-->
The story which, according to the oldest sources at our disposal, is alluded to in verses {21-26} affects the question as to whether God's elect, the prophets - all of whom were endowed, like David, with "wisdom and sagacity in judgment" - could or could not ever commit a sin: in other words, whether they, too, were originally subject to the weaknesses inherent in human nature as such or were a priori endowed with an essential purity of character which rendered each of them "incapable of sinning" (ma'sum). In the form in which it has been handed down from the earliest authorities (including, according to Tabari and Baghawi, Companions like 'Abd Allah ibn'Abbas and Anas ibn Malik, as well as several of the most prominent of their immediate successors), the story contradicts the doctrine - somewhat arbitrarily developed by Muslim theologians in the course of the centuries - that prophets cannot sin by virtue of their very nature, and tends to show that their purity and subsequent sinlessness is a result of inner struggles and trials and, thus, represents in each case a moral achievement rather than an inborn quality. As narrated in some detail by Tabari and other early commentators, David fell in love with a beautiful woman whom he accidentally observed from his roof terrace. On inquiring, he was told that she was the wife of one of his officers, named Uriah. Impelled by his passion, David ordered his field-commander to place Uriah in a particularly exposed battle position, where he would be certain to be killed; and as soon as his order was fulfilled and Uriah died, David married the widow (who subsequently became the mother of Solomon). This story agrees more or less with the Old Testament, which gives the woman's name as Bath-Sheba (II Samuel xi), barring the Biblical allegation that David committed adultery with her before Uriah's death (ibid. xi, 4-5) - an allegation which has always been rejected by Muslims as highly offensive and slanderous: cf. the saying of the fourth Caliph, 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (quoted by Zamakhshari on the authority of Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab): "If anyone should narrate the story of David in the manner in which the story-tellers narrate it, I will have him flogged with one hundred and sixty stripes - for this is a [suitable] punishment for slandering prophets" (thus indirectly recalling the Qur'anic ordinance, in 24:4 , which stipulates flogging with eighty stripes for accusing ordinary persons of adultery without legal proof). According to most of the commentators, the two "litigants" who suddenly appeared before David were angels sent to bring home to him his sin. It is possible, however, to see in their appearance an allegory of David's own realization of having sinned: voices of his own conscience which at last "surmounted the walls" of the passion that had blinded him for a time.
This story or Parable is not found in the Bible, unless the vision here described be considered as equivalent to Nathan's parable in 11 Samuel, xi, and xii. Baidhawi would seem to favour that view, but other Commentators reject it. David was a pious man, and he had a well-guarded private chamber (mihrab) for Prayer and Praise.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
David used to retire to his private chamber at stated times for his devotions. One day, suddenly, his privacy was invaded by two men, who had obtained access by climbing over a wall. David was frightened at the apparition. But they said: "We have come to seek thy justice as king: we are brothers, and we have a quarrel, which we wish thee to decide."
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
Brother in faith or business partner.
The brother who was most aggrieved said: "This my brother has a flock of ninety-nine sheep, and I have but one; yet he wants me to give up my one sheep to his keeping; and moreover he is not even fair-spoken. He talks like one meditating mischief, and he has not even the grace to ask as an equal, or one sharing in a business or an inheritance. What shall I do?"
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
The term khulata' (sing. khalit) denotes, literally, "people who mix [i.e., are familiar or intimate] with others or with one another". In the present instance it evidently alludes to the "brotherhood" between the two mysterious litigants, and is therefore best rendered as "kinsmen".
Sc., "and that he had failed" (in the matter of Bath-Sheba).
The circumstances were mysterious; the accusation was noval; it was not clear why the unjust brother should also have come with the complainant, risking his life in climbing the wall to evade the guard, and he certainly said nothing. David took them literally, and began to preach about the falsehood and the fraud of men, who should be content with what they have, but who always covet more.
Especially, said David, is it wrong for brothers or men in partnership to take advantage of each other; but how few are the men who are righteous? He had in his mind his own devotion and justice. But lo and behold! the men disappeared as mysteriously as they had come. It was then that David realised that the incident had been a trial or temptation-a test of his moral or spiritual fibre! Great though he was as a king, and just though he was as a judge, the moment that he thought of these things in self- pride, his merit vanished. In himself he was as other men: it was Allah's grace that gave him wisdom and justice, and he should have been humble in the sight of Allah.
Judged by ordinary standards, David had done no wrong; he was a good and just king. Judged by the highest standard of those nearest to Allah (Muqarraban, lvi. 11), the thought of self-pride and self-righteousness had to be washed off from him by his own act of self-realisation and repentance. This was freely accepted by Allah, as the next verse shows. A) Some commentators say that David's fault here was his hastiness in judging before hearing the case of the other party. When he realised his lapse, he fell down in repentance.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
Cf. ii. 30, and n. 47. David's kingly power, and the gifts of wisdom, justice, psalmody, and prophethood were bestowed on him as a trust. These great gifts were not to be a matter of self-glory.
As stated in n. 1471 above, this vision and its moral are nowhere to be found in the Bible. Those who think they see a resemblance to the Parable of the prophet Nathan (2 Samuel, xii. 1-12) have nothing to go upon but the mention of the "one ewe" here and the "one little ewe-lamb" in Nathan's Parable. The whole story is here different, and the whole atmosphere is different. The Biblical title given to David, "a man after God's own heart" is refuted by the Bible itself in the scandalous tale of heinous crimes attributed to David in chapters xi and xii. of 2 Samuel, viz., adultery, fraudulent dealing with one of his own servants, and the contriving of his murder. Further, in chapter xiii, we have the story of rapes, incest, and fratricide in David's own household! The fact is that passages like those are mere chroniques scandaleuses, i.e., narratives of scandalous crimes of the grossest character. The Muslim idea of David is that of a man just and upright, endowed with all the virtues, in whom even the least thought of self-elation has to be washed off by repentance and forgiveness.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
Cf. 3:191 . The above statement appears in the Qur'an in several formulations; see, in particular, note [11] on 10:5 . In the present instance it connects with the mention of the Day of Reckoning in the preceding verse, thus leading organically from a specific aspect of David's story to a moral teaching of wider import.
I.e., a deliberate rejection of the belief that the universe - and, in particular, human life - is imbued with meaning and purpose leads unavoidably - though sometimes imperceptibly - to a rejection of all moral imperatives, to spiritual blindness and, hence, to suffering in the life to come.
Cf. iii. 191. Unbelief is the subjective negation of a belief in Order, Beauty, Purpose, and Eternal Life. Unbelief is to Faith as Chaos is to Cosmos, as the Fire of Misery is to the Garden of Bliss.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
By implication, belief in resurrection, judgment and life after death is postulated in this passage (verses {27-28}) as a logical corollary - almost a premise - of all belief in God: for, since we see that many righteous people suffer all manner of misery and deprivations in this world, while, on the other hand, many of the wicked and depraved enjoy their lives in peace and affluence, we must either assume that God does not exist (because the concept of injustice is incompatible with that of Godhead), or - alternatively - that there is a hereafter in which both the righteous and the unrighteous will harvest in full what they had morally sown during their lives on earth.
The reference to the Hereafter at the end of verse 26 above is of a piece with the whole tenor of this Sura, which deals with the superiority of the spiritual kingdom and the Hereafter. If there were no Hereafter, how could you reconcile the inequalities of this world? Would not the Unbelievers be right in acting as if all Creation and all life were futile? But there is a Hereafter and Allah will not treat the Good and Evil alike. He is just and will fully restore the balance disturbed in this life.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
Revelation is not a mere chance or haphazard thing. It is a real blessing-among the greatest that Allah has bestowed on man. By meditation on it in an earnest spirit man may learn of himself, and his relation to nature around him and to Allah the Author of all. Men of understanding may, by its help, resolve all genuine doubts that there may be in their minds, and learn the true lessons of spiritual life.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
I.e., he would always think of God, as illustrated by the example given in the sequence.
The greatest in this life have yet need of this spiritual blessing: without it all worldly good is futile. Referring back to the story of David, we are now introduced to Solomon, who was a great king but greater still because he served Allah and turned to Him. The Qur-an, unlike the old Testament, represents Solomon as a righteous king, not as an idolater, doing "evil in the sight of the Lord" (1 Kings. xi. 6).
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
The passages about David and Solomon have been variously interpreted by the Commentators. The versions which I have suggested have good authority behind them, though I have followed my own judgment in filling in the details.
Safinat: literally, horses that stand, when at ease, on three legs, firmly planted, with the hoof of the fourth leg resting lightly on the ground. This would imply breeding and a steady temper, to match with their quality of swiftness mentioned in the next clause.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
Lit., "because of [or "out of"] ('an) the remembrance of my Sustainer".
This and the preceding interpolation are based on Razi's interpretation of this passage.
The story is not found in the Old Testament. I interpret it to mean that, like his father David, Solomon was also most meticulous in not allowing the least motive of self to be mixed up with his spiritual virtues. He was fond of horses; he had great armies and wealth; but he used them all in Allah's service. Cf. xxvii. 19. n. 3259; xxvii. 40. n. 3276, etc. His battles were not fought for lust of blood, but as Jihad in the cause of righteousness. His love of horses was not like that of a mere race-goer or of a warrior: there was a spiritual element in it. He loved by a kind of love which was spiritual,-the love of the highest Good. Some commentators interpret this verse saying that Soloman, peace be upon him, was so engrossed in the inspection of his fine horses that he completely forgot to say his 'Asr prayer before the sunset'.
His review of his fine horses was interrupted by his evening devotions, but he resumed it after his devotions.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
The story of Solomon's love of beautiful horses is meant to show that all true love of God is bound to be reflected in one's realization of, and reverence for, the beauty created by Him.
Some commentators have a different interpretation, which is not supported by reliable sources. They maintain that Solomon kept watching these fine horses until the sun set, then he realized that he had missed the noon prayer because of his love for horses, so he killed them, striking at their legs and necks.
Like all lovers of horses, he patted them on their necks and passed his hands over their fore-legs and was proud of having them-not as vanities but as a "lover of Good".
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
To explain this verse, some of the commentators advance the most fantastic stories, almost all of them going back to Talmudic sources. Razi rejects them all, maintaining that they are unworthy of serious consideration. Instead, he plausibly suggests that the "body" (jasad) upon Solomon's throne is an allusion to his own body, and - metonymically - to his kingly power, which was bound to remain "lifeless" so long as it was not inspired by God-willed ethical values. (It is to be borne in mind that in classical Arabic a person utterly weakened by illness, worry or fear, or devoid of moral values, is often described as "a body without a soul".) In other words, Solomon's early trial consisted in his inheriting no more than a kingly position, and it rested upon him to endow that position with spiritual essence and meaning.
It is reported in a ḥadîth collected by Bukhâri that one night Solomon said that each of his wives would conceive a boy who would struggle in Allah’s cause. He forgot to say ‘Allah willing,” so only one of them gave birth to a deformed, dead baby. So Solomon prayed to Allah for forgiveness.
What was the trial of Solomon? All the power, wealth, and glory, which were given to him were a spiritual trial to him. They might have turned another man's head, but he was staunch and true, and while he enjoyed and used all the power he had-over the jinns, men, and the forces of nature, (see below), he kept his mind steady to the service of Allah. Cf. viii. 28, where "your possessions and your porgeny" are declared to be "but a trial".
"The body on his throne" has been variously interpreted. The interpretation that appeals more is the following: Sulaiman was at his utmost height of power and glory. Allah Ta'ala tested him with a severe illness during which he was no more than a lifeless body on his throne. He came to realize how weak and powerless he was in the eyes of Allah. In this state of weakness and misery he turned to Allah with humility and humbleness.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.
I.e., a spiritual kingdom, which could not be inherited by anyone and, hence, would not be exposed to envy or worldly intrigue.
The seeking of worldly Power, even if intended to be used for Allah's service, has a little of Self in it. It may be quite legitimate and even meritorious in ordinary men, but even the thought of it in a Prophet is to be apologised for. See a similar idea in the case of David explained in n. 4176 to xxxviii. 24 above.
He asked for a Power that he would not misuse, though others might not be able to refrain from misusing it,-such as power over forces of nature or forces of violence (see the next three verses).
Cf. xxxviii. 9 above.
No translation has been selected yet. Please click on the (Compare) link at the top and enable the translations of your choice.