimed that a bowl of silver was delivered by the deceased to the executors. Since, in this case the heirs are the plaintiffs, they should produce witnesses to prove their claim, but on their failure to do so, the defendants, i.e. the trustees are required to declare on oath that they did not commit any breach of trust. For that purpose, the Holy Qur’an advises the judge by saying, you shall detain them after the prayer, and they shall swear.

Although it is not legally compulsory to take this oath in the mosque after a prayer, yet the Holy Qur’an has advised to take oath after a prayer, so that the sanctity of time and place may further per¬suade the people to give a truthful statement.

In the next verse the Holy Qur’an says, “Then, if it is discovered that the two had rendered themselves liable to a sin…” It means that they had given a false evidence, as in the case of Budayl they themselves admitted that the bowl was purchased by them which implied that the property of Budayl contained a bowl and their earlier testimony was false. At this stage they claimed that they had purchased the bowl from Budayl. They should have substantiated this claim by witnesses, but they failed to do so, therefore, the oath was given to the legal heirs of Budayl that no such sale took place to the best of their knowledge. It is this oath of the heirs which has been mentioned in the verse by saying, “then, in their place shall stand two others closest of those whose right has been taken away and they shall swear by Allah…”

Some Rulings

1. The person with whom the deceased leaves his or her property in trust with the request that it be given to someone is called Wasiyy (authorized guardian, executor, trustee, caretaker; plural: Awsiya’ ). A Wasiyy can be one individual, or more.
2. That a Wasiyy should be Muslim and just, is better but not nec¬essary, no matter whether the will is being made in journey or at home.
3. In a dispute, the complainant is called the Mudda’i (plaintiff) while the other party is Mudda` a ` alayh (respondent).
4. Witnesses from the Plaintiff are taken first. If he presents them as recognized under the legal norms set by the Shari’ ah of Islam, the case is decided in his favour. If he cannot do that, the Respondent is put on oath and the case is decided in his favour. However, if he de¬nies it, the Plaintiff wins the case.
5. Taking oath at a particular time or place in order to make it more emphatic, as done in the cited verse, depends on the opinion of the judge – it is not required compulsorily. Its compulsory nature is not proved from this verse too, while the converse is proved from other verses and Hadith reports.

The Witness of a Kafir is Acceptable in the case of another Kafir

In the opening words of the verse (106): يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا شَهَادَةُ بَيْنِكُمْ translat¬ed as : ` when death draws near one of you, that is, at the time of mak¬ing a will, the evidence (recognized) between you shall be of two just witnesses from among you, or of two others not from you,’ Muslims have been commanded that at the time death draws near one of them, they should appoint two good and just men from among them as their Wasiyy (executor of the will), and if they do not have such people from their own, then, they can have two others (that is, from disbelievers).

It is from here that Imam Abu Hanifah has deduced the ruling that the witness given by disbelievers for each other is permissible. Since the witness of the disbelievers has been declared permissible in the case of Muslims in this verse, as obvious from: أَوْ آخَرَ‌انِ مِنْ غَيْرِ‌كُمْ (or of two others not from you), so the witness of disbelievers for each other is permissible as more suited. But, later on, the witness of the disbeliev¬ers for Muslims was abrogated under the authority of the verse: وَاسْتَشْهِدُوا شَهِيدَيْنِ مِن رِّ‌جَالِكُمْ (And have two witnesses from among your men – 2:282). But, the evidence of disbelievers for each other remains valid as it was. (Qurtubi & Al-Ahkam Al-Qur’an by Jassas)

The support for the position of Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) also comes from what a Hadith says about a Jew who had committed Zina (adultery). His people smeared his face with black soot and produced him before the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) . Looking at his condition, he asked for the reason. They told him that the man had committed adultery (Zina). After hearing the testimony of the witnesses, he gave orders that he be stoned to death (Rajm). (Jassas)

Two Words, Two Rules

1. The word, تَحْبِسُونَهُمَا (You shall detain them) in the context of this verse (106) tells us that a person who (genuinely) owes something to someone (having the right of return), the later can have him detained for the retrieval of his right, if and when needed. (Qurtubi)

The word, “Salah” in: مِن بَعْدِ الصَّلَاةِ (after the prayer) means the Sa¬lah or prayer of عَصر ` Asr. That this time has been chosen is because the people of the Book held it in esteem. Telling a lie at this time was par¬ticularly prohibited among them. This tells us that the placing of the restriction of special time or place for taking a solemn and sacred oath (Taghliz) is permissible. (Qurtubi)

The Linkage of Verses

Earlier, mention was made of various injunctions. In between came inducements to put these in practice along with warnings against opposing them. Now it is to reemphasize the approach that people are reminded of the frightening happenings of the Day of Qiyamah so that obedience is promoted and antagonism is checked. This is the prevailing style of the Holy Qur’an. Then, towards the closing stages of the Surah, there is that dialogue with the people of the Book which has also appeared earlier through several verses where the purpose is to acquaint the people of the Book with facts about Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) facts which affirm his being a servant of Allah and negate the er¬roneous ascribing of godhood to him (though, the actual locale of this address will be the Last Day of Qiyamah).

The First Question Asked of Prophets (عليهم السلام) on the Last Day

Verse 109 opens with the statement: يَوْمَ يَجْمَعُ اللَّـهُ الرُّ‌سُلَ `(Remember) the day Allah will assemble the messengers’ which is ominous. Though, the day of Qiyamah will be the Day of Doom when all human beings born from the beginning to the end shall be standing on open grounds. Human beings, no matter what their region, country or time, shall all be present on those grounds and there will come that hour of ultimate reckoning for a whole lifetime of deeds. But, in the statement quoted above, mentioned particularly are the blessed prophets whom Allah will assemble on that day of reckoning. The sense is that, as for as¬sembling, the whole world will be assembled, but the first question asked will be from the prophets, may peace be upon them all – so that the whole creation of Allah may see that, on that day, no one is ex¬empted from reckoning. Then, the question asked of the prophets will be: مَاذَا أُجِبْتُمْ (How were you responded to?). It means when you invited your communities towards Allah and His true religion, how did they react to your call. Did they act as they were commanded to? Or, did they say no to the call and opposed it?

Though the question will be addressed to the prophets, but it would really be beamed at their communities. In other words, the prophets will be the first ones to testify about the good or bad deeds done by their communities. And for them this would be a trying time, for, on their part, they would be hoping for the intercession of their prophets to rescue them from this nerve shattering experience, while, on the other hand, there would come this question addressed to their prophets themselves requiring them to explain the conduct of their communities. Under such circumstances, it is obvious that prophets would never say anything but the truth, so the criminals and sinners will have apprehensions that the prophets themselves will become wit¬nesses to their wrong-doings. Who, then, they would wonder, was now left to intercede on their behalf?

The answer that the prophets will give will be: قَالُوا لَا عِلْمَ لَنَا ۖ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ عَلَّامُ الْغُيُوبِ (We have no knowledge. Surely You have the full knowledge of all that is unseen).

The Removal of a Doubt

As for the people of every community who were born after passing away of their prophets from this world, this answer given by the prophets (عليهم السلام) correct and clear in that they are unaware of the actual state of their faith and deeds – because no one has the knowledge of the unseen except Allah. But, the question arises with regard to the great majority of people within the community, who professed belief at the hands of their prophet as a result of his work among them, and proved that they kept following before their eyes what they were asked to follow. Similarly, there were disbelievers who did not listen to the prophets, even treated them with hostility. How would it be correct to say about them that ` we have no knowledge of their faith and deeds.’? It appears in Tafsir Al-Bahr Al-Muhit that Imam Razi has answered this doubt by saying: There are two separate things here. One is عِلم ` Ilm which means perfect certitude, while the other is ظَن Zann which means conjecture or weighty likelihood. And it is obvious that if a person can, despite his being sitting next to the other person, testify about his faith and deed, then, it will be on no other basis but that of ظَن Zann or conjecture or likelihood.

Otherwise, real faith (‘Iman) is a secret of the heart which no one can find out with any certitude without a Divine revelation. Every religious community had their groups of hypocrites who obviously did profess faith and did follow what they were com¬manded to follow. But, their hearts had no faith in them nor they had the real feeling and drive for carrying out those commands. All they had was hypocricy. , But, like all laws, religious laws too were applied on what was visible from the outside. Anyone who called himself a be¬liever, followed Divinely ordained laws, and no word or deed from him or her stood proved against faith and belief, was a good believer in the sight of the prophets and their believing communities. Whether some-one was a true believer at heart, or simply a hypocrite, it did not count for they had no choice in the matter. Therefore, it was said by the Holy Prophet: (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

We judge on the basis of outward deeds while Allah is (Himself) the custodian of the secrets (of the hearts).

Under this rule, the noble prophets, their deputies and the learned could confirm, at least in the mortal world, that someone was a true believer as based on their favourable opinion deduced from his out-ward deeds. But, that mortal world where everything revolved round opinions and conjectures is all gone. This is the Yowm al-Hashr, the fateful day of Resurrection when the dead shall rise and where things will be sorted out and realities will be unfolded. Criminals will stand on trial. People will witness against them. If they do not confess, oth¬er witnesses will be brought in, very special, and very official witness-es. With mouths and tongues silenced, the wrong-doer’s hands and legs and the skin will be asked to testify. They will tell everything الْيَوْمَ نَخْتِمُ عَلَىٰ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَتُكَلِّمُنَا أَيْدِيهِمْ وَتَشْهَدُ أَرْ‌جُلُهُم بِمَا كَانُوا يَكْسِبُونَ ﴿٦٥﴾ (That Day We shall set a seal on their mouths while their hands will speak to Us, and their feet bear witness, to all that they did -36:65). Human beings will then surely find out that parts of their own body could also act as secret service agents when summoned to do so by the Lord of the universes. After such disarming testimony no denial will remain possible.

In short, that would be a state of being in which no judgment will be based on opinion, estimate and conjecture. Instead, certitude will be the order of the day. And as we have just seen that no one has the real knowledge about anyone’s faith and belief except Allah, therefore, when the prophets will be asked on the day of Resurrection: مَاذَا أُجِبْتُمْ (How were you responded to?), they would recognize the reality behind the question, that the question is not being asked in the world of our experience where it could be answered by conjecture, instead, that question was being asked in the horrendous scenario of the Day of Resurrection where nothing other than certitude was going to work. Therefore, their answer: ` We have no knowledge’ about it, that is, they do not have that certain knowledge needed to answer the question, is right and correct.

The Answer Shows the Affection Prophets have for People

We now know that the prophets did have some opinion about the acceptance or rejection of their call by their communities and knew facts about their obedience or disobedience. On that basis, they could have at least mentioned their apparent attitude as part of their an-swer to the question – and could have referred the certainty in knowl¬edge to the sole domain of Almighty Allah. But, what we see here is that the prophets said nothing about what they knew, nor did they mention any events which had passed before them. They simply re-signed these to the Divine knowledge and chose to remain silent.

This was a great demonstration of consideration. Prophets are very affectionate to their people, and to the creation of Allah in gener¬al. They would not elect to say something as an adverse comment against their community on their own, lest their people are in trouble. If they had to say so, they would. But, here they had the excuse of not having certain knowledge. Using this legitimate excuse to their advantage, they could have avoided saying anything against their com¬munities – and so they did.

Five Questions on the Day of Resurrection

Opened through this verse is a window to Qiyamah, the fateful Day of Doom. Stationed there on the grandstands of reckoning are the highest and the dearest of Allah, His noble messengers and prophets, all in awe and reverence. Think of them and think of what would be happening to others. Therefore, we should start worrying about that Day right from this day. This little time of our life is a blessing in our hands and should be devoted to getting ready for the ultimate account¬ing. In a Hadith of Tirmidhi, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is reported to have said:

No son of Adam will move a step on the Day of Qiyamah until he is asked five questions: (1) About his age: In what did he use it up? (2) And about his youth: In what did he spend it? (3) And about his wealth: From where did he earn it? (4) And where did he spend it? (5) And what was it that he did follow¬ing that which he knew?

Great is the mercy and affection of Allah Ta` ala. He puts us to a test and He Himself tells His people about the questions asked during the test. The task was done by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) who told his Ummah how to appear in this test. Now, for them, there is nothing left to do but to resolve these questions, find their answers and solu¬tions and keep that preserved (for the day of trial). So, if someone still fails, even after being told what will be in the test, fairly in advance, who else could be more deprived than him?

A Particular Question Asked from Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام)

The first verse (109) referred to prophets in general where a ques¬tion was asked and its reply was given. In the second verse (100), and after that, in all the nine verses appearing through the end of the Surah, the text talks about Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) ، the last prophet of the Bani Isra’il, and mentions some blessings of Allah on him. A particular question asked from him on the Day of Resurrection (Al-Mahshar) along with its answer has also been mentioned which follows in verses coming next.

The purpose of the question asked and the answer given is to show this disturbing sight to Bani Isra’il and to the entire creation. When on the plains of the Hashr, the one who is called, The Spirit of Allah (Ruhullah) and The Word of Allah (Kalimatullah) is asked the question as to why did his people make him a partner of God, he would be upset despite his being a great prophet and would hasten to plead his being free from what his followers did, not in one way, but in more than one. First he said. سُبْحَانَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِي أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ (Pure are You, it does not be-hove me to say what is not right for me – 116).

Then, he pleads his innocence from another angle when he makes Almighty Allah his witness and says: ` Had I said it, You would have known it. You know what is in my heart and I do not know what is in Your’s. You alone have the full knowledge of what is unseen – 116.’ Af¬ter this overture, he answers the main question.

The Answer given by Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) before His Lord

His answer was that he had taught his people precisely what he was commanded to teach, that is: أَنِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّـهَ رَ‌بِّي وَرَ‌بَّكُمْ (Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord – 117). Then, after this teaching, as long as he lived among those people, he was a witness to what they said and did (upto that time, none of them said things like that about him). Then, after he was raised by his Lord towards Him, these people remained under His watch, and it is He who knew their words and deeds fully and truly.

The Mention of Special Blessings on Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام)

Before these verses where questions asked and their answers given by Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) have been mentioned, special blessings which were bestowed upon him as his miracles have also been described (110). Thus, by bringing the bestowal of blessings and the scenario of an¬swerability in juxtaposition, both groups of Bani Isra’il have been ad-monished, one of which insulted, accused and harassed him while the other took him as God or son of God. By describing the blessings, the first group has been admonished while, by mentioning the questions and answers, it is the second group which has been warned. The detailed description of blessings which appears in many verses has one sentence which is worth special consideration, the sentence where it is said: تُكَلِّمُ النَّاسَ فِي الْمَهْدِ وَكَهْلًا ۖYou spoke to the people when in the cradle and while middle-aged). In other words, a special miracle given to Sayyid¬na ` Isa (عليه السلام) was that he talked to people in a state when he is a child, and he also does that in a state when he is middle-aged.

As for the first spectacle, it is obvious that it is a miracle and cer¬tainly a special blessing of Allah. In the early post-birth stage, chil¬dren cannot talk (meaningfully). If a child were to start talking in the cradle or on the laps of the mother, that would be a particular distinc¬tion of the child. As for talking ` while middle-aged,’ it does not seem to be worth mentioning, for everyone talks at this age. But, for a mo¬ment, think of the conditions surrounding Sayyidna ` Isa and you will realize that this too was a miracle – because Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) was raised from the earth before reaching middle-age. Now that he would talk to people on the earth after reaching his middle-age can become possible only when he returns to this world – as is the collective belief of Muslims which stands proved on the basis of clear statements of the Qur’an and Sunnah. It is from here that we find out that in the man¬ner it was a miracle of Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) that he talked when a child, so in the same manner, talking while middle-aged because of his return to this world is nothing but a miracle.

Important Notes

1. In the first verse (116), the question asked and the answer given by Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) establishes that Allah alone has the full knowledge of everything, therefore, He is not asking Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) because He does not know. In fact, the purpose is to admonish his people who call them Christians that the one they are taking to be god is himself confessing to his servitude quite contrary to the belief they hold – and that he is free of all their accusations. (Ibn Kathir)
2. About the sentence: فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّ‌قِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ (And when You picked me up You were the One watching over them) in verse 117, a de-tailed discussion of the subject of the ` death’ or ` having been raised to-ward Allah’ has appeared in the Commentary on Surah Al-‘Imran un¬der verse 3:55: إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَ‌افِعُكَ (I am to take you in full and lift you towards Me). It may be seen there [ Ma` ariful-Qur’an, English Translation, Volume II, pages 76-81]. As for using the verse 117 : فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي ` falamma taw¬affaitani) to reject his ascension to heavens and to establish his natu¬ral death is not a sound inference, because the time of this conversa¬tion shall be the day of Qiyamah – and at that time, after he has descended down from the heaven, he would have had his natural and real death. Therefore, as reported by Ibn Kathir on the authority of a narration from Sayyidna Abu Musa al-Ash` ari (رض) ، the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: On the day of Qiyamah, the prophets and their communi¬ties will be summoned. Then, Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) will be called. Then, Allah Ta` ala will remind him of His blessings and drawing him closer, He will say, ` O ` Isa son of Maryam: اذْكُرْ‌ نِعْمَتِي عَلَيْكَ وَعَلَىٰ وَالِدَتِكَ Remember My blessing upon you and upon your mother.’ Then, in the end, He would say: يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْ‌يَمَ أَأَنتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَـٰهَيْنِ مِن دُونِ اللَّـهِ : ( O ` Isa son of Maryam, did you say to the people: Take me and my mother as gods beside Al¬lah?). Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) will deny it saying that he did not. Then, the ques¬tion will be asked from the Christians. They will say, ` yes, this is what he had ordered us to do.’ After that, they will be driven towards Hell.

1. As for the statement beginning with the words: إِن تُعَذِّبْهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ عِبَادُكَ (If You punish them, they are Your slaves … ) appearing in the last verse (118), it means that Allah does not bring undue hardship on His servants, therefore, if punishment does come to them, it will only be just, right and wise. And should He forgive them, then, this forgiveness too will not be a matter of not being able to do otherwise – because He is Mighty, fully-capable and overpowering, from whose reach and control no wrong-doer can escape. And since He is Wise too, therefore, it is also not possible that He would let a wrong-doer walk away just for no reason. Thus, the Divine verdict in the case of wrong-doers will be absolutely wise and masterly. Since this saying of Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) will take place in the Mahshar (the day of Resurrection) – where no intercession on behalf of the disbelievers, or appeal of mercy for them, will be entertained – therefore, Sayyidna ` Isa (عليه السلام) has not referred to the Divine attributes of Ghafurur-Rahim (the Most-Forgiving, the Very-Merciful) in place of “Al-` Aziz Al-Hakim” (the Mighty, the Wise) of the text. This stands in contrast with what Sayyidna Ibrahim (عليه السلام) had said to his Lord during his life in this world: رَ‌بِّ إِنَّهُنَّ أَضْلَلْنَ كَثِيرً‌ا مِّنَ النَّاسِ ۖ فَمَن تَبِعَنِي فَإِنَّهُ مِنِّي ۖ وَمَنْ عَصَانِي فَإِنَّكَ غَفُورٌ‌ رَّ‌حِيمٌ ﴿٣٦﴾ (That is, 0 my Lord, these [ idols ] have made many of the people go astray. Henceforth, whoever has followed me is one of mine. And whoever has disobeyed me, so then, You are the Most-Forgiving, the Very-Merciful – 14:36). It means that the likeli¬hood still exists that Allah may, in His mercy, give them the Taufiq later on to repent and return to the path of truth and thereby forgive their sins. (Shabbir Ahmad Usmani – Notes)

Ibn Kathir reports a narration from Sayyidna Abu Dharr (رض) that once the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) spent a whole night reciting one single verse. And that verse was: إِن تُعَذِّبْهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ عِبَادُكَ (If You punish them, then, they are Your slaves – 118). When morning came, I said: Ya Rasul Allah, you kept reciting just this verse. You made your Ruku` with it and you made your Sujud with it, right upto this break of dawn. He said: I prayed to my Rabb to bless me with the station of interces¬sion (Shafa’ ah), which He granted. Inshallah, it is going to be for one who has never associated anyone with Allah Ta` ala.

According to another narration, after reciting the verse cited above, he raised his hands facing the heaven and said: اَللَّھُمَّ اُمَّتِی (Allahumma Ummati that is, ` 0 Allah, mercy – mercy on my people.’ And then he wept. Thereupon, Allah Ta` ala sent angel Jibra’il (عليه السلام) to ask why would he weep. He told the angel what he had said. Then, Allah Ta` ala asked angel Jibra’il to go back and tell Muhammad that He will please him soon in his concern for his people and will not let him be unhappy.

The Linkage of Verses

The first two sections (Ruku`) appearing earlier describe some of the happenings on the day of Qiyamah such as the reckoning, the ques¬tions and their answers. Mentioned now is the outcome of the probe and reckoning of that fateful day.

Notes

1. Verse 119 opens with the words: قَالَ اللَّـهُ هَـٰذَا يَوْمُ يَنفَعُ الصَّادِقِينَ صِدْقُهُمْ (Allah said, “This is a day the truth of the truthful shall bring benefit to them). Generally, what is according to what has happened is called truth while that which is not according to what has hap¬pened is referred to as false or a lie. But, according to the -Qur’an and Sunnah, sidq (truth) and kidhb کِذب (lie) are general, that is, they refer to both words and deeds. As such, given here is a Hadith in which counter-factual deed has been called kidhb مَن تَحَلَّی بِمَا لَم یُعطَ کَانَ کَلَابِسِ ثَوبَی زُورِ [ that is, whoever adorns himself (or herself) with what has not been given to him (or her) (that is, claims a quality or deed not in him or her) then, it is as if he has put on two garbs of a lie – [ Mishkat ].

There is another Hadith in which one who makes Salah with care and concern, whether in public or in private, has been called a true servant of Allah:

A person who performs Salah openly, then, does it well; and when performs it in private, then, does it well, then, Allah Ta’ala says: ` This is My servant – in truth. – Mishkat.

2. About the statement: رضِيَ اللَّـهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَ‌ضُوا عَنْهُ (Allah is pleased with them, and they are pleased with Him – 119), it appears in Ha¬dith that, after having blessed true believers with Jannah (Paradise), Allah Ta` ala will say: The real blessing is that I am pleased with you and now I shall never be displeased with you.
3. The words appearing after that are: ذَٰلِكَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيمُ (That is the great achievement). Indeed, so it is. When Allah Jalla Sha’nuhu, the Master, the Creator is pleased with you, what else could it be?

[From Ma’ariful Quran English by Mufti Taqi Uthmani]