1. The word 'believers' referred to in this verse stands for those who embraced the Prophet's call, accepted him as their guide and leader, and willingly consented to follow the way of life expounded by him.

The Arabic word falāḥ means success and prosperity. It is used as an antonym of khusrän which signifies loss and failure. To say that someone has acquired falaḥ therefore, amounts to saying that he has achieved his objective; that he has attained prosperity and well-being, that his efforts have borne fruit, and that his condition has ameliorated.

The opening statement of this surah, namely that 'the believers have indeed attained true success', can only be appreciated with reference to the circumstantial background against which this discourse was revealed. At the time of its revelation, the chief opponents of the Message of Islam consisted, on the one hand, of the wealthy notables of Makka whose trade was flourishing, who enjoyed all the appurtenances of worldly prosperity. On the other hand, there were the followers of Islam. In sharp contrast to the former, most of them were in a poor and wretched condition when they embraced Islam. Only a few Muslims belonged to well-to-do families or had achieved some success in business. Even they, however, were reduced to severe adversity because of the persecution and pressures to which they were subjected by their own people.

Given this background, the opening verse which proclaims the success and prosperity of the believers suggests that man-made standards of success and failure are false; that the assumptions entertained by men in this regard are ill-founded; that they lack the correct vision that enables them to have a long-range view of things. No wonder, for what they conceive of as success and prosperity is nothing but sheer loss and failure. Likewise, contrary to the claim of their contemporaries who thought of the believers as those who had failed and had incurred utter loss, the followers of the Prophet (peace be on him) were indeed those who had attained true success. By responding to the call to embrace the truth they had not struck a bad bargain; rather they had been fortunate in obtaining what would confer on them lasting success in both this life and the Next. By their refusal to embrace the call to the truth, the unbelievers, in contrast, had incurred a serious loss, the dire consequences of which would afflict them in this world and in the Hereafter.

This idea forms the central theme of the surah and the whole discourse from the beginning to the end is focused on driving home this point.

2. Verses 1-9 set forth the qualities of the believers. Veritably, these qualities serve as evidence in support of the claim that it is the act of believing that led the believers to success. In other words: how can those who have developed such wholesome qualities in their lives owing to their faith not attain true success? If they cannot be successful, then who can?

3. The true meaning of khushu' is to lower oneself before someone, to be submissive, to display humility. The state called khushu' is related both to the heart and to the outward condition of one's bodily organs. The khushu' of the heart consists in man's feeling of being overwhelmed by someone's awe, grandeur and majesty. As for khushu' of the bodily organs, it manifests itself in a number of ways: one's head is lowered in the presence of him whom one holds in awe; the organs of the body are loosened; one's gaze is downcast; one speaks in a subdued voice. In short, outward khushu' covers all the physical manifestations. which naturally appear when one comes face to face with someone exceedingly mighty and awesome. In the context of Prayer, khushu' signifies both the state of the heart and its outward manifestations. In fact, khushu' is the essential spirit of Prayer. It is reported in a ḥadīth that once the Prophet (peace be on him) observed someone playing with his beard during Prayer. On this he observed: 'Had his heart been in a state of humility [before God] the organs of his body would also have been in a state of humility.' (Cited by Alūsi in his Rūḥ al-Ma'ānī, vol. 18, p. 3 - Ed.)

Although khushu' is essentially a condition of the heart which also manifests itself outwardly, the Shari'ah does additionally prescribe certain rules which are required to be observed in Prayer. These serve two purposes. First, they help create the state of mind that is conducive to khushu'. Second, while the state of khushu' naturally vacillates, these rules ensure that at least a certain minimum of khushu' is observed at the outward level. For instance, one of these rules is that during Prayer one should neither move one's head left or right, nor should one look upward. At most, one can cast glances out of the corner of one's eyes. According to the Ḥanafi and Shafi'i schools, even one's gaze should not go beyond the spot on which one prostrates. However, the Malikī school is of the opinion that all one is required to do is to look straight ahead [i.e. one's gaze may go beyond the spot on which one prostrates]. It is also forbidden to move about or bend in different directions while one is praying. Likewise, it is also forbidden to fold one's clothes over and over again, or to brush them or play with them. People have also been directed not to clean the place on which they sit or perform prostration while they are bending to prostrate. It is also inconsistent with the etiquette of Prayer to stand in an overly erect position, or to recite the Qur'an too loudly, or to recite it in a sing-song style. Similarly, to yawn or belch loudly during Prayer is not consistent with the good manners of praying. To perform the Prayer too hastily is also highly disapproved of. It is rather required that each part of the Prayer should be performed with deliberation and care, with peace and tranquillity. Not until one has completed one part of the Prayer, such as prostration, rising or sitting down, can one proceed to the next part. If one is put to inconvenience by something, it can be driven away with one hand. What is, however, disallowed is that one should violently move or engage both hands in anything other than the rituals of Prayer.

Apart from observing these outward rules, it is exceedingly important that while praying one should avoid thinking deliberately about irrelevant matters. Should some such ideas involuntarily come to one's mind, once or even constantly, there is nothing to worry about for that is man's natural weakness. Yet one should try one's level best that one's heart remain oriented to God, and that the statements made by one's tongue accord with what one's heart also feels. During Prayers if some unrelated ideas involuntarily come to mind all one is required to do is turn one's attention away from them and direct it instead towards Prayer. This should be done as soon as one realizes, i.e. becomes aware, of this interference.

4. The word laghw signifies all that is useless, irrelevant and fruitless. All things, be they words of the mouth or actions of the body, which have no utility, which lead to no beneficial results, which are neither genuinely needed nor serve any useful purpose, fall under the purview of laghw.

We have translated mu'riḍün () as those 'who avoid whatever is vain and frivolous . . .' We are conscions, however, that this expression fails to do full justice to what the Qur'an says here. The thrust of the verse is that the believers do not concern themselves with things that are vain and frivolous; they rather pay no attention to them at all. They even abstain from approaching places where people are engaged in frivolous things let alone directly participate in them. If they come face to face with frivolities, they simply move away and scrupulously pass them by; and if they are confronted with them, they remain detached and withdrawn. This is what has been said elsewhere in the Qur'an: "The believers do not bear witness to falsehood and, if they pass by a vain thing, they pass by it with honourable avoidance' (al-Furqan 25: 72).

What has been pithily stated here in just a few words in fact constitutes one of the most vital characteristics of a believer. A true believer is he who is always conscious of his duties. He looks at his being placed in the world as though he were in an examination hall where he is taking a test. Life to him amounts to being put in a position in which it is required of him to complete his examination. Such realization makes him behave in the manner of a serious-minded student who, while seated in the hall, fully concentrates on the examination, knowing that the time allocated to him to complete the test is very short. Like the student he is also conscious that the few hours granted to him for so doing is extremely crucial for his future career. He, therefore, utilizes each and every second so that he might give his best possible performance. Without wasting a single moment, a believer spends all the time available to him on pursuits which produce beneficial results. Even in selecting his leisure activities, he chooses those that eventually produce better results. Rather than being inclined to 'kill time', he regards time as a precious and invaluable commodity which he naturally tries to utilize in the best possible way.

Moreover, a believer is blessed with good taste, chaste temperament and fine sensibility. He is not attracted to things that are obscene or vulgar. He engages in useful conversation, but certainly not silly gossip. He enjoys humour, wit and refined jokes, but he refrains from vulgarity, obscene jokes and clownishness. He is not someone who is habituated to silly chatting. He is tormented if he is placed in bad company or a society rife with abuse, back-biting, evil insinuations, lying, dirty songs and obscene talk. It may be remembered that one of the numerous bounties of Paradise that the Qur'an mentions is that in it one will not come across any word that is vain: 'In it [i.e. Paradise] they shall hear no vanity' (al-Ghashiyah 88: 11).

5. The significance of 'observing Zakāh' is entirely different from paying Zakāh, and it is a mistake to overlook the difference between the two meanings. It would appear important that in this verse whilst describing the attributes of believers, the Qur'an departs from the usual usage yu'tūn al-zakāh, 'they pay zakāh', and employs instead the unusual expression li al-zakāt fā'ilun, 'they observe zakāh'. In Arabic, zakāh signifies two things: (1) purity, and (2) growth.

To remove all that obstructs the growth of a thing and to enable its essence to grow are the two concepts that bring out the full meaning of zakāh. When this word is employed in the Islamic context, it applies to (1) the amount of wealth that is given away in order to achieve purification; and (2) the striving to purify oneself. Had the expression been yu'tūn al-zakāh, they pay zakāh, it would simply have meant that believers give away a part of their wealth so as to purify themselves. This would have restricted the act simply to giving away wealth. The actual expression used here, however, is li al-zakāt fā'ilūn which signifies that the believers are actively engaged in purification. In such a case, the matter does not end with their giving away part of their wealth, rather it embraces a whole range of acts including purification of one's self, purification of one's morality, purification of one's wealth; in sum, the purification of virtually everything.

Moreover, this is a wide-ranging concept according to which the process of purification is not confined to the life of an individual, but extends to the lives of all those amidst whom we live. It is better, therefore, to understand the present verse as meaning that the believers are those who are constantly engaged in the task of purification. In other words, they seek to purify themselves as well as others. They not only try to purify themselves but also to bring about purification in the world outside themselves. The Qur'an also refers to this aspect of the believers' concern in other places: "Those who purify themselves, and remember the name of their Lord and perform Prayer will prosper' (al-A'lā 87: 14-15). "Truly he who caused it to grow it [to wit his self] succeeds; and he who corrupts it, fails' (al-Shams 91: 9-10).

The present verse, however, has a wider connotation than the two mentioned above. For, whereas the other verses emphasize the task of self- purification, the present verse concentrates on the act of purification itself; one that embraces both the individual and society.

6. This means two things. First, that the believers cover the private parts of their body; that is, they shun nudity. Second, that they guard their chastity and modesty; that they are not unfettered in the exercise of their sexual urges. (For further elaboration see al-Nur 24, nn. 30-2 below.)

7. This parenthetical statement is made in order to dispel any misconception which might arise from the above statement about strictly guarding one's private parts. Some people have believed in the past as some people also believe now that the sexual urge is, in itself, an evil. Such people are of the opinion that it is unbecoming of those who are righteous, of those who are truly devoted to God to fulfil their sexual desires even in a perfectly legitimate way. It is possible that such a misconception might have been strengthened if the statement had ended on the note that believers who guard their private parts are those who succeed. This could, however, have given the wrong message that piety demands that people practise absolute abstinence, lead an hermatic and reclusive life, and stay away from all the botherations of conjugal life. The Qur'an, therefore, makes the additional remark in parenthesis that there is nothing inherently bad in fulfilling one's sexual desires providing it is done in a legitimate manner. Sin only entails that one exceeds the legitimate limits and seeks to gratify one's sexual urges beyond what is appropriate and lawful.

Several rules can be derived from the above Qur'anic statement, rules that we will attempt below to state succinctly:

(1) It is made clear that one need not guard one's private parts from two kinds of women - one's wives and slave-girls. The first category consists, according to Arabic usage and several Qur'anic statements, of those women whom one has duly married. The second category are termed as mā malakat aymanuhum. Use of this expression in both the Arabic language as well as the instances of its use in the Qur'an make it quite evident that it signifies slave-girls, i.e. women whom one has come to possess.

Thus, this verse makes it clear that it is perfectly lawful for a person to have sexual relations both with one's wives and the slave-girls in one's possession. Likewise, it is clear from this verse that with regard to the latter it is not marriage, but ownership which provides the legitimizing basis for sexual relations with them. Had marriage alone been the legitimate ground for sexual relations, there would have been no need to mention a separate category because any woman whom a person marries would fall in the category of azwāj (wives).

Some Qur'ānic commentators of our own time who deny the legitimacy of sexual relations with slave-girls, refer to the following verse in support of the doctrine that one is only allowed to have such relations with one's wives: 'And those of you who cannot afford to marry free believing women (muḥṣanāt), then marry such believing women whom your right hands possess' (al-Nisa' 4: 25).

They argue on the basis of this verse that sexual relations with slave- girls can be established only after marrying them. For, this verse of Surah al-Nisa' states, that if one does not have the means to marry free believing women, then one may marry a slave-girl, or so they contend. It is, however, strange that these scholars cite only that particular part of the Qur'ānic verse which suits their purpose and leave aside the remaining element which goes against their position. The verse in question actually lays down the following code for marrying slave-girls: 'Marry them, then, with the leave of their guardians, and give them their bridal-due in a fair manner' (al-Nisa' 4: 25). Now quite obviously this verse is not addressed to the owners of slave- girls, but to those who intend to marry a slave-girl who is in someone else's possession. Such a person, if he does not have the resources to marry a free woman, is being directed to marry a slave-girl with the permission of her owner. Had the verse related to the owners themselves, the statement about obtaining the owner's leave would be quite redundant. Nonetheless, those who are bent on distorting the meaning and message of the Qur'an highlight only that part which pertains to marrying slave-girls, and suppress the statement made about the leave of their guardians.

Moreover, this incorrect inference runs counter to the directive laid down in other places in the Qur'an. Anyone who is interested in making an honest and objective study of this question with the intention so as to find the true Qur'ānic position should read the above verse in conjunction with the following verses: al-Nisa' 4: 3 and 25, al-Aḥzāb 33: 50-2, and al-Ma'ārij 70: 30. Taken together, these clearly spell out the Qur'ānic position on the issue. (For further details see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. II, al-Nisa' 4, n. 44, pp. 26-8 and the author's Tafhīmāt, vol. 2, pp. 290-324, and Rasa'il wa Masā’il, vol. 1, pp. 324–33).

(2) The use of the proposition ‘alā in making an exception of those with whom one is not required to guard one's private parts (illā ‘alā azwājihim aw mã malakat aymānuhum), makes it all the more clear that the law that is being laid down here is specifically meant for men. However, what has been stated in verses 1 to 11 of the sūrah, is equally applicable to both men and women despite the fact that the pronoun hum (in verse 2) is masculine. This is so because in Arabic the masculine pronoun is used to denote a group of people consisting of genders. However, in the command relating to the guarding of private parts an indication is given that the meaning applies only to males, this by use of the preposition ‘alā. Had the preposition li been used instead of 'alā, it would have covered both males and females.

Unable to grasp this subtle nuance, a woman in the time of Caliph 'Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb had sexual relations with her male slave. When the matter was reported in a gathering of the Prophet's Companions, they unanimously expressed the opinion that she had interpreted the Book of God incorrectly.

This should not, however, give rise to the misunderstanding that since this exception applies to males alone, it is not lawful for wives to have sexual relations with their husbands. Such a misconception is pointless since husbands have not been asked to guard their private parts from their wives. Thus, the same command applies to wives in relation to their husbands. Quite obviously, no further clarification or elaboration on this count was needed.

In sum, the above exception is practically confined to relations between males an their slave-girls. As a corollary of this rule, it is unlawful for women to have sexual relations with their male slaves. This prohibition for women is accounted for by virtue of the fact that while a male slave would be able to fulfil the woman's sexual desires, he would not be able, because of his slavery, to become the head (qawwām) of the family. As a consequence of such a relationship, the foundations of family life would be weakened.

(3) The words of the verse: 'But those who seek beyond that such are the transgressors', prohibit all forms of sexual relations, except the two specified in the verse. These words not only prohibit sexual relations with all those women who do not fall into the above two categories, but also prohibit such relations with other males as also with all animals. The only form of sexual gratification about which there is some disagreement among jurists is masturbation. Aḥmad ibn Hanbal regarded it as lawful while Mālik and Shafi 'I considered it totally forbidden. The Ḥanafi school whilst looking upon it as an unlawful act, is of the view that if someone is overpowered by sexual passion to commit such an act occasionally rather than habitually, God might pardon him.

(4) Some commentators on the Qur'an cite this verse to prove the prohibition of mut'ah (temporary marriage). They argue that a woman in temporary marriage is neither a wife nor a slave-girl. So far as her not being a slave-girl is concerned, this is quite obvious. Now as far as her being a wife is concerned, we find that none of the laws with regard to marriage apply to her. She neither inherits her male partner nor does the latter inherit her. Nor is the waiting period ('iddah) applicable in her case, nor divorce or maintenance, nor the other rules in respect to matters pertaining to marriage such as īlā', zihār and li‘ān. A temporary wife is also not counted as one of the four wives, the maximum one may have at any time. As she does not belong to the category of either wife or slave-girl, those who have sexual relations with temporary wives fall into the category of those 'who seek beyond what is lawful', and such people have been branded by the Qur'ān as transgressors. (See verse 7.).

This argument appears quite weighty, yet it is marred by the fact that it is difficult to say with absolute certainty that the verse categorically forbids mut'ah. The Prophet Muḥammad (peace be on him) forbade mut'ah in a categorical and definitive manner in the year of the conquest of Makka. That mut'ah was considered permissible before that is something which is borne out by authentic traditions. Let us suppose that the verse under discussion prohibits mut'ah. Now this verse is unanimously considered a Makkan verse, revealed a few years before the Hijrah. It seems simply inconceivable that the Prophet (peace be on him) would have allowed the practice of mut'ah (temporary marriage) till the conquest of Makka, even though it had been prohibited by the Qur'an. It would, therefore, be safer to hold that mut'ah was not forbidden by any Qur'anic verse, but rather by the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be on him). Had this matter not been clearly resolved by the Sunnah, mut'ah could not be forbidden simply on the basis of this verse.

While discussing the question of mut'ah, two points need to be clarified here. First, that it had been forbidden by the Prophet (peace be on him) himself. It is, therefore, incorrect to say that it was 'Umar who forbade it. The fact is that 'Umar was not the one who prohibited mut'ah, but the one who enforced the prohibition. Mut'ah was prohibited by the Prophet (peace be on him) himself in the very last stages of his life and, hence, its prohibition was not known to everyone. What 'Umar did was to proclaim the prohibition in such a manner that it became widely known. Moreover, he ensured it was duly executed by recourse to the force of law. Second, as for the legal position of the Shi'ah that mut'ah is absolutely lawful, there is no justification for this in any text of the Qur'an or the Sunnah. In the early period of Islam, the few Companions and Successors who held mut'ah to be lawful confined its lawfulness to highly exceptional circumstances, to circumstances of extreme compulsion and necessity. None of them believed mut'ah to be unconditionally lawful in normal circumstances, i.e. a practice that would be as lawful as say contracting marriage.

'Abd Allah ibn 'Abbas is mentioned as the leading authority to hold this practice as lawful. It is significant that Ibn 'Abbas mentions the lawfulness of mut'ah in the following words: 'It is no different from the carrion which is not lawful for anyone except for him who is compelled to eat it.' (See Jaṣṣāṣ, vol. 2, p. 147 - Ed.) Ibn 'Abbās did, however, recant his position when he observed that some people misused the permission and indulged in it freely instead of availing of it only under compulsive circumstances. Disregarding whether Ibn 'Abbās and the very small number of like-minded Companions recanted their positions or not, all those who claim to follow the legal position can avail themselves of the lawfulness of mut'ah only in very exceptional circumstances. There are no grounds, in any case, to consider it unconditionally lawful, even if one has wives whom one has duly married. Practising mut'ah in such a circumstance seems outrageous to a person of sound taste, let alone that its lawfulness be ascribed to the Shari'ah of Muḥammad (peace be on him) and the imams of the Prophet's family.

I believe that no decent person of the Shi'ah community would be happy if someone were to seek to contract mut'ah rather than regular marriage with his sister or daughter. This being the case, if mut'ah were practised, it would be necessary to have a fair number of low-class women, say similar to prostitutes. The other possibility is that women of poor families are subjected to mut'ah by the rich. However, it is unthinkable that either God or the Prophet (peace be on him) would endorse a law that is so flagrantly unjust. Is it plausible that the Shari'ah would sanction a practice which no woman could help but view as brazenly dishonourable and shameless?

8. The word amānāt (trusts) encompasses all types of trust which either God or society or an individual places in someone else's charge.

As for the word 'ahd (pledge), it embraces all covenants between man and God, man and man, and one nation and another. One of the distinguishing characteristics of a believer is that he never betrays a trust and never goes back on his committed word. In his sermons, the Prophet (peace be on him) often used to say: 'He who is not true to his trust is devoid of faith, and he who does not keep to his commitment is devoid of [true] religiosity.' (See Aḥmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, vol. 3, p. 135. See also Bayhaqi, Shu'ab al- Iman - Ed.) A tradition in Bukhārī and Muslim states that the Prophet (peace be on him) said: "There are four attributes which if they are found in some person [it will be deemed that] he is a full-fledged hypocrite. And if someone has any one of these four attributes [it will be deemed that] he has one attribute of hypocrisy until he abandons it. These attributes are: when he is charged with a trust, he betrays it; when he speaks, he lies; when he makes a commitment, he violates it; and when he quarrels, he transgresses [all limits of morality and truthfulness].' (See Bukhārī and Muslim.)

9. In an earlier verse (see verse 2 above) while referring to khushu' it was said that the Believers are those who humble themselves in Prayer (şaläh). There, the word ṣalah was used in the singular whereas in the present verse, the same word is used in the plural. This is because of a difference in the two usages. In the first case, 'Prayer as such was meant, whereas in the second, the word signifies each single, individual Prayer. Thus, safeguarding Prayers in the second instance means that believers safeguard the appointed time of each Prayer, and safeguard all the rituals of which it is composed; in short, they safeguard everything associated with Prayer. Thus, their safeguarding Prayers means that they take full care to keep their bodies and clothes clean, to perform ablution properly, and remain ever vigilant lest they perform any Prayer without ablution. They should also be mindful of performing Prayers at the right time, rather than lazily, allowing the time to go by. They should also perform all the acts related to Prayers with due concentration and equanimity and not treat them as if they were a burden which they would rather get rid of. Rather than mechanically repeating a set of words that one has committed to memory and which one somehow likes to utter and finish with, everything should be recited with full consciousness and in the manner that a servant entreats his master.

10. Firdaws, the most commonly used word for Paradise in the Qur'an, is common to almost all languages. In Sanskrit, we have the word Pardisha, in ancient Kaldian Pardisa, in ancient Persian Pairidaisa, in Hebrew Pardis, in Armenian Pardiz, in Syriac Fardisw, in Greek Paradaisus, in Latin Paradisus and in Arabic we have the word Firdaws. In all these languages the word signifies a large, enclosed garden adjoining one's residence, a garden that abounds in fruits, especially grapes. In some languages the concept also includes the notion of a garden that abounds in pet birds and animals.

The word Firdaws was also used in pre-Islamic Arabic literature. In the Qur'an, it is used to denote a collection of gardens, such as in the following verse: 'As for those who believe and do good works, the Gardens of Paradise shall be there to welcome them' (al-Kahf 18: 107). The image that emerges from this verse is that Firdaws is a very spacious garden full of trees, fruits and flowers.

The idea that the believers would inherit Paradise is also mentioned elsewhere in the Qur'an. For further elaboration, see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. V. Tā Hā 20, n. 83, p. 226 and al-Anbiya' 21, n. 99, pp. 299-302.

11. These verses make four significant points: first, that those who accept the teaching of the Qur'an and the Prophet (peace be on him) as true and develop the attributes enunciated here, will succeed in the present world and in the World to Come.

Second, true success does not accrue merely by a verbal affirmation of faith, nor merely by developing in oneself some good qualities. True success rather requires a combination of both. When a man accepts God's guidance and cultivates good moral qualities in the light of that guidance, he achieves

success.

Third, success does not simply comprise material well-being, nor is it limited to ephemeral worldly success. Instead, man's success consists in a pervasive well-being which embraces unceasing prosperity and well-being both in the present world and in the Hereafter. These can only be attained if one has faith and one is righteous in conduct. This is a universal law and is not negated by the ephemeral prosperity and success of those who are immersed in error. Nor is this law negated by the fact that righteous men of faith are at times temporarily faced with hardship.

Fourth, the attributes of believers are put forward as proof of the truth of Prophet Muḥammad's (peace be on him) mission. It is this aspect of the present verses which links them with the discourse that follows until verse 50.

The argument develops in the following manner. It opens with an empirical proof. It says that the teachings of the Prophet (peace be on him) brought about a moral change in some members of society who had accepted the true faith insofar as they had developed admirable moral qualities. That being the case, it was for the unbelievers to consider how such wholesome changes could have been brought about had the Prophet's teachings not been true.

This is followed by an argument based on observation. It runs as follows: 'There are innumerable signs in the universe around man and within him which conclusively prove the truth of the doctrines of monotheism and of the Hereafter expounded by the Prophet (peace be on him).' These are followed by arguments drawn from human history.

The historical argument is as follows: the conflict between the Prophets and their opponents had been raging since ancient times and the outcome of this conflict was always the same. This clearly shows which party was in the right, and which in the wrong.

12. For elaboration see al-Hajj 22, nn. 5, 6 and 9 above.

13. Anyone who notes the growth of a foetus in a mother's womb will never be able to anticipate what kind of baby will come into being nor what its mental and physical faculties will be. It is impossible for anyone to predict the marvellous achievements that a child may go on to make in different fields by dint of his intellectual ability, wisdom and skill. For, in the beginning every child is no more than a lump of flesh, which up until its birth is possessed of no more than the most rudimentary attributes of life. In these early stages, the foetus is devoid of the faculties of hearing, sight, speech, understanding and reason. Soon after birth, however, a child becomes something quite different from the foetus it originally was. It now makes its mark as one gifted with the faculties of seeing, hearing, and speaking, and one who gradually acquires knowledge through experience and observation. The child also develops, by and by, an ego of its own which, from the very outset, asserts itself in relation to the things around it, and seeks to establish dominance over them. And as the child grows its ego manifests itself as a factor that constantly becomes more conspicuous and full of impact. Later, when the child grows into youth, he or she becomes totally different from the baby that was. At middle age, we again find another change, and with old age the difference is so great from what was visible in the earlier stages of life that it becomes extremely difficult for the younger ones to imagine what this older person looked like in childhood or during youth. Such extraordinary changes do not occur in any other creature on earth. Let a person look at the powers and abilities of a grown-up and then consider that this was once only a drop of sperm which had been dropped in a mother's womb some fifty or sixty years previously and which had all these astonishing qualities latent in it. When one does actually reflect on this one is forced to utter, with wonder and excitement the words that we find in the verse that follows: 'Blessed is Allah, the Best of all those that create.'

فتبارك الله

.

14. The actual words used are The full significance and richness of these words are hard to translate. In terms of lexicography and linguistic usage, the expression embraces two meanings. First, that Allah is extremely Holy and is far above all defects, imperfections and limitations. Second, that Allah is so infinitely Good, Bounteous and Munificent that we always find Him higher than whatever estimate we form of Him. (For further elaboration see al-Furqan 25, nn. 1 and 19 below.)

When both these meanings are taken into consideration, it is clear that the exclamation 'Blessed is Allah' at the conclusion of the account of the different stages of man's creation by God, serves not only to exalt God, but in fact constitutes the natural conclusion of the argument. What is brought home here is that God, Who develops the extract of clay into a fully-fledged man, is far too Holy to have any partner in His Godhead. Likewise, He is far too great to be incapable of re-creating man whom He created in the first instance. It would also be a very low estimate of God to think that His creative capacities ceased once He created man and that, thereafter, He became bereft of the ability to further create.

15. The actual word used is țară'iq which signifies both 'paths' and 'layers'. (See t-r-q in Lisān al-'Arab - Ed.) If the term is taken in the first sense, it means the orbit of the seven planets. Since man at that time knew only of seven planets, hence only those orbits are mentioned. This statement does not mean that there are no other orbits. On the other hand, if we consider

bin

the second sense, it means an expression used elsewhere in the Qur'an, 'seven heavens one layer upon the other' (al-Mulk 67: 3).

In the present verse it is said that God 'fashioned above you seven paths...' Its simple meaning is what the words clearly convey in the first instance. But the statement also seems to emphasize God's greatness insofar as He created the heavens whose creation is a much greater achievement than the creation of man. This is quite in consonance with what the Qur'an has said elsewhere: 'Indeed the creation of the heavens and the earth is greater than the creation of man' (al-Mu'min 40: 57).

16. Alternatively, this verse can be rendered as follows: 'We were never [nor are] oblivious of the creatures.'

The idea expressed here is that it is quite evident from everything God has created that it has neither been created purposelessly nor is it the creation of someone devoid of skill. On the contrary, God's creation conforms to a well- considered plan, with the result that all parts of His creation reveal a high degree of mutual harmony and coordination. Purposiveness is also evident from every aspect of this vast universe and this conclusively points to the wisdom of its Creator.

Alternatively, if the verse is understood in the second sense (namely 'We were never oblivious of the creatures'), it would mean that God has never been negligent of the needs of any of His creatures, nor has He ever been unaware of the state they are in. The result is that God has never allowed anything to go in a direction opposed to His plans, nor has he ever been negligent in providing for the natural requirements of anything. God has always been mindful of all His creation, be it a tiny particle or the leaf of a tree, or anything else.

17. This may be understood to mean seasonal rainfall. When one considers the words of the verse, however, one might be inclined to accept another meaning as well: that at the time of creating the universe, God provided it with water through one huge downpour. Thanks to God's infinite knowledge, He provided through this downpour water in a quantity that would suffice for the earth's needs for all time to come. The water that was so provided accumulated in the recesses of the earth, giving rise to seas, gulfs, and sub- soil water. It is this accumulation of water which is kept rotating through the varying seasons and winds. The original resource of water continues to be distributed through rains, snow-clad mountains, rivers, springs, and wells. This very accumulation of water enters into the process of creation and into the composition of a variety of things. Then it also becomes part of the wind and eventually returns to the same original resource of water. Thus, from the beginning until today the total quantity of water has neither increased nor decreased by as much as a single drop.

What is even more astonishing is that water is composed of two gases, namely hydrogen and oxygen, which were released only once in such quantity and right proportion that a vast quantity of water was produced which continues to fill the seas and oceans and no fresh supply is added to it. So who is it who prevents hydrogen and oxygen from intermingling, even though both gases are found in the world, with the result that not a drop of water has been added to the original reservoir of water? We also know that water evaporates into air. Again who is it who prevents the two gases from separating after this evaporation? Do atheists have any answers to these questions? Or can all this be satisfactorily explained by those who believe in a multiplicity of gods, who believe that there are separate gods of wind and water, of heat and cold?

18. There are numerous means by which water can be made to disappear: God is quite capable of cutting off the supply of this vital life source by any of these means. Thus, this verse further extends the import of the one which

follows: 'What do you consider, if one morning your water were to vanish in the earth who would then supply you with clear flowing water?' (al-Mulk 67: 30).

19. This refers to a wide variety of dry and fresh fruits in addition to dates and grapes.

20. Orchards and farms provide man with many forms of livelihood - fruits, grains, timber and much, much more. The words used in the verse are in which the pronoun is related to the word jannāt (gardens), rather than to fawäkih (fruits). As for the word ta'kulun it does not simply mean that 'people eat the fruits of these gardens', it rather conveys the wider meaning of deriving a livelihood from them.

21. This alludes to the olive, the most important product in all the lands around the Mediterranean Sea. The olive tree lasts for one and a half to two thousand years. Olive trees live for so long that on the basis of the height and breadth of some in Palestine it is estimated that they date back to the days of the Prophet Jesus (peace be on him):

The olive tree is mentioned here in association with Mount Sinai. This presumably is because the original habitat of the olive tree is Mount Sinai which in turn is the most prominent place in that region.

22. This refers to milk. At another place the Qur'ān speaks of it as something produced from what is within the bodies of animals, between excretion and blood (see al-Naḥl 16: 66).

23. Cattle and ships are juxtaposed here because the Arabs mostly used camels for transportation. Now, the camel has been known for a very long time as the 'ship of the desert'. In the poetry of Dhu'l-Rumnah, a pre-Islamic poet of Arabia, we come across the following line:

سفينة بر تحت خدي زمامها

("The ship of the desert, its rein is under my cheek.')

24. For comparison see al-A'raf 7: 59–64; Yūnus 10: 71-3; Hūd 11: 25 and 48; Bani-Isrā'il 17: 3; and al-Anbiya' 21: 76-7.

25. The unbelievers are asked: do they not have fear when they worship other than their true God? Are they not fearful of the terrible consequences of serving and obeying others than the One True God when they live in the realm of He Who is the true Lord and Master of the whole universe and of themselves as well?

26. All those who have wandered away from the True Path share one common error - that a human being cannot become a Prophet; and that Prophets are not human beings. It is for this reason that the Qur'an repeatedly declared this idea to be altogether false, emphasizing that all the Prophets were human. The Qur'an also says that in order to carry out the functions of the Prophetic office effectively, he who is sent to human beings should be one of them. (See for further details al-A'raf 7: 63 and 69; Yunus 10: 2; Hūd 11: 27 and 31; Yusuf 12: 109; al-Ra'd 13: 38; Ibrāhīm 14: 10-11; al-Nahl 16: 43; Bani-Isrā'il 17: 94-5; al-Kahf 18: 110; al-Anbiya' 21: 3 and 34; al-Mu'minun 23: 33 and 47; Fussilat 41: 6 and also the relevant notes.)

27. The enemies of the truth have always been wont to charge that the activity of reformers is actuated by their hunger for power. This very charge was levelled by Pharaoh against Moses and Aaron and was phrased in the form of the following question 'Have you come to turn us away from the way of our forefathers that the two of you might become supreme in the land?' (Yūnus 10: 78). The Prophet Jesus (peace be on him) was also subjected to a similar accusation: that he was striving to become the king of the Jews. The unbelieving Quraysh entertained the same suspicion about the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be on him). Hence, they made several attempts to entice him into striking a bargain with them. They suggested that if he sought power, they were willing to accept him as their sovereign.

It is inconceivable for those who ceaselessly hanker after worldly benefits, after pomp and glory, to appreciate that anyone can strive simply for the good of mankind, and that all such striving be absolutely sincere and selfless. Such people are wont to come up, every now and then, with catchy slogans and lay false claims to be working for the common welfare of all. They do so even though the true purpose of their effort is nothing else but to achieve power and influence. Furthermore, they regard craftiness and deception as absolutely natural. No wonder then that they tend to believe that no one can call for reform sincerely and altruistically. If someone does call for reform, he must inevitably be prompted, like them, by some ulterior motive. For example, as a subterfuge for the realization of his own selfish designs.

It is also interesting that accusations of hungering after power are always hurled at reformers by those who have been able to entrench themselves in power or by their sycophantic cronies. They seem to believe that the power they enjoy is their birth-right. Hence, if they strive to wrest power from others and to perpetuate their hold on it, all is viewed as perfectly legitimate. But it becomes altogether objectionable if anyone else, someone who has no birth- right to enjoy power, shows the least sign of hungering for it. (For further elaboration see n. 36 below.)

It is pertinent at this stage to point out that whoever rises with the purpose of purging the prevalent order of its evils and expounds a reformist idea and programme is bound to confront the forces that obstruct and oppose such reform. In time, the reformer will naturally make efforts to remove these obstructions, and seek to bring to power those forces that will implement and enforce his ideas and programmes. Additionally, if and when the call for such reform succeeds, that reformer will naturally be invested with leadership and will himself either hold the reins of power, or bring to power some of his supporters and followers. Can we identify any single Prophet or reformer whose efforts were not directed at the implementation of his Message? Who of them did not assume the leadership of his people after his call attained success? Given that, does the mere fact of someone's assuming the leadership of his people suffice to accuse him of being power-hungry? It is only those implacable enemies of the truth who can answer this question in the affirmative.

In point of fact, there is a world of difference between seeking power for its own sake and seeking it for a good cause. This difference can be understood if we compare the dagger of a bandit with the knife of a surgeon. Now, it is possible that someone might claim that there is no difference between the bandit's use of his dagger and the surgeon's use of his instruments, i.e. both pierce another person's body with a sharp instrument. Moreover, both of them acquire money from their action. The preposterousness of this line of argument is all too evident even to be stated. For, the two persons radically differ from each other in respect of their intentions and objectives, their modus operandi and their overall role and character. If this were not so, they would not be known by two different names, bandit and surgeon.

- 27a. This statement makes it incontrovertibly clear that the people of Noah (peace be on him) did not deny the existence of God. Nor did they deny that God is the Lord of the universe Who has all angels subservient to His authority. Thus, Noah's people were guilty of polytheism rather than of atheism; guilty of associating others with the attributes, power and authority of God rather than denying His existence.

28. The Prophet Noah implored God to punish those who had been accusing him of deceit: "Then he called on his Lord: "I am one overcome; help me, then, to victory" (al-Qamar 54: 10). The Qur'an also mentions that: 'And Noah said: "O my Lord! Leave not any of the unbelievers, not a single one of them on earth! For if You leave any of them, they will but mislead Your servants, and they will breed none but those that are wicked and ungrateful"' (Nūḥ 71: 26-7).

29. Some scholars are inclined to interpret the word al-tannur to mean the earth. Others have considered it to be the highest point of the earth, and others that it means sunrise. Other scholars though set it as a metaphor, the blowing up of tannur being merely a figure of speech such as the expression meaning the boiling up of turbulence.

There seems little reason, however, to interpret this word figuratively in disregard of its literal meaning. The verse seems to suggest that a particular oven was indeed designated aforetime as the place from which water would start gushing forth. Such an incident, it was believed, would mark the beginning of the Flood. Now, one may feel the need to interpret this word figuratively only if one is not prepared to accept that a flood of such gigantic proportions could have commenced with the eruption of water from an oven. The fact that the starting-point of such an enormous flood was an oven simply shows that the ways of God are indeed strange. Once He decides to inflict a nation with scourge, He strikes from a direction which is even beyond the ken of their imagination.

30. It is significant that God commanded Noah (peace be on him) to thank Him for the total annihilation of a people. This is clear proof of the extent to which the people of Noah (peace be on him) were involved in corruption, wickedness and criminal mischief.

31. To make someone land at a certain place, according to Arabic idiom, has the connotation of entertaining and playing host to him. This Prayer, therefore, amounts to saying to God: 'From now on we are Your guests, and You are our hosts.'

32. This story is full of lessons. Through it we learn that the Prophets who called mankind to monotheism were right whereas those who insisted on polytheism were wrong. It is significant that this was also true of Makka in the time of the Prophet (peace be on him). In fact the Makkan situation at the time of the Prophet Muḥammad closely resembled the situation which obtained in the time of the Prophet Noah (peace be on them). Additionally, the role of the Prophet Muḥammad was similar to the role of the Prophet Noah (peace be on them). Likewise, the attitude of the Makkans at the time of Muḥammad (peace be on him) was similar to that of Noah's people.

This suggests, in a subtle manner, that the unbelieving Makkans were bound to meet the same fate which had befallen Noah's people. God's Judgement might take some time but it was bound to come and when it did, it would undoubtedly be in favour of the votaries of the truth and against the unbelievers.

33. Alternatively, the verse might be translated as follows: 'We had to put them to test' or 'We have to put them to test.' Whatever be the truly correct translation of the verse, its thrust is to warn people. The warning consisted of bringing home to Noah's people that God does not allow any people whom He has invested with authority and power in any part of His earth to go about doing as they wish, and if they do that God will not hold them to account. On the contrary, it is God's rule that such people are constantly under observation. They are watched in order to establish whether they abuse the power that has been bestowed upon them. What befell Noah's people was strictly according to this rule. No nation is God's favourite to such an extent that He leaves them free to go about pouncing upon the treasures of the world, and never calling them to account for their deeds. All have to go through this process.

34. Some scholars consider this to refer to the Thamud. For it is said a little later in this surah that the people of the Thamud were destroyed by a blast (see verse 41 below). We learn from the Qur'an that it was indeed the Thamud who were thus destroyed (Hūd 11: 67; al-Hijr 15: 83; al-Qamar 54: 31). According to other scholars, however, this verse refers to the 'Ad since it is they who succeeded Noah's people: 'And do call to mind when He made successors after the people of Noah' (al-A'raf 7: 69). The latter opinion seems more plausible and seems to be corroborated by the words ‘. . . after the people of Noah'.

As for the reference to the sayḥah (see, for example, Hūd 11: 67 etc.), it was not specific to the Thamud. For it may be taken, in its general sense, to be the scourge which caused death on a massive scale. Moreover, the word sayḥah is also used for that hue and cry which takes place at the time of death on a massive scale, whatever its actual cause.

35. This characterization of the opponents is significant. The ringleaders opposing the Prophet (peace be on him) were those who held the leadership of their people. The error into which all of them had fallen was their denial of Life after Death. Hence, they had no notion of being accountable or answerable to God. This, in turn, was because of their excessive infatuation with worldly life and their refusal to believe in any value above material well-being. The fact that at that time they enjoyed a considerable degree of prosperity totally swamped them in this erroneous belief. They were so deeply engrossed in worldliness that they considered themselves to be right merely because they thrived materially. They were, thus, in no mood to accept that their beliefs, morality and way of life, which they thought to be the main cause of their success in this world could be mistaken. Human history has repeatedly provided evidence of the fact that the opponents of the truth have always held these three features in common. Little wonder, then, that the same scenario obtained in Makka at the time when the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be on him) embarked on his reform movement.

36. Some people have misunderstood this verse to mean that the unbelievers made such statements to one another in their private conversations.

The fact is, however, that such things were said by the notables of society to the common people. The notables had begun to sense the danger that the commoners might be swayed by the distinctly noble character and appealing discourse of the Prophet (peace be on him). They considered this possibility a serious threat to their vested interests, to their positions of power, to their privileges and leadership. It was this realization which prompted them to resort to the vicious propaganda campaign of the kind mentioned earlier, a propaganda deliberately aimed at misleading people.

This represents another aspect of the attitude mentioned earlier with regard to the notables among Noah's people who hurled similar accusations at him (see verse 24 above - Ed.). The notables virtually said that all his claims to be God's Messenger [on the part of Hūd] were merely designed to hood-wink people. All that he was really motivated by was a lust for power. They also claimed that he was in no way different from other people. After all, they said, he too was made of the same flesh and bone as they were. So what justification was there for his wanting to have a position higher than that of anyone else? What was the rationale behind the requirement that others should obey him?

The underlying assumption of their argument, one which these notables took for granted, was that as far as they were concerned, their position of leadership was not open to question. They enjoyed an incontestable status and, hence, no one could raise any question about their authority on the grounds that they were, like everyone else, made of the same flesh and bone. What agitated them was the emerging authority of the Prophet's leadership which seemed to pose a threat to their position. In sum, their arguments were no different from those marshalled by the notables of Noah's community. They too resorted to charging their Prophet with a hunger for power in total disregard of the fact they themselves had not only fully satisfied that hunger, but had stuffed themselves with power well beyond the limit of satiety and were prone to indigestion!

-36a. These words once again clearly indicate that these people, i.e. the 'Ād, like others before them, did not deny the existence of God. Their main error lay in their succumbing to polytheism. The Qur'ān speaks of this fault on several occasions. (See al-A'raf 7: 70; Hūd 11: 53-4; Fuşşilat 41: 14; al- Ahqaf 46: 21-2.)

37. The word used here is ghutha' which denotes the rubble which accompanies the flood and which accumulates and lies rotting on the coast once the water recedes. (See g-h-t-h in Lisān al-'Arab – Ed.)

38. Or to put it differently, they refuse to accept the teachings of the Messengers.

39. The expression 'clear authority' which follows the word 'Signs' signifies that the 'Signs' which had been bestowed upon Moses were sufficient to prove that he indeed was a Messenger who had been raised by God. It is also possible that the word 'Signs' here refers to all Moses' other miracles that were witnessed in Egypt with the exception of the miracle of the rod. As for 'clear authority', this refers to that miracle, i.e. of the rod. Such an expression is understandable because after this miracle it became clear beyond all doubt that the two brothers, Moses and Aaron, had surely been designated by God. (For details see al-Zukhruf 43, nn. 43-4.)

40. The words used here, wa kānū qawman ‘ālīn, mean two things. One is that they were arrogant, iniquitous and oppressive, and the other that they were extremely vain and boastful.

- 40a. For an explanation, see n. 26 above.

41. In this part of the verse the word which is used to characterize the people in question is 'ābid. In Arabic usage, to accept someone as an object of unquestioned obedience and to worship him are almost synonymous. So whoever unreservedly obeys and serves someone appears as though he worships him.

This sheds significant light on the connotation of the term 'ibadah (worship). It also highlights the full significance of the teaching of the Prophets to people: that they should shun the 'ibadah of any other than God and to bind themselves to the 'ibadah of the One True God alone. This also clearly indicates that 'ibadah, as conceived by the Prophets, did not merely consist of consecrating the rituals of worship for God alone. Instead, the Prophets also wanted people to become fully devoted to God alone; devoted to Him in worship as well as servitude. It is in this pervasive sense of 'ibadah that they denied the appropriateness of the 'ibadah of anyone other than the One True God. (For further elaboration see Towards Understanding the Qur'ān, vol. V, al-Kahf 18, n. 50, p. 113.

42. For a more elaborate narration of the story of Moses and Pharaoh see al-Baqarah 2: 49-50; al-A'raf 7: 103-36; Yūnus 10: 75-92; Hūd 11: 96-9; Bani-Isrā'il 17: 101-4; and Tā Hā 20: 9-80.

43. What is said here is not that the son of Mary was a sign of God and that another of His signs was Mary herself. Nor is it being said that Mary and the son of Mary were two signs of God. What is rather said here is that the two of them, taken together, constitute a sign of God. In other words, what is clearly suggested is that it is the extraordinary manner of Jesus' birth, who was born without a father, and the extraordinary way in which Mary conceived him without contact with any male, which combine to make them both a sign of God. All those who, while believing in the Qur'an, deny the immaculate birth of Jesus, i.e. his birth without a father, would be hard put to explain the Qur'anic contention that the mother and the son were a sign of God. (For further details see Towards Understanding the Qur'ān, vol. I, Āl ‘Imrān 3, nn. 44 and 53, pp. 252-4 and 260; vol. II, al-Nisa' 4, nn. 190 and 212-13; pp. 105 and 116-17; vol. V, Maryam 19, nn. 15-22, pp. 152-7 and al-Anbiyā' 21, nn. 89-90, pp. 294-5.)

Two other points seem to merit attention. First, that this account of Jesus and his venerable mother betrays another weakness of those steeped in ignorance. The Prophets who have been mentioned earlier were rejected on the grounds that they were mere human beings, and human beings could not be Prophets. By contrast, the followers of Jesus and Mary developed an exaggerated sense of devotion to them so much so that they ended up elevating them from their human status to one of Godhead. Second, there were also others who refused to believe in Jesus even after they had witnessed his miraculous birth and his ability to speak from his cradle. They even went to the extent of calumniating Mary. No wonder God inflicted a severe punishment on them which became an example for all time to come.

44. This place has variously been identified by scholars as Damascus, Ramlah, Jerusalem, and Egypt. According to Christian traditions, Mary had to leave home twice after the birth of Jesus in order to protect him from harm. First she took him to Egypt during the reign of Herod and stayed there until Herod died. Then, in the days of Archelaus, she took Jesus to Nazareth in Galilee (Matthew 2. 13-23).

It can hardly be stated with any reasonable degree of certitude which place is alluded to by the Qur'an here. The word rabwah literally means an elevated piece of land which has an even surface and stands out in the surrounding area as a result of its height. Now, since this place is described as dhāt qarar (endowed with sedentariness), the place must be one where all necessities of life are found in abundance, such that it is possible for people to live there comfortably. As for the word ma'in, it signifies flowing water or a running stream.

45. After narrating the accounts of several Prophets in the last two sections (i.e. verses 23-50), the discourse is now directed at all Messengers. Quite obviously this does not mean that all Messengers were assembled together at one particular place and addressed collectively. Rather, this manner of address simply signifies that the same directive was given to all the Messengers who were raised at different times and in different places. In this sense, the Messengers represent a single group that had been entrusted with an identical Message. Now, all the Messengers are described as one community, Ummah, (see verse 52 and n. 47 below). Therefore, while mentioning the Messengers the Qur'an adopts a style that suggests that they were so integrated it was as though they were assembled in a single place and received an identical directive.

It is regrettable that the subtlety of the Qur'anic style has eluded the grasp of some people in our own times. The result being that they have concluded from this verse that the words 'O Messengers' addresses Prophets who will be raised after Muḥammad (peace be on him). They further infer from this form of address that the institution of Prophethood would continue even after Muḥammad (peace be on him). It is ironic that those who are so conspicuously incapable of appreciating literary and linguistic subtleties have the audacity to then embark on writing Qur'ānic exegeses.

46. The word al-ṭayyibāt used in the Qur'an signifies things that are at once clean in themselves and which are obtained through clean and lawful means.

The directive to partake of clean things strikes at the two extremes of monasticism and epicureanism and brings into relief the moderate and balanced approach which characterizes Islam. A Muslim should neither deny himself lawful things, nor should he hanker after everything of the world without distinguishing between that which is lawful and that which is not.

It is also significant that the directive to partake of clean things precedes the directive to act righteously. This suggests that righteous behaviour becomes absolutely meaningless if it is not accompanied with the lawfulness of what one eats and the lawfulness of the earning that enables that eating. The very first condition of being righteous is that man should subsist on what is lawful. According to a ḥadīth, the Prophet (peace be on him) said that God is pure and likes pure things. He followed this statement by reciting the above verse, adding: 'A person undertakes a long journey, his clothes are ridden with dirt and his hair is dishevelled, while the food that he eats is unlawful, the drink that he drinks is unlawful, the dress that he wears is unlawful, and his body has been nourished on what is unlawful, and then he raises his hands to the sky and prays: "O my Lord! O my Lord!" Whence can his Prayer be answered?' (See Muslim, K. al-Zakāh, ‘Bāb Qubūl al-Șadaqah min al-Kasb al-Ṭayyib wa Tarbiyatahā', Tirmidhī, K. Tafsir al-Qur'ān, ‘Bāb wa min Surah al-Baqarah', and Aḥmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, vol. 2, p. 328 – Ed.)

47. The statement that 'this community of yours is one community' implies that all the Prophets belong to one and the same group. As it is, the word Ummah signifies a body of people who share a basic principle. The Prophets, even though they belonged to different ages and climes, are designated as one single community, because all shared the same belief, the same religion and the same Message. The words that follow, '. . . I am your Lord', make it quite clear as to what the common basis was that made them one community. (For further details see al-Baqarah 2: 130-3 and 213; Āl 'Imrān 3: 19–20, 33-4, 64, 73 and 85; al-Nisa' 4: 150–2; al-A'raf 7: 59, 65, 73 and 85; Yusuf 12: 37– 40; Maryam 19: 49 and 59, and al-Anbiya' 21: 71-93.)

48. This is not simply a statement of fact. In addition, it is a part of the argument which runs throughout this surah. The main point is that all Prophets, right from the Prophet Noah to Jesus, called their respective people to the same teaching - to affirm the Unity of God and the reality of the Hereafter. It is clear, therefore that Islam, meaning submission to the One True God, is the true, primordial religion of the human species. All other religions that we find today are nothing but distorted forms of this primordial religion. They are an ensemble of some truths of the original faith, albeit in distorted form, along with doctrinal accretions that have accumulated over the course of time. Now, if anyone is in the wrong it is those who follow these distorted religions rather than the Prophet (peace be on him) who, shunning them called people to embrace the true faith.

49. There is a gap between the two sentences. Rather than filling this gap with an explicit statement, it has been left to the good sense of the reader to complete it since the context itself helps one to realize what is left unsaid.

The background to the discourse is that the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be on him) had continuously called people to the true faith for a period of five or six years. In so doing he put forward a variety of arguments to establish his point, not least drawing people's attention to several events in human history to emphasize the truth of his Message. He also drew attention to the wholesome impact of his Message on the lives of those who had accepted it, and he proffered it as corroborative evidence in support of the truth of the Message. The pure and spotless conduct of the Prophet (peace be on him) also made it clear that he was a trustworthy person. Nevertheless, his people continued to exult in the falsehood which they had inherited from their ancestors. Not only did they reject the truth which had been expounded by the Prophet (peace be on him) with persuasive arguments, they even became sworn enemies of the bearer of that truth. This enmity reached such proportions that they did not shrink from employing any means, howsoever vile and despicable, to frustrate the mission of the Prophet (peace be on him). They adamantly opposed the Prophet (peace be on him), taunted and reproached him and used repressive measures including fabricating lies against him.

In order to appreciate the statement made here, 'Leave them immersed in their heedlessness', we ought to bear in mind that it was made after it had been fully shown that the true faith has always been one and the same and that those religions invented later are false. In this context, the above statement amounts to saying in a reproachful tone: 'Well, if these people still refuse to accept the truth and wish to exult in their erroneous ways st leave them alone.'

It is quite obvious that here the use of the imperative 'leave them' cannot be taken in its literal sense, i.e. that the believers should give up preaching the truth to those who are in error. Such an interpretation betrays a total lack of appreciation of the whole tenor of the discourse. A statement such as the above does not imply that preaching of the truth should be abandoned. On the contrary, it is meant to jolt people out of their heedlessness.

Moreover, the use of the words 'till an appointed time' is also meaningful.

It amounts to warning people that their exultation will not last for long; that soon they will come to their senses, and that they will wake up and distinguish between the Message that is being given them and the falsehood in which they are jubilating.

50. For a better understanding of what is said here one should glance at the opening verses of this sūrah, as the content here is substantially the same, albeit in a different manner. The Makkan unbelievers had a very narrow, materialistic conception of success and well-being. In their view, whoever fed or dressed himself well, lived in good houses, was able to obtain wealth and offspring and fame, prestige and a degree of influence should be reckoned as successful. Conversely, whoever failed to attain these was a failure.

This misconception led them to even larger errors. This consisted in their believing that those who enjoyed material prosperity were definitely in the right, they were God's favourites. For had this not been so, they would not have been able to make all those material achievements. Likewise, those who conspicuously lacked such material attainments, so they thought, were definitely not on the Right Path, neither in regard to their belief nor their practice. Instead they were affected with God's Wrath.

The Qur'an repeatedly alludes to this serious misconception, one of the most vital causes of those who follow a materialist way of thinking going astray. The Qur'ān also refutes this misconception and explains the truth of the matter in a variety of ways. (See al-Baqarah 2: 126 and 212; al-Tawbah 9: 55, 69 and 85; Yūnus 10: 17; Hud 11: 3, 27-31 and 38-9; al-Ra'd 13: 26; al-Kahf 18: 28, 32-43, 103 and 105; Maryam 19: 77-80; Tā Hā 20: 131-2, and al-Anbiya' 21: 44, along with the related notes.)

In this connection, there are certain basic points which need to be appreciated for unless they are grasped mental confusion is bound to persist. First, man's success is something more lofty and pervasive than material, or transient worldly achievements.

Second, if those who embrace such a view regard worldly success or lack of it as an index of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil, such a view leads to a basic misconception. In fact, unless one frees oneself from it, one will never be able to find the Straight Way of sound belief and outlook, nor sound conduct and behaviour.

Third, it needs to be emphasized that the present life is meant essentially to test man rather than to recompense him for his works. As far as man's moral acts are concerned, even if there is a recompense for them during this worldly life, that recompense is on a very limited scale and is highly imperfect. Additionally, in the recompense itself there is an ingrained element of test and trial. It would be a misconception of the highest magnitude, rather a folly, if we were to disregard the above and believe that whatever good a person receives here is in reward for his goodness, and that receiving such a reward is an index of the recipient being right, righteous, loved and favoured by God. Likewise, the disposition to regard anyone who is hit by misfortune as one who is necessarily under 'punishment', is in the wrong, unrighteous, and among those who are disapproved of by God is quite unjustified. To believe this is to be totally misconceived, and nothing can have a more disastrous effect on a people's conception of right and wrong, or be more baneful for their moral standards. A seeker of the truth should realize at the very outset that the world is a testing ground for all individuals, communities, indeed the whole of mankind and this in a number of ways. The different circumstances which confront people during the course of this test cannot be regarded as the final judgements of reward and punishment. Nor can they be taken as the criteria for determining which concepts, moral attributes and actions are right and which are wrong. Nor can they be held as the criteria for determining who are loved by God and who are subject to His Wrath.

Fourth, without doubt adherence to the truth and righteousness leads to success and felicity. Likewise, falsehood and evil-doing are bound to result in failure. Nevertheless, we observe that it is possible for falsehood and iniquity to meet with success, even if it be only temporary and apparent. Likewise, we also find that truth and righteousness might encounter failure, even if that too is only temporary and apparent. Now, this phenomenon can often prove to be quite deceptive. Hence, man stands in need of independent criteria to distinguish between good and evil, a criteria that is not susceptible to any delusions. Such criteria are provided by the teachings of the Prophets and the Scriptures, and are endorsed by man's common sense. It is also endorsed by the fact that humanity instinctively recognizes, and recognizes unanimously, which acts are essentially good and which are evil.

Fifth, if we find that an individual or community has deviated from the path of truth and is engrossed in sin and corruption, in wrong-doing and transgression, and is nevertheless lavished with bounties, the meaning of all this is quite clear. According to the Qur'an as well as reason, such an individual or nation has been put to serious test. The bounties that are apparently being lavished on it are not indicative of God's Mercy and Favour; in a way they signify His Wrath. If that person or nation had met with a catastrophe after their wrong-doing, it would have provided impetus for self-reform. But the bestowal of bounties, despite wrong-doing, simply means that the person or nation concerned is being led to their destruction. If the boat carrying that person or nation remains afloat even after iniquity, it means that it has been decided that it should simply be filled with a large amount of water, and then capsized, once and for all.

Conversely, even when there is sincere devotion to God, purity of conduct, honesty in dealings, and benevolence towards His creatures, still the people concerned are confronted with much hardship and suffering, and constantly encounter one calamity after another. This, however, is an indication not of God's Wrath but of His Favour and Mercy. For such a person or community is, thus, being thoroughly purged of impurities in the manner a goldsmith purges gold of all dross so that it comes forth before the world in its pure form. In any case, if such people are not compensated for their good deeds in this world, it does not matter much. The true worth of that pure gold will be recognized by the goldsmith himself, and he will pay its true value. If good people face any hardship or suffering it is not an indication of God's Wrath, rather His Wrath is directed at their enemies, and to the society in which good people are made to suffer and evil-doers are enabled to thrive.

51. Believers are never devoid of fear of God, nor are they heedless of Him. Nor do they act according to the dictates of their whims, disregarding Him above them Who is ever vigilant and Who seizes those who engage in wrong-doing and transgression. The hearts of believers are filled with fear of God, and it is this which prevents them from committing evil.

52. The word 'Signs' embraces two different kinds. On the one hand, it means the signs which are brought forward by the. Prophets on God's behalf. On the other hand, it includes those signs that are found within man as well as those that are scattered around the universe. Now, to believe in the signs of the Book amounts to confirming their truth. As for belief in the signs in the universe and in man's own being, this suggests having faith in the truths to which these signs testify.

53. Believing in God's signs requires one to believe in the Unity of God. The additional statement that such people do not associate aught with God in His Divinity seems to have been made in view of man's known weaknesses: that occasionally people engage in one form of shirk or another, that they associate others with God in His Divinity despite their belief in His signs. One such example of this weakness is riyā', i.e. engaging in acts of religious devotion to impress people with one's piety rather than doing so to exclusively please God. Likewise, excessive veneration of Prophets or saints, at times, also leads people to shirk. Other forms of shirk include praying to and seeking help from others than God, willingly binding oneself to serve and obey others than the One True Lord, and following man-made laws (in disregard of the Law enjoined by God - Ed.).

Thus, this characterization of the believers as those who do not engage in shirk after they are identified as believing in His signs is significant. This would seem to be because believers ought to consecrate their service, obedience and worship exclusively for the One True God in a manner that leaves not even an iota of doubt about it.

54. The word itā' in Arabic usage is not only confined to giving money or something material. It can also be employed to mean giving something non- material. We find, therefore, such expressions in Arabic as:

أتيته من نفسي الإباءه

(I have accepted to give him my obedience). Contrariwise, is the expression osḥyi come jus duji (I have decided to deny giving him my obedience). Thus giving does not simply mean giving away wealth in the cause of God. It also includes giving oneself to God in obedience and servitude.

In view of the above, the full meaning of the verse is that believers do not gloat at the good deeds they do in obedience to God, at the services they render, at the sacrifices they make. Their piety or their feeling of proximity with God does not generate vanity and arrogance in them. On the contrary, despite fully exerting themselves in acts of devotion and virtue, they remain anxious for they are unsure whether or not their deeds will find God's acceptance. They are also uncertain about whether their good deeds will outweigh their sins, and whether these good deeds will suffice to earn them God's forgiveness. This very point is explained in the following ḥadīth as found in the works of Aḥmad ibn Hanbal, Tirmidhi, Ibn Mājah, Ḥākim and Ibn Jarir al-Tabarī. ‘Ā’ishah asked the Prophet: 'O Messenger of God! Does this mean that even while committing theft, fornication and drinking wine one should fear God?' It appears that 'Ã'ishah considered to mean 'whatever they do'. In reply, the Prophet (peace be on him) clarified: 'No, O daughter of Siddiq. It rather means that he who prays, fasts, pays Zakah, and yet fears God.' (See Ibn Majah, K. al-Zuhd, 'Bab al-Tawaqqi 'ala al-'Amal' - Ed.)

This, then, identifies that the correct reading of the verse is not ya'tūna, but yu'tūna. Furthermore, that yu'tuna has not been used in the sense of giving away one's wealth, but in the wider sense of giving oneself totally in God's obedience. This verse also points to the inner state of the believer while he is engaged in acts of devotion to God. The best illustration in this regard is a statement made by 'Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb close to the time of his death. In spite of his highly distinguished services, throughout his life, in the cause of Islam, he was nonetheless still apprehensive that God would hold him to severe and exacting account. Such was his trepidation that he said: 'If I am reckoned on the Day of Judgement as one whose good and evil deeds are equal, that will be quite fine with me.' Hasan al-Bașrī has also expressed this point beautifully: 'A believer obeys and yet remains fearful, whereas a hypocrite disobeys and is fearless.'

55. This is a vitally significant statement in the context in which it has been made so let us take care to grasp its full import. It was earlier pointed out who those people are who hasten to do good deeds and supersede others in attaining them. This is now followed with a clear reference that God does not place on anyone a burden greater than that which he can bear. In other words, there is nothing superhuman about the character and conduct required of man. All human beings are made of the same flesh and blood, and are capable of establishing very high standards of conduct. Hence, it does not hold water for some people to claim that the kind of character required of them is beyond their capacity. Man is in fact capable of following both patterns of behaviour: the one being followed by the generality of people in the time of the Prophet (peace be on him) as well as the one being followed by the true men of faith from amongst their own people. A person's conduct results from his own choice: which of two acts, each of which he is capable of adopting, does he prefer? If someone makes the wrong choice and, thereafter, devotes his efforts to accumulating evil and distancing himself from good, no amount of false pretension will save him. His plea that good deeds were simply beyond his power will be of no avail and he will be made to suffer the consequences of his wrong choice. If such people do in fact proffer this pretext, saying that the way enjoined by God was beyond their capacity, they are bound to face the question: if that is so, how was it that many people like them were able to follow that way?

56. The 'Book' here means the record of deeds that is being compiled separately for each individual. This record literally embraces everything about a person. All that pertains to a man, every single act, every little movement, every thought and intent, is recorded in minute detail. It is the same 'Book', meaning Record of deeds, about which the following statement is made elsewhere in the Qur'an: 'And then the "Book", i.e. the Record of their deeds shall be placed before them and you will see the guilty full of fear of what it contains, and will say: "Woe to us! What a 'Book' [i.e. Record of deeds] is this! It leaves nothing, big or small, but encompasses it." They will find their deeds confronting them. Your Lord wrongs no one' (al-Kahf 18: 49).

It should be pointed out, however, that some people have understood the word 'Book' here to mean the Qur'an. This totally confuses the actual meaning of this verse.

57. This is an assurance that no one will be charged with guilt they have not committed. Nor will anyone remain deprived of the reward to which their good deeds entitle them. In short, no one will be unduly punished, nor will anyone be denied the reward that they rightly deserve.

58. That is, they are oblivious of the fact that all their deeds, sayings and thoughts are being recorded and that a time will come when they will be held to account for them.

59. We have translated the word mutrafin here as 'those given to luxuriant ways'. This word is used for those who, having obtained worldly riches, have immersed themselves in the pursuit of pleasure, and have, thus, become oblivious of their duties to God and to His creatures.

The 'chastisement' which is mentioned in this verse is not the chastisement with which they will be confronted in the Hereafter. Instead, it refers to the chastisement that will seize them here in this world.

60. The verb used here is derived from the word ju'ār which signifies the lowing of the oxen produced in a state of severe pain. (See j-'-r in Lisān al- 'Arab - Ed.) In its present usage, the word does not simply denote groaning, but the groaning of one who does not deserve any mercy. The word also carries the nuances of contempt and sarcasm. The meaning conveyed here is: 'You were completely engaged in your misdeeds. But now that the time for the retribution of those deeds has come, you have burst out in piteous lamentation.'

61. This is what the wrong-doers will be told in response to their groaning.

62. These words graphically describe their aversion to the Prophet's message. They were so hostile to the truth that they would not permit their ears even to hear a single word of that message.

63. The word sāmiran used in this verse refers to those who engage in samar. (See s-m-r in Lisan al-'Arab - Ed.) It signifies conversations people have at night, including gossiping and story-telling. Such light conversations are a part of village life and are held in the late evenings amongst small groups of friends who get together in rural clubs. This practice was also common among the Makkans in the time of the Prophet (peace be on him).

64. A question is posed here: did the unbelievers reject the Prophet's Message because they failed to comprehend it? Obviously, that was not the case. For, the Qur'an is far from being a jigsaw puzzle that defies comprehension. Nor has it been revealed in a language alien to the unbelievers. Nor are the contents of the Qur'an beyond human comprehension. The thrust of the statement then is that the unbelievers fully understood the Message, in fact they understood it even in its complete detail. Their rejection, therefore, is both deliberate and well-considered, and not the result of any deficiency in their understanding.

65. Another possible reason for their rejection of the Qur'anic Message could be that it expounded something absolutely novel, something altogether unheard of. Obviously, this was not true either. The Prophet (peace be on him) taught that God had raised many earlier Prophets who brought their Scriptures, called people to monotheism, warned them that they would be held to account in the Life to Come, and expounded well-known principles of morality.

None of these teachings was being expounded for the first time in human history. The neighbouring lands - Iraq, Syria and Egypt - had witnessed the advent of a host of successive Prophets each of whom had expounded substantially the same teachings. Hence, the Arabs were not unfamiliar with the contents of the Prophet's teachings. Apart from the Prophets sent to neighbouring countries, Arabia, itself, had had its share of Prophets. Abraham and Ishmael had come to Arabia. Hūd, Ṣāliḥ and Shu'ayb were also raised there. The names of these Prophets were known to virtually everyone. The unbelievers of Arabia even acknowledged them as those who had been raised by God. They also recognized that these Prophets were not polytheists. On the contrary, they called people to serve the One True God. In sum, their rejection of the Message of the Prophet (peace be on him) did not arise from their unfamiliarity with what he expounded. (For further details see al-Furqan 25, n. 84; al-Sajdah 32, n. 5; al-Sabā' 34, n. 35.)

66. Another question is also posed: did the unbelievers reject the Message of Islam because it was expounded by someone who was a total stranger to them, by one who had suddenly appeared from nowhere and who asked them to believe in his teachings and follow him? Once again, this could not be the reason for their rejection. For the bearer of this Message was a member of their own community. The nobility of his lineage was not unknown to them. They were also thoroughly familiar with his distinguished personal character for they had known him as a child, and had witnessed him grow to youth before their very eyes. They subsequently also witnessed his youth enter the precincts of manhood. All of them were well aware that he was truthful and veracious, that he was absolutely trustworthy, that he possessed an unblemished character. Thanks to these qualities, his compatriots called him al-amin (the trustworthy one). Even his worst enemies conceded that he had never lied. He was a model of chastity and purity, known to be honourable and virtuous. They knew him to be forbearing, truth-loving and peacefully disposed, one who had always kept aloof from all manner of feuds and squabbles. They also knew that he was a straightforward person, and that his dealings with others were transparent. They also knew that he honoured his word and was faithful to his commitments. They knew that he was neither disposed to engage in wrong-doing nor supported others in their wrong-doing. They knew that his door was open for everyone in distress, for everyone who required help, for everyone who was in need, and that he greeted such people with the utmost compassion, tenderness and sympathy.

They also knew that never before had he declared himself to be a Prophet, had not even uttered a word that would suggest that he was preparing the ground to make such a claim. Moreover, ever since the day he declared himself to be a Prophet, he had consistently preached one and the same Message. Not once did he deviate. Not once did he modify his claim or change the content of his Message. Nor could one detect any evolution in his claims, an evolution that could lend him to be suspected of proceeding gradually towards self- exaltation-an evolution whose start was marked, as is the case with imposters, by first making a modest claim, and then proceeding to make ever taller claims after having consolidated his position. Not only that, his life also bore witness to the fact that he not only practised all that he preached to others, but he rather practised it before he preached it.

It was also quite evident that there was no contradiction between his word and deed. Nor was there any trace of hypocrisy in his conduct. Nor did he have a different set of weights and measures for himself and for others.

It was thus difficult for the Makkan unbelievers to say of someone who was so well known, so tried and tested among his fellow-beings, that he was crafty, and having won over peoples' hearts with his captivating words, then threw away the mask he had been wearing only to reveal his true colours. Essentially his detractors were unable to accuse him of playing tricks with them in order to promote his covert evil designs. (For further elaboration see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. II, al-An'am 6, n. 21, pp. 226-7; vol. IV, Yūnus 10, n. 21, pp. 19-21; and vol. V, Banī Isrā'il 17, n. 105, pp. 71-2.)

67. Another possible reason for the unbelievers rejecting the Prophet's teaching is mentioned here in the form of a query: did they reject his teaching because they believed that he was mad? Again, quite obviously this was not the reason for their intransigence. For regardless of whatever they might have said publicly about the Prophet, they recognized in their heart of hearts that he was sharp-witted, wise and sagacious. For, after all, the difference between sanity and insanity is quite obvious and hence there was no question of their being confused on this issue. It is only those who are brazenly obstinate who could say that he who brought them the Qur'an was insane. Could anyone who knew anything about the life of the Prophet (peace be on him) believe that it was the life of someone who was mentally deranged? For strange indeed is that insanity, or for that matter the fits of epilepsy mentioned with such gusto by Orientalists, which leads to a work like the Qur'an! What kind of insanity is it that enabled the Prophet to successfully lead a movement that changed not only the destiny of his own land but also of the whole world?

68. This pithy sentence embodies a statement of great significance, and we should make every effort to understand it. It is customary for foolish people to become angry with those who tell them the truth. Such people wish to hear whatever best suits their interests rather than what is true and what accords with the facts. Such men tend to forget that the truth remains the truth regardless of whether people like it or not. Even if all people combine to negate a fact or change a truth into a falsehood, they will fail to do so.

When such is the case, how can facts and truths be so altered as to make them conform to the wishes of an individual? Alternatively, how can facts constantly conform to a myriad of mutually conflicting wishes? Foolish people fail to appreciate that if there is any discordance between their wishful thinking and reality, then it is their wishful thinking that is to blame rather than reality. In denying reality, such people cause no harm to it per se, instead they only harm themselves.

This immense system of the universe is based on well-established realities and inalterable laws. Living in the framework of such a universe, it is imperative that man strive to bring his thoughts, wishes and conduct in conformity with reality. He should constantly apply himself, with the help of rational argument, experience and observation, to what reality indeed is. It is only the puerile who, at both mental and practical levels, adamantly cling to their preconceptions, wishes and biases and who attempt to show those realities as conforming to their preconceived ideas. Once they embark on this course, they turn a blind eye to every piece of argument, howsoever weighty and reasonable it might be.

69. The word dhikr used here has three possible meanings, each of which seems to be correct in the present context:

(1) Dhikr, in the first place, might be regarded as a synonym about human nature. Taken in this sense, the present verse would mean that the Qur'an is not speaking about some other world that is unrelated to them. On the contrary, the Qur'an is concerned with expounding the reality of man's being, with explaining his nature and his urges. The Qur'an does so in order to remind man of the lesson that he is ever disposed to forget, a lesson that he is averse to learning. Such an escapist attitude is not an escape from matters unrelated to man. It is rather man's escape from the truth about himself.

(2) The word dhikr may also be taken to mean admonition and good counsel. In this case the verse in question would mean that the Message of the Qur'an constitutes an admonition which is in their own best interests. Hence, if they flee from it, it would amount to fleeing from something that is conducive to their own good,

(3) Dhikr may also be used in the sense of honour. If this sense is accepted, the verse means that if the unbelievers accept the Message that has been brought to them, they will be endowed with honour. On the contrary, if they turn away from it, it will amount to denying themselves a golden opportunity for their own growth and exaltation.

70. This is another argument in support of the Prophet's claim to have been designated by God as a Prophet. The argument demonstrates that the Prophet (peace be on him) was quite evidently most selfless in his mission. No one could honestly accuse him of facing all the hassle involved in his work in order to fulfil any selfish design. Before embarking on his mission as the Message-bearer of Islam, he was a fairly prosperous trader. After becoming involved in Islam, he began to face want and privation. Before he was designated as God's Messenger, he was held in high esteem by his people. Thereafter, however, he was subjected to both verbal abuse and even physical hurt; and even his life was at risk. In the past, he had lived a happy life with his family, but thanks to his mission, he became engaged in a struggle which lef him little time for rest and peace. Moreover, the cause that he was expounding yielded no advantages to him directly. On the contrary, it antagonized virtually every element of his people so much so that his own kith and kin seemed bent on the utmost hostility towards him. In view of all this, who in his right mind would say that the work of the Prophet (peace be on him) was that of a self- seeker?

Self-seekers are wont to come forward as champions of tribal and national chauvinism. They use their ability and craftiness in a manner that enables them to assume the leadership of their people. Self-seekers are never advocates of unpopular causes; they are never the proponents of an idea that would frontally challenge the chauvinistic biases and prejudices of their people, let alone espouse an idea that negates the very foundation on which the tribal pre-eminence of the Makkan unbelievers rested. This argument is put forward by the Qur'an not only in support of the truth of Muḥammad's claim, but in order to prove the truth of all Prophets (peace be on all of them). (For further details see al-An'am 6: 9; Yūnus 10: 72; Hūd 11: 29 and 51; Yusuf 12: 104; al-Furqan 25: 57; al-Shu'ara' 26: 109, 127, 145, 164 and 180; Saba' 34: 34; Ya Sin 36: 21; Ṣād 38: 86; al-Shūrā 42: 23; and al-Najm 53: 40, along with the relevant notes.)

71. The unbelievers denied the After-Life and this made them bereft of all sense of responsibility. Basically, they were easygoing and carefree. Since they did not believe that this life had any other purpose, or that they were accountable for their deeds before a higher authority, why should they be concerned about what is good and what is evil? Like animals, their only concern was with the optimal fulfilment of their physical and sensual desires. If these needs were fulfilled, all else, even questions of good and evil, right and wrong, could be dismissed as altogether irrelevant. On the other hand, if in the pursuit of their material goals they discovered something wrong, something which served as . an obstacle to their self-gratification, they would consider what had caused that wrong and how it could be rectified. Such people are naturally not interested in finding out the true path that human beings ought to follow.

72. This alludes to the hardship and suffering experienced by the Makkans as a result of the then raging famine. Some narrators, however, have mixed up the two famines which afflicted the Makkans. The result being that the average reader is unclear about which famine is being alluded to here. One of these famines occurred some time after Prophethood was bestowed upon Muḥammad (peace be on him), and the other took place a few years after Hijrah. This second famine was caused by Thumāmah ibn Uthal who stopped the export of food grains from Yamamah to Makka. The present verse, though, refers to the first rather than the second famine. According to a tradition in both Bukhārī and Muslim, on the authority of 'Abd Allah ibn Mas'ud, when the Quraysh repeatedly refused to accept the Prophet's Message and placed numerous obstacles in his way, he prayed to God: 'O God, help me against them with a seven-year famine as You helped Joseph with a seven-year famine:' (See Bukhārī, K. al-Da'wat, 'Bab al-Du'a' 'alā al-Mushrikin', and Tirmidhi, K. Tafsir al-Qur'ān, 'Bāb wa min Surah al- Dukhān' - Ed.) Consequently, a very severe famine took hold of Makka, so much so that the Makkans resorted to eating carrion. There are several allusions to this famine in the Makkan surahs, (See, for example, al-An'ām 6: 42-4; al-A'raf 7: 94-9; Yūnus 10: 11-12 and 21; al-Nahl 16: 112-13; and al-Dukhan 44: 10 and 16, along with the relevant notes.)

73. The word mublisūn used in this verse is very rich in meaning so that the expression: 'they will utterly despair of all good', does not express the full import of the statement. The root b-l-s from which the verbal form iblis is derived, embraces several meanings. It denotes a person's being wonder- struck, aghast with fear, heart-broken with grief and sorrow, utterly frustrated after suffering a succession of reverses. Since the word signifies desperation arising from loss of all hope, Satan has been named Iblis. (See b-l-s in Lisän al-'Arab Ed.) This word is chosen for Satan because in states of utter frustration his injured pride is so provoked that he seeks to wreak every possible havoc and commit every kind of crime.

74. The unbelievers are being asked: did God not endow human beings with eyes, ears, and the faculties of head and heart so that they might use them in the manner of animals? Do these faculties have no other purpose than that human beings become engrossed in scheming as to how they can best employ them in the fulfilment of their biological needs, and for the constant improvement of their standards of living? Can there be any greater ingratitude on man's part than that he makes himself indistinct from animals, and this despite the fact he was created as a species distinct from animals? The result is that people are prone to use their eyes to observe everything except those signposts which lead to a comprehension of reality. They make use of their ears to hear everything except that which enables them to comprehend the truth. They employ their heads and hearts to reflect on literally everything except the fundamental question of how did they come into being and for what purpose. What a pity that those who abuse their God-given faculties live in our midst and are reckoned as human beings rather than brutes!

75. The previous verse drew man's attention to the fact of his using his faculties to obtain knowledge - through his senses and reason - as quite inappropriate. After arousing man from this state of heedlessness, the present verse proceeds to emphasize that there are a myriad of signs around him. If man could only observe them properly or derive from them proper inferences, he would be able to reach the truth. Thanks to those signs, it is quite possible for man to realize that this well-regulated universe could neither have come into existence without God Who created it, nor could it have been created by a plethora of gods. Overwhelming evidence is available to lead a reasonable person to believe that the universe rests on the solid bedrock of the Unity of God. Furthermore, the evidence which exists around man should suffice to convince him that this universe is neither devoid of purpose, nor is it an act of play and sport, nor a set of meaningless talismans. On the contrary, the universe is based on an order that is full of wisdom. Is it conceivable that man, who enjoys free-will, should have been placed in such a universe and not be held to account, be simply reduced to dust after death?

76. Evidence is being marshalled here to confirm the cardinal doctrines of the Unity of God and the After-Life. The signs to which attention is being drawn in the verses that follow provide sufficient proof to refute both polytheism and any denial of the After-Life.

77. In this respect, one should remember that the unbelievers who rejected the After-Life as something impossible, were not simply denying that After-. Life. They were, in fact, also denying God's omnipotence and wisdom.

78. If God is the sole creator of the earth and all who dwell on it, what prevents people from comprehending the simple truth that He, and none but He, deserves to be served? Likewise, if God created all the human beings who ever lived on the earth, what difficulty would He face were He to Will that all of them be brought back to life?

79. The actual word used in the verse is li Allah, which should literally be rendered: Allah's' or 'belonging to Allah'. In deference to English usage, however, we have translated it simply as 'Allah'.

80. The proposition that God is Lord of the universe was acknowledged even by the unbelievers. Given that is the case, why are people not afraid of acting rebelliously towards God and associating others with Him in His Divinity? Why are they not worried about when they will be called to account by the Lord of the heavens and the earth about their behaviour? What justification will they be able to put forward to Him for their actions?

81. The word malakūt combines two meanings: mulk (kingship, dominion) and milk (ownership). At the same time, it also carries the nuance of intensity. Taking all these things into account, the verse seems to pose the question: who is it who has absolute power over, and total ownership of, everything?

82. The unbelievers are asked: أني تسحرون The literal translation of this is: 'Whence are you then bewitched?' The essence of magic and sorcery is to show a thing to be different from what it really is. The magician, thus, creates a false impression in the minds of onlookers, making them believe things to be contrary to what they actually are. Thus the question posed by the verse amounts to asking people: who is it who has bewitched these people so that even though they are aware of disparate facts, they are nonetheless unable to comprehend reality? What kind of spell has been cast upon them such that those who are not their lords appear to them either to be their lords, or the partners of their lords? What kind of magic has made them look upon those who have no power as worthy of being served as the One True God should be served; in fact they consider them to be even more deserving of service and worship than He Who has all power? Who has blinded them to well-known facts so that they are treacherous and faithless to the One True God about Whom they themselves recognize that against Him no one can provide any refuge? Are they doing this in the hope that they will be provided refuge by those who have no power to do so? Who has deluded them into believing that He Who is the True Master of everything will never hold them to account, that He will never question them in what manner they used the things which truly belonged to Him? How have they succumbed to the erroneous belief that the Sovereign of the universe will never question them as to what right they had to claim their own sovereignty or to accept the sovereignty of others in His realm?

These questions assume greater meaning in view of the fact that the unbelieving Quraysh were wont to accuse the Prophet (peace be on him) of being a magician. So saying the Qur'an turns the tables on the unbelievers, virtually telling them that they mistake the person who guides them to the truth, a truth they also recognize, for a magician. Conversely, those who truly delude them into believing what is contrary to reason and logic, what is altogether opposed to their experience and observation, even opposed to their own statements concerning the truth, are unquestioningly accepted by them as their guides. This without there arising the least suspicion in their minds that such are the real magicians.

83. Their assertion that aught other than the One True God partakes of Divinity (that is, shares with God any of His attributes or authority, or His rights vis-à-vis His creatures) is a lie. They also lie when they say that there will be no After-Life. This lie can even be shown to be so by virtue of their own statements. For, on the one hand, they themselves concede that God is the Lord of the heavens and the earth, and that He has absolute control over everything in the universe. On the other, they contend that godhead is not exclusively God's but rests with others too - with those who are bound to be His creatures and servants and, thus, under His omnipotent control. Quite evidently these two positions totally contradict each other.

The same applies to the unbelievers' contention regarding the After-Life: On the one hand, they concede that God has created both human beings and this enormous universe. On the other, they contend that God is unable to resurrect those whom He once created. Such an assertion is most patently irrational. Thus, both their doctrines, polytheism and denial of the After- Life, are altogether inconsistent with their own stated positions.

84. This statement should not be regarded as one that simply refutes the Christian doctrine that Jesus was the son of God. It refutes similar doctrines. held by other religious groups as well. The Arab polytheists of the time also claimed that their deities were God's offspring. Most polytheists the world over have in one way or another succumbed to this error. However, since the Christian doctrine that Jesus was the son of God gained much currency. even some leading Muslim commentators of the Qur'an are of the opinion: that the present verse was revealed to refute this false Christian belief.

It should be recalled, however, that the entirety of this discourse is addressed to the Makkan unbelievers, that is from beginning to end. It would be rather odd then if the discourse suddenly began to direct itself at the Christians. However, the Qur'anic assertion is couched in such terms that it refutes all those who trace the pedigree of their deities to God, whether such a doctrine is held by Christians, Arab polytheists or for that matter by anyone else.

85. This statement means that it is simply impossible for different forces and spheres of the universe to have different creators and gods and that those gods enjoy the absolute cooperation and harmony among themselves which is reflected in the whole. The regularity in the system of the universe and the absolute harmony found among its different components indicates that they are all in the grip of one central authority. Had the authority governing the universe been divided among several holders, disagreement among them would be inevitable, and as such would lead to conflict and fighting. This point has also been emphasized elsewhere in the Qur'an:

Had there been many gods in the heavens and the earth beside Allah, the order of both the heavens and the earth would have gone to ruin (al-Anbiyā' 21: 22).

Say: (O Muḥammad!): 'Had there been other gods with Him, as they claim, they would surely have attempted to find a way to the Lord of the Throne' (Banī-Isrā'il 17: 42).

(For further elaboration see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. V, Bani-Isrā'il 17, n. 47, p. 45: and al-Anbiya' 21: 22.)

86. This is a subtle allusion to a certain form of polytheism which first gave rise to the polytheistic version of intercession, and later on, to the fallacious belief that someone other than God possesses knowledge of things that lie beyond the ken of sense-perception (ghayb) the knowledge of all that was and all that will be. The present verse refutes both these erroneous notions of polytheism. (For further elaboration see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. V, Tā Hā 20, nn. 85-6, pp. 227-9 and al-Anbiyā' 21, n. 27, p. 262.)

87. This, of course, does not mean that there was any danger that the Prophet (peace be on him) would become one of the wrong-doers. Nor was there any possibility that he would succumb to iniquity if he did not make the Prayer mentioned here. Rather, the point that is made emphasizes that God's punishment is something to be dreaded. It is certainly not something that a person should invite upon himself. Additionally, if God defers His punishment, as a result of His Mercy and Forbearance, this should not prompt a person to persist with impunity in acts of iniquity and disobedience against God. God's punishment so horrendous that even the righteous will seek refuge from it, this despite all the good deeds they might have done, so what hope is there for the sinners?

This also indicates that when God's punishment comes upon a people as retribution for their collective misdeeds, it is not only the evil-doers but also the righteous who are often struck by it. Hence, the righteous who live in a misguided and wicked milieu should always seek God's refuge from His punishment. For one never knows when God's scourge will seize the wrong- doers, and whom it will include.

88. For further elaboration see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. II. al-An'am 6, nn. 71-2, pp. 262-3; vol. III, al-A'raf 7, nn. 138 and 150-3, pp. 101-2 and 112-15; vol. IV, Yūnus 10, n. 39, p. 32; al-Hijr 15, n. 48, p. 302; and al-Nahl 16, nn. 122-4, pp. 375-7; and vol. V, Bani-Isrā'il 17, nn. 38 63, pp. 51-3. Also see Fussilat 41, nn. 36-41.

89. The expression has a plural form. One possible meaning is that the plural of respect adopted here addresses one who is worthy of it. The use of the plural form as a show of respect is common to virtually all languages. The other possible reason for use of the plural might be to emphasize that this Prayer was to be made over and over again. In other words, it conveys the idea that they should pray repeatedly: 'Send me back; send me back. Additionally. some commentators have expressed the opinion that in. the first part of this sentence the words 'My Lord!' are addressed to God. whereas the second part of the sentence ('send me back') is a pleading addressed to those angels who seize the soul of a sinner. In other words, the verse would mean: O my Lord! [O angels!] send me back.

90. That sinners would constantly pray to God to grant them another chance, right from the time of their death until they are hurled into Hell on the Day of Judgement, is a recurrent idea in the Qur'an. In fact they will continue to so plead even after they have been consigned to Hell, but if their plea is heard, they will never disobey God but from thereon in follow the Right Path instead. (For further elaboration see al-An'am 6: 27-8; al- A'raf 7: 53; Ibrāhīm 14: 44-5; al-Mu'minün 23: 105-15; al-Shu'ara' 26: 102; al-Sajdah 32: 12-14; al-Faṭir 35: 37; al-Zumar 39: 58-9; al-Mu'min 40: 10; al-Shūrā 42: 44, along with the relevant notes.)

91. Despite their pleading, the sinners will not be sent back to the world. No one will be allowed to start his life afresh. The reason being that if a person is granted a fresh lease of life for the same purpose, that is, to test him, one of two conditions will obtain. Either all that he witnessed after his death will remain preserved in his memory or he will be restored to life devoid of any memory as was the case at the time of his first birth. In the former situation, the whole purpose of testing him would be lost. For this test consists in whether one discovers the truth by appropriately using one's mental faculties and accepts it or not; or whether without directly observing ultimate realities, one chooses obedience rather than disobedience even though one has had the freedom to choose between the two. But once the ultimate realities are shown to man and he witnesses the dire consequences of his disobedience, then this almost amounts to depriving him of the opportunity to disobey. Once man observes with his own eyes the horrible consequences of disobedience, how is it possible that he would not believe and not be obedient?

Let us now consider the second possibility, namely that man is recreated exactly as he was before, that is, bereft of any memory of past misdeeds and without having directly observed the ultimate consequences of disobedience to God. This would be tantamount to repeating something unnecessarily. For if someone failed the test earlier, what point is there in subjecting them to the same test again, for they are bound to perform exactly as previously? (For further elaboration see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. I, al- Baqarah 2, n. 228, pp. 163-4; vol. II, al-An'ām 6, n. 6, pp. 217-18 and nn. 139-40, pp. 296-7; and vol. IV, Yūnus 10, n. 26, pp. 24-5.)

92. It may, alternatively, be translated as: 'It is a statement he is now bound to make.' In other words, his utterance is not worth considering. For, faced with God's punishment, he is bound to say so. Yet, given another chance, he would behave exactly as he did earlier. Hence, his utterance merits no attention and he need not be sent back to life.

93. The word barzakh is an Arabized form of the Persian word pardah (signifying a barrier). According to this verse, there is presently a barrier between those who are dead and the present world. This barrier prevents the dead from returning to life, and so they will stay where they are till the Day of Judgement.

94. This does not mean that a father will cease to be a father, and a son cease to be a son. Rather, it means that neither a father will be of any avail to his son, nor a son of any avail to his father. Everyone will be too engrossed in their own plight to be able to think of their kindred, let alone show them any sympathy or aid. This state of affairs is mentioned at several places in the Qur'ān:

No friend shall inquire about another friend (al-Ma'arij 70: 10).

To redeem himself from the torment of that day the sinner will gladly sacrifice his children, his wife, his brother, his kindred who had provided him shelter, and all the people of the earth (al-Ma'arij 70: 11-14).

On that Day each person shall flee from his own brother, and from his mother and his father, and from his wife and his children. Each one of them, that Day, will have enough concern of his own to make him indifferent to the others ('Abasa 80: 34-7).

95. This is a reference to those whose good deeds will outweigh their evil ones.

96. These verses should be read in conjunction with the Qur'anic account of true prosperity and failure as outlined in the opening verses (1 ff.) and verses 51 ff. of the present surah.

97. The word used here is kāliḥūn, signifying those whose face is so scorched that their skin is tattered and their teeth are protruding just as though they are the burnt head of a goat. Someone asked 'Abd Allah ibn Mas'ud the meaning of the root word k-l-ḥ. To this he replied: 'Have you not seen the burnt head of an animal?'

98. The unbelievers are told not to plead to be free; nor to put forth any excuses. This does not mean, however, that they will become mute and disabled from such pleading for themselves. True, some traditions suggest that this will be their very last utterance. But this view is, however, discordant with the Qur'ānic account. For the Qur'an subsequently recounts the conversation that will take place between the unbelievers and God in the Next Life (see verse 112 ff. below - Ed.). Obviously, either these traditions are untrue or they mean that thereafter the unbelievers will not be able to plead for their redemption, (rather, they will be unable to speak altogether. - Ed.).

99. Once again the Qur'anic concepts pertaining to success and failure are being clearly stated in the present verse.

100. For details see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. V, Țā Hā 20, n. 80, pp. 224-5.

101. The Messengers used to tell the unbelievers that the life of the world was meant merely to test them. It was a life so ephemeral that they should not consider it to be their real life. They were told in unequivocal terms that the real abode will be in the World to Come wherein they will remain forever. They were, therefore, counselled not to engage in deeds which whilst yielding some transient pleasure, will nonetheless destroy all their prospects in the eternal life of the Hereafter. Yet the unbelievers did not pay any heed to the Messengers. They were bent on denying the Hereafter and believed that the Next Life was simply a figment of the Messengers' imaginations. They suffered from the illusion that the life of the world was all that there was and, hence, is ought to be enjoyed to the maximum. The unbelievers' remorse later on though will be to no avail. They should have realized while they were alive that the After-Life is a reality. Instead, they wasted the opportunity that was made available to them, totally ruining their prospects in the never-ending life of the Hereafter for the sake of the advantages and pleasures of the present life.

102. The word 'abathan used here may be taken to mean either 'by way of sport and play' or 'for the sake of sport and play'. In the former sense, the verse means: 'Do you believe that man was created simply by way of jest and amusement, that his creation was devoid of any purpose, and that God had dispersed a species on earth without requiring it to achieve any object?' If the word 'abathan is understood in the latter sense, it means: 'Do you think that you have been created merely to devote all your time to frivolous things such as sport, play and entertainment, to activities that lead to no worthwhile results?'

103. That is, He is far too exalted to do anything that is purposeless. Also, He is far too exalted to make it possible for any of His creatures to partake of His Divinity.

104. An alternative rendering of the above could be: 'He who invokes any other God along with Allah has no sanction to do so.'

105. That is, there will be no way for such people to escape from being called to account, from being questioned about their deeds.

106. This is a reiteration of the point made earlier; a statement about those who will truly prosper and those who will be the losers. (See, for example, verses 102-3 above - Ed.)

107. The subtlety of this supplication should not be missed. It was earlier pointed out that God would not pardon those who had made a laughing-stock of the Prophet (peace be on him) and the believers when they made this Prayer (see verses 105-10). Now the Prophet (peace be on him) and by implication the Companions, are also being directed to make the same Prayer mentioned above. The implication being that if the unbelievers persist in this mocking of them, they will earn strong evidence against themselves in the Hereafter. This despite the clear warning they have been given here.