-->
Regarding this allusion to the incredulous inquiry of the unbelievers, see {6:57-58}, 8:32 and {10:50-51}, as well as the corresponding notes.
The term ruh (lit., "spirit", "soul" or "breath of life") is often used in the Qur'an in the sense of "inspiration" - and, more particularly, "divine inspiration" - since, as Zamakhshari points out in connection with the above verse as well as with the first sentence of 42:52 , "it gives life to hearts that were [as] dead in their ignorance, and has in religion the same function as a soul has in a body". A very similar explanation is given by Razi in the same context. The earliest instance in which the term ruh has been used in this particular sense is 97:4 .
I.e., in accordance with a meaning and a purpose known only to Him. See also 10:5 and, in particular, the corresponding note [11].
This repetition of part of verse {1} is meant to stress the uniqueness of God's creative powers.
Lit., "he becomes an open contender in argument (khasim)". According to Zamakhshari and Razi, the above phrase is liable to two interpretations. In the words of Zamakhshari, "one interpretation is that after having been a [mere] drop of sperm, a particle of matter without consciousness or motion, man becomes highly articulate (mintiq), able to argue on his own [for or against a proposition], courageously facing disputes, and clearly formulating his arguments: [and herein lies] an indication of God's creative power. The other [interpretation] is that man is [prone to become] a contender in argument against his Sustainer, refusing to acknowledge his [very] Creator." Razi, on his part, gives his unqualified support to the first of these two interpretations, "because the above verses are meant to stress the evidence of the existence of a wise Creator, and not the fact of men's insolence and their proneness to blasphemy and ingratitude". However, in view of {36:77-78} (revealed at a considerably earlier period), I am of the opinion that the above two interpretations are not mutually exclusive but, rather, complementary, inasmuch as this passage is meant to bring out man's unique quality as a rational being - a quality that may lead him to great heights of achievement, but may equally well lead him utterly astray: hence my free rendering of this profound, elliptic phrase.
The use, in this context, of the term yakhluqu implies the future tense ("He will create") in contrast with the past tense khalaqa employed in the preceding passages. Since this reference to God's continuing creation comes immediately after a mention of primitive means of transport (i.e. of animals domesticated by man to this end), it obviously relates to other - as yet unknown - things of the same category: that is to say, to new means of transport which God unceasingly creates through the instrumentality of the inventiveness with which He has endowed man's mind (cf. 36:42 ). Inasmuch as every successive stage of human development bears witness to new, previously undreamt-of inventions in the realm of transport, the Qur'anic statement that "He will yet create things of which [today] you have no knowledge" is valid for every period - past, present and future - of man's history.
Lit., "upon God rests the [showing of the] goal of the path" - i.e., the establishing of the goals of ethics and morality implied in the concept of the "right path". In further analysis of this phrase, the expression "it rests upon God" ('ala 'llah) is similar in intent to the statement in 6:12 and {54} that He "has willed upon Himself the law of grace and mercy": in other words, God invariably shows the right path to everyone who is willing to follow it.
Since the concept of morality is linked with man's God-given freedom of choice between good and evil, God does not "impose" His guidance upon man but leaves it to him to accept or reject it.
See 14:33 and the corresponding note [46].
Lit., "thou seest".
This is apparently an allusion to the fact that the mountains owe their rise to the gradual balancing process to which the solid crust of the earth is subject - a process which, in its turn, is the result of stresses and disturbances due to the cooling and hardening, progressing from the surface towards the centre, of the presumably molten or perhaps even gaseous matter of which the earth's interior seems to be composed. It appears that part of this interior is kept solid only by the enormous pressure of the overlaying material, of which the mountains are the most vivid evidence: and this explains the Qur'anic reference (in 78:7 ) to mountains as "pegs" (awtad), i.e. symbols of the firmness and relative equilibrium which the surface of the earth has gradually achieved in the course of its geological history. Notwithstanding the fact that this equilibrium is not absolute (as is evidenced by earthquakes and volcanic eruptions), it is the solidity of the earth's crust - as contrasted with its possibly fluid but certainly very unstable interior - which makes life on earth possible: and this, to my mind, is the meaning of the phrase "lest it sway with you" (or "with them") occurring in the above verse as well as in 21:31 and 31:10 .
Lit., "they find their way". This passage rounds off the preceding description of God's favours to man by returning, in a subtle manner, to the theme introduced in verse {4} and alluded to, indirectly, in the last sentence of verse {8} as well as in verse {14}: namely, the consideration of man's intellectual potential - the greatest of all the gifts bestowed upon him by God. (See in this connection note [5] above, as well as the allegory of the creation of man enunciated in {2:30-33}.)
Lit., "those whom they invoke": this refers - as is obvious from verse {21} below - to dead saints invested by their followers with divine or semi-divine qualities.
Cf. {7:191-194}.
I.e., they are too arrogant to accept the idea of man's utter dependence on, and responsibility to, a Supreme Being.
Sc., "and not divine revelations" (cf. 8:21 ).
The conjunction li prefixed to the verb yahmilu ("they shall carry") has here obviously - as pointed out by Razi - the function of what the grammarians call a lam al-'aqibah, indicating no more than a causal sequence ('aqibah); it may be appropriately rendered by means of the conjunctive particle "and" or - as in this context- by the adverb "hence".
Lit., "those whom they are leading astray without knowledge" - i.e., without knowledge or understanding on the latters' part (Zamakhshari).
Lit., "schemed" (makara): i.e., they blasphemed by describing the divine revelations as "fables of ancient times" and by refusing to admit the truth of God's existence or of His oneness and uniqueness.
Lit., "their building" (see next note).
This is obviously a metaphor (Razi) describing the utter collapse of all endeavours - both individual and social - rooted in godlessness and false pride.
I.e., finally and utterly - for, "only on the Day of Resurrection will you be requited in full for whatever you have done" ( 3:185 ). Since the pronoun "them" refers not only to the earlier sinners mentioned parenthetically in the preceding verse but also to those spoken of in verses {22-25}, I have interpolated the word "all".
Lit., "those [alleged] partners of Mine". Regarding the Qur'anic use of the term sharik (pl. shuraka') in connection with religious beliefs, see surah {6}, note [15].
Or: "you were wont to contend [against My guidance]". See in this connection surah {8}, note [16].
I.e., those who had availed themselves of the knowledge of good and evil which God offers to mankind through His prophets.
Cf. 6:23 and the corresponding note, as well as 2:11 .
Sc., "and He will judge you on the basis of your motivation" - implying that their plea of ignorance is rejected in view of the fact that they were offered God's guidance through His revealed messages, which they deliberately scorned in their false pride and dismissed out of hand as "fables of ancient times" (see verses {22-24} above).
This "good fortune" (hasanah) does not necessarily signify, in this context, material benefits but refers, rather, to the spiritual satisfaction and the feeling of inner security resulting from genuine God-consciousness.
Lit., "for the angels to come to them, or for God's judgment (amr) to come" - i.e., for the Day of Resurrection. The full meaning of this passage is forthcoming from 6:158 , revealed at the same period as the present surah.
See 6:10 and the corresponding note. Similar phrases occur in many places in the Qur'an, always with reference to a derision of divine messages and, particularly, of predictions relating to God's chastisement of reprobate sinners. As so often, the Qur'an points out here that this "chastisement" or "suffering" ('adhab) is but a natural, unavoidable consequence of deliberate wrongdoing: hence, he who becomes guilty of it is, in reality, "doing wrong to himself" or "sinning against himself" inasmuch as he destroys his own spiritual integrity and must subsequently suffer for it.
Lit., "apart from Him". See in this connection 6:148 and the corresponding note [141]. (The arbitrary, unwarranted prohibitions and taboos alluded to in that verse as well as in the present one are discussed in {6:136-153} and explained in my notes.) The derision of God's messages by the deniers of the truth is implied in their questioning His grant of free will to man - that is to say, the ability to choose between right and wrong, which is the basis of all morality.
I.e., the apostles could not force anyone to make the right choice.
Or "at every period", since the term ummah has this significance as well. In its wider sense, it may also be taken here to denote "civilization", thus comprising a human groupment as well as a period of time.
For this rendering of the term at-taghut, see surah {2}, note [250]. It is to be borne in mind that, in Qur'anic terminology, "worship of God" invariably implies the concept of man's sense of responsibility before Him: hence, the above commandment comprises, in the most concise formulation imaginable, the sum-total of all ethical injunctions and prohibitions, and is the basis and source of all morality as well as the one unchanging message inherent in every true religion.
I.e., who availed themselves of the guidance offered by Him to all human beings.
Lit., "upon whom error came to be inevitably established (haqqa 'alayhi)" or "against whom [a verdict of] error became inevitable": i.e., one whose heart "God has sealed" in consequence of his persistent, conscious refusal to submit to His guidance (see surah {2}, note [7], as well as surah {14}, note [4]).
See preceding note; also 8:55 and the corresponding note [58].
Lit., "And" - but since this conjunction is obviously meant to elaborate the preceding statement, it is best rendered as above.
This categorical denial of resurrection - implying as it does a denial of God's ultimate judgment of good and evil - is characteristic of a mental attitude which refuses to admit the reality, or even possibility, of anything that lies beyond the range of man's actual or potential observation. Since such an attitude is an outcome of an intrinsically materialistic outlook on life and the "false pride" referred to in verses {22-23} above, it is anti-religious in the deepest sense of this word even if it is accompanied by a vague - because non-consequential - belief in the existence of God.
I.e., in the first instance, the truth of resurrection and judgment as such, and, in general, the final answers to all the metaphysical problems which perplex man during his life on earth.
For an explanation of this rendering of alladhlna hajaru, see surah {2}, note [203], and surah {4} note [124]. That the "forsaking of the domain of evil" has here a purely spiritual connotation is obvious from its juxtaposition with the "denial of the truth" referred to in the preceding verses.
See note [28] above.
The verb 'alima, which primarily denotes "he knew", has also the meaning of "he came to know", i.e., "he understood"; and since - as pointed out by Baghawi, Zamakhshari and Razi - the pronoun "they" in the phrase law kanu ya'lamun relates to the deniers of the truth spoken of in the preceding passages, the rendering "if they could but understand" is here clearly indicated - the more so as it provides a self-evident connection with the subsequent, objective clause.
I.e., if they could really understand the spiritual motivation of the believers, they (the deniers of the truth) would themselves begin to believe.
This passage has a double purport: firstly, it connects with the statement enunciated in verse {36} to the effect that God's apostles have appeared, at one time or another, within every civilization, and that, consequently, no substantial human groupment has ever been left without divine guidance; secondly, it answers the objection frequently raised by unbelievers that Muhammad could not be God's message-bearer since he was "a mere mortal man". (As regards the Qur'anic doctrine that no created being, not even a prophet, has ever been endowed with "supernatural" powers or qualities, see 6:50 and 7:188 , as well as the notes relating to those verses; also note [94] on 6:109 .)
Lit., "reminder" - because every divine message is meant to remind one of the truth. The people to be asked for enlightenment in this respect are apparently the Jews and the Christians (Tabari, Zamakhshari).
The above sentence is addressed, parenthetically, to all who question the divine origin of the Qur'an on the grounds mentioned in note [45] above. For an explanation of the term zubur ("books of divine wisdom"), see surah {21}, note [101].
Sc., "through revelation" - implying that moral values are independent of all time-bound changes and must, therefore, be regarded as permanent.
To my mind, by "evil schemes" are meant here systems of God-denying philosophy and of perverted morality.
I.e., destroy them utterly.
I.e., in the midst of their habitual occupations. My interpolation of the word "suddenly" is warranted by the reference, in the next verse, to the alternative of gradual decay.
One of the meanings of takhawwuf is "gradual diminution" or "decay" or "slow destruction" (Lisan al-'Arab, art. khawafa; thus also Tabari and Zamakhshari); in the above context, the term has obviously both a social and a moral connotation: a gradual disintegration of all ethical values, of power, of civic cohesion, of happiness and, finally, of life itself.
Sc., "seeing that He offers you guidance through His prophets, and gives you time to reflect and mend your ways before you do irreparable harm to yourselves".
In view of the separate mention, in the next verse, of animals and angels, the "things" referred to here apparently denote inanimate objects and perhaps also living organisms like plants.
Lit., "and they are utterly lowly" or "submissive". The "prostration" referred to in this and the next verse is obviously a symbolism expressing the intrinsic subjection of all created beings and things to God's will. See also 13:15 and the corresponding notes [33] and [34].
I.e., the lowest as well as the highest. The term dabbah denotes any sentient, corporeal being capable of spontaneous movement, and is contrasted here with the noncorporeal, spiritual beings designated as "angels" (Razi).
I.e., they must, by virtue of their nature, obey the impulses implanted in them by God and are, therefore, incapable of what is described as "sinning". Man, however, is fundamentally different in this respect. In contrast with the natural sinlessness of "every beast that moves, and the angels", man is endowed with free will in the moral sense of this term: he can choose between right and wrong - and therefore he can, and often does, sin. But even while he sins he is subject to the universal law of cause and effect instituted by God and referred to in the Qur'an as sunnat Allah ("God's way"): hence the Qur'anic statement that "before God prostrate themselves, willingly or unwillingly, all [things and beings] that are in the heavens and on earth" ( 13:15 ).
The double dual in ilahayn ithnayn ("two deities") serves to emphasize the prohibition of worshipping "more than one deity" - i.e., anything but the One God.
This is a striking example of the fluctuation to which personal pronouns are subjected in the Qur'an whenever they refer to God. As already pointed out in my Foreword, note [2], as well as in other places, such abrupt changes of pronoun ("He", "I", "We", "Us", "Me", etc.) indicate that God is limitless and, therefore, beyond the range of definition implied in the use of "personal" pronouns.
Cf. {6:40-41}.
Lit., "associate [other powers] with their Sustainer": i.e., by attributing the change in their "luck" to what they regard as "extraneous" factors and influences, they invest the latter, as it were, with divine qualities and powers.
According to most of the classical commentators, this relates to the custom of the pagan Arabs - mentioned in 6:136 - to dedicate a part of their agricultural produce and cattle to their deities; and because those deities were mere figments of imagination, they are described here as "things of which they know nothing". However, as I have pointed out in note [120] on 6:136 , the above statement bears a much wider, more general meaning: it connects directly with the three preceding verses of this surah - namely, with the attribution of a share (nasib) in God's creativeness - and thus of a decisive influence on one's life - to "causes" or "powers" other than Him. This view has also been advanced by Razi (with a specific reference to astrological speculations) in the concluding sentence of his commentary on the above verse.
The pre-Islamic Arabs believed that the goddesses Al-Lat, Al-'Uzza and Manat (see note [13] on {53:19-20}), as well as the angels, whom they conceived as females, were "God's daughters". As against this, the Qur'an states that God is utterly remote from every imperfection (subhanahu), complete in Himself, and therefore free from the incompleteness inherent in the concept of "progeny" as an extension of one's own being (cf. 6:100 and the corresponding notes [87] and [88]). - This parenthetic passage, comprising verses {57-59}, is explained in note [66] below.
Namely, only male issue, because the pre-lslamic Arabs regarded daughters as no more than a necessary evil.
I.e., a tiding that should have been regarded as a happy one, since the sex of the child ought to make no difference to parental love.
I.e., either of these alternatives is evil: to keep the child as an object of perpetual contempt, or to bury it alive, as was frequently done by the pagan Arabs. - This passage, containing as it does an utter condemnation of men's attitude towards women in pre-Islamic Arabia, has - as is always the case with Qur'anic references to historical events or customs - a meaning that goes far beyond this specific social phenomenon and the resulting infanticide. It would seem that the pivotal point of the whole passage is the sentence, "for themselves [they would choose, if they could, only] what they desire": that is to say, while they are only too ready to associate with God ideas which are repugnant to themselves (for instance, female progeny, which they themselves despise), they are unwilling to accept the concept of man's ultimate responsibility to Him, because such a concept militates against their own hedonistic inclinations by obliging them to impose a moral discipline on themselves. And because they rebel against the idea of ultimate moral responsibility, they instinctively reject the idea of resurrection and of life after bodily death; and since they deny, by implication, God's power to resurrect the dead, they deny His omnipotence and, consequently, begin to "ascribe divinity" - i.e., a genuinely causative function - to all manner of imaginary forces, beings or influences: and so, by means of a parenthetic reference to pre-Islamic Arabian beliefs and customs, the discourse returns full circle to the concept of God's oneness, uniqueness and omnipotence, around which the whole of the Qur'an revolves.
I.e., inasmuch as they deny, by implication, man's ultimate responsibility before God. According to Zamakhshari and Razi, the term mathal (lit., "example" or "parable") has here and in the next clause the connotation of sifah ("attribute").
Or: "known [only to Him]" - i.e., the period of their lives on earth, during which they may reflect and repent.
For my rendering of sa'ah as "a single moment", see surah {7}, note [26].
I.e., "daughters" (see verses {57-59} above): but this alludes also, as Zamakhshari points out, to the association with God of imaginary beings which allegedly have a share in His power and thus nullify the concept of His uniqueness: in other words, while the people spoken of here would hate to see their own legitimate spheres of influence encroached upon and curtailed by rivals, they do not extend the same consideration to their idea of God.
Lit., "that theirs is the supreme good (al-husna)" - i.e., in the sight of God - because they regard their own religious or anti-religious views, in spite of their absurdity, as good and true. This interpretation of al-husna in the above context (mentioned, among others, by Zamakhshari and Razi) connects logically with the statement in the next verse that "Satan had made their own doings seem goodly to them".
Lit., "theirs [or "their portion"] will be the fire, and they will be abandoned".
Or: "He is their patron [or "master"] today". It should be borne in mind that the noun wall is derived from the verb waliya, which primarily signifies "he was [or "became"] close [or "near", i.e., to someone or something]". It is in this sense that the term wali is used in the Our'an with reference to God's nearness to the believers (e.g., in 2:257 or 3:68 ), or their nearness to God (see 10:62 and the corresponding note [84]). Similarly, the "powers of evil" (at-taghut) are spoken of in 2:257 as being "near unto those who are bent on denying the truth (alladhina kafaru)".
As so often in the Qur'an, a reference to the spiritual life engendered by divine revelation is followed here by a reference to the miracle of organic life as another indication of God's creative activity.
Milk - in itself a glandular secretion - is not necessary for the mother-animal's life (or, as it is here metonymically described, its "blood"); on the other hand, it is not just something that the body eliminates as being of no further use to its metabolism: hence it is referred to as a substance "between that which is to be eliminated [from the animal's body] and [its] life-blood".
The term sakar (lit., "wine" or, generically, "intoxicants") is contrasted here with rizq hasan ("wholesome sustenance"), thus circumscribing both the positive and the negative properties and effects of alcohol. Although this surah was revealed about ten years before the Qur'anic prohibition of intoxicants in {5:90-91}, there is no doubt that their moral condemnation is already implied in the above verse (Ibn 'Abbas, as quoted by Tabari; also Razi).
The expression "He has inspired" (awha) is meant to bring out the wonderful quality of the instinct which enables the lowly insect to construct the geometrical masterpiece of a honeycomb out of perfectly-proportioned hexagonal, prismatic wax cells - a structure which is most economical, and therefore most rational, as regards space and material. Together with the subsequently mentioned transmutation, in the bee's body, of plant juices into honey, this provides a striking evidence of "God's ways" manifested in all nature.
Lit., "thy Sustainer's paths".
Lit., "is reduced to a most abject age, so that he knows nothing after [having had] knowledge": alluding to the organic curve of man's growth, his acquisition of bodily strength, intelligence and experience, followed by gradual decay and, in some cases, the utter helplessness of senility, comparable to the helplessness of a new-born child. See also 22:5.
The phrase "to share their sustenance with...", etc., reads, literally, "to turn over their sustenance to". The expression "those whom their right hands possess" (i.e., "those whom they rightfully possess") may relate either to slaves taken captive in a war in God's cause (see surah {2}, notes [167] and [168], and surah {8}, note [72]) or, metonymically, to all who are dependent on others for their livelihood and thus become the latters' responsibility. The placing of one's dependents on an equal footing with oneself with regard to the basic necessities of life is a categorical demand of Islam; thus, the Prophet said: "They are your brethren, these dependents of yours (khawalukum) whom God has placed under your authority [lit., "under your hand"]. Hence, whoso has his brother under his authority shall give him to eat of what he eats himself, and shall clothe him with what he clothes himself. And do not burden them with anything that may be beyond their strength; but if you [must] burden them, help them yourselves." (This authentic Tradition, recorded by Bukhari in several variants in his Sahih, appears in the compilations of Muslim, Tirmidhi and Ibn Hanbal as well.) However, men often fail to live up to this consciousness of moral responsibility: and this failure amounts, as the sequence shows, to a denial of God's blessings and of His unceasing care for all His creatures.
Lit., "has made [or "provided"] for you mates out of yourselves". The term zawj denotes not only "a pair" or "a couple" but also - as in this instance - "one of a pair" or "a mate" of the opposite sex; hence, with reference to human beings, the plural azwaj signifies both "husbands" and "wives".
Lit., "they", i.e., those who deny the truth of God's existence and/or oneness.
For the comprehensive meaning embodied in the term rizq, see the first sentence of note [4] on 2:3 .
I.e., "do not blaspheme against God by regarding anyone or anything as comparable with Him, or by trying to define Him in any terms whatsoever" - since "definition" is, in the last resort, equivalent to a delimitation of the qualities of the object thus to be defined in relation to, or in comparison with, another object or objects: God, however, is "sublimely exalted above anything that men may devise by way of definition" (see last sentence of 6:100 , and the corresponding note [88]).
The obvious answer is that they cannot. The implication is equally clear: if even these two kinds of man cannot be deemed equal, how could any created being, with its intrinsic, utter dependence on other created beings, or any force of nature conceivable or imaginable by man, be thought of as possessing powers comparable with those of God, who is almighty, limitless, unconceivable - the self-sufficient fount of all that exists? (This argument is continued and further elaborated in the subsequent parable.)
The term abkam signifies "dumb" both in the literal, physiological sense and (as in colloquial English) in the sense of being "unable to speak properly" on account of intellectual weakness: i.e., "dull-witted" or "stupid". Both these meanings are contained in the above Qur'anic description.
Or: "wherever he sends him".
I.e., who is not only wise and righteous but also has the strength and authority to enjoin a righteous way of living upon others. Thus, while in the first parable the main issue is the contrast between freedom and bondage or - more generally - between dependence and independence, in the second parable we are given the antithesis of dumbness and incompetence, on the one hand, and wisdom, justice and competence, on the other; and in both parables the implication is the same (see note [85] above).
This passage connects with the second sentence of verse {74} - "Verily, God knows [all], whereas you have no [real] knowledge."
As may be inferred from the sequence, the term ghayb - rendered here as the "hidden reality" - alludes in this context to the coming of the Last Hour, the time whereof is known to God alone (Zamakhshari). Parallel with this, it may also relate to God's Own existence, which cannot be directly established by the testimony of our senses (Baydawi) but, as the Qur'an consistently points out, may be inferred from the observable effects of His creativeness.
Lit., "the case [i.e., the manifestation] of the [Last] Hour will be like...", etc. - implying that it will be characterized by utter suddenness and unpredictability, both of them an outcome of the absence of any time-interval between God's decreeing it and its materialization: and this explains the phrase "or closer still" at the end of the above sentence.
Lit., "subservient [to God's laws] in the air of the sky".
The term julud (sing. jild) denotes, literally, "skins", but apparently comprises here also the wool which grows on the skins of domesticated animals. It is to be noted that in Arabian usage the noun bayt ("house") signifies not only a solid building but also a "tent" - in brief, every kind of dwelling, whether permanent or temporary.
Wabar (here given in its plural, awbar) is the soft wool growing on the shoulders of camels ("camel-hair"), used in the weaving of fine cloths and sometimes also of bedouin tents.
Lit., "out of that which He has created".
Lit., "shades (zilal. sing. zill). Metonymically, this term is occasionally used to describe anything that "shades" one in the sense of protecting him; and since the sequence clearly refers to means of protection, I believe that this derivative meaning of zilal is here preferable to the literal.
According to almost all the classical commentators, the mention of "heat" implies here its opposite as well, namely "cold"; hence my interpolation.
According to most of the commentators, the second incidence of the term "garments" (sarabil) in this verse is to be understood as "coats of mail" or "armour", in which case it would allude to wars and other instances of mutual violence. But although this interpretation cannot be ruled out, it seems to me that the second mention of "garments" can be understood in a much wider sense, perhaps metonymically denoting all manner of "coverings" (i.e., devices meant to protect the body) which man may be constrained to use in dangerous situations of his own making: hence the stress on "your violence" (ba'sakum).
I.e., although they are aware of the many blessings which man enjoys, they refuse to attribute them to God's creative activity, thus implicitly denying the truth of His existence. My rendering of al-kafirun as "[such as] are given to denying the truth" is conditioned by the definite article al which, in the above construction, is meant to stress the quality of deliberate intent.
An allusion to the Day of Judgment, when the prophets whom God has called forth within every community - or, in the wider sense of the term ummah, within every civilization or cultural period - will symbolically bear witness to the fact that they had delivered God's message to their people and explained to them the meaning of right and wrong, thus depriving them of any subsequent excuse.
According to Zamakhshari, their being "refused permission" to plead is a metonym for their having no valid argument or excuse to proffer. (Cf. also {77:35-36}.)
Cf. 6:22 and the corresponding note [15].
The Qur'an states in many places that every sinner who dies without repentance will be endowed on Judgment Day with a clear, objectified vision of his sins, every one of which will have assumed for him the status of an independent reality bearing witness against him and forcing him to acknowledge his now irremediable guilt. It is to be remembered in this connection that the Qur'an describes every act of sinning - whether it be an offence against the concept of God's oneness and uniqueness or a wrong done to any of His creatures - as, primarily, one's "wronging oneself" or "sinning against oneself".
Cf. {6:23-24} and the corresponding notes [16] and [17].
See note [100] above.
Although the Arabian contemporaries of the Prophet were, naturally, the first to whom his revelation was conveyed - a fact that gave a particular weight to the manner in which they responded to it - the Qur'anic message as such is addressed to all mankind (see in this connection, in particular, 7:158 and 21:107 , as well as the corresponding notes).
I.e., everything that pertains to the knowledge of good and evil, in both the individual and social senses of these terms. - Regarding my rendering of nazzalna, it should be borne in mind that this particular grammatical form is often used in the Qur'an to bring out the fact that it was revealed gradually ("step by step") over a considerable period of time, and not in one piece.
Lit., "the giving to [one's] kinsfolk (dhu'l-qurba)". The latter term usually denotes "relatives", either by blood or by marriage; but since it occurs here in the context of a comprehensive ethical exhortation, it obviously alludes to man's "kinsfolk" in the widest sense of the term, namely, to his "fellow-men".
The term al-munkar (rendered by me in other places as "that which is wrong") has here its original meaning of "that which the mind [or the moral sense] rejects", respectively "ought to reject". Zamakshari is more specific, and explains this term as signifying in the above context "that which [men's] intellects disown" or "declare to be untrue" (ma tunkiruhu al-'uqul): in other words, all that runs counter to reason and good sense (which, obviously, must not be confused with that which is beyond man's comprehension). This eminently convincing explanation relates not merely to intellectually unacceptable propositions (in the abstract sense of the term) but also to grossly unreasonable and, therefore, reprehensible actions or attitudes and is, thus, fully in tune with the rational approach of the Qur'an to questions of ethics as well as with its insistence on reasonableness and moderation in man's behaviour. Hence my rendering of al-munkar, in this and in similar instances, as "all that runs counter to reason".
Regarding the expression "bond with God" ('ahd Allah), see surah {2}, note [19]. The clause "whenever you bind yourselves by a pledge" has a twofold meaning: in the first instance (as in 13:20 ) it refers to the spiritual, moral and social obligations arising from one's faith in God; and, secondly, it applies to all pledges or promises given by one person to another - for, as Razi points out, every pledge given by man to man represents, in its essence, a pledge to God. It is to this second aspect of man's "bond with God" that the sequence refers.
I.e., as distinct from oaths "uttered without thought" (see 2:225 ).
Lit., "and having made God [or "named God as"] your guarantor (kafil)".
Lit., "as a [means of] deception (dakhalan) among yourselves".
Lit., "because there are people (ummah) more powerful than [other] people": relating to declarations and false promises made out of fear.
As is evident from the preceding passage as well as from the sequence, the differences alluded to here relate to ethical and moral values, regarding the truth and relevance of which people of various communities and persuasions hold most divergent views. See also surah {2}, note [94].
I.e., bound by mutually agreed-upon moral values. See in this connection 10:19 and the corresponding notes, especially note [29]. For an elucidation of the concept of ummah wahidah ("one single community") and its further implications, see surah {2}, notes [197] and [198].
Or: "He lets go astray whomever He wills, and guides aright whomever He wills". Regarding the problem of free will versus predestination, seemingly implied in the concept of God's "letting man go [or "causing him to go"] astray" or, alternatively, "guiding him aright", see surah {14}, note [4].
Alluding to the erroneous idea that man's good or evil actions - and therefore also his propensities and resulting attitudes - are "predetermined" by God and not really an outcome of free choice, Zamakhshari rounds off his views on this problem (quoted by me in surah {14}, note [4]) in these words: "If [it were true that] God compels [men] to go astray or, alternatively, to follow His guidance - why should He have postulated their deeds as something for which they will be held responsible?"
I.e., "you will offend against God after having attained to faith", seeing that - as has been pointed out in note [110] above - every pledge given by man to man is synonymous with a pledge to God.
I.e., in this world (Tabari, Zamakhshari, Baydawi), inasmuch as the breaking of pledges unavoidably leads to a gradual disappearance of all mutual trust and, thus, to the decomposition of the social fabric.
This may relate either to life in this world - inasmuch as a true believer invariably finds happiness in his God-consciousness - or to the happiness which awaits him in the hereafter, or to both.
The present passage (verses {98-105}) evidently connects with the broad ethical exhortation given in verse {90} above and, thus, with the statement (in verse {89}) that the Qur'an is meant "to make everything clear and to provide guidance and grace and a glad tiding unto all who have surrendered themselves to God" - which, in its turn, implies that the Qur'an is the ultimate source of all God-willed ethical and moral values, and thus an unchanging criterion of good and evil. But since man is always, by virtue of his nature, prone to question the very validity of the moral standards established through revelation, the believer is now called upon to seek, whenever he reads or meditates on this divine writ, God's spiritual aid against the whisperings of what the Qur'an describes as "Satan, the accursed" - that is, all the evil forces, both within man's own soul and within his social environment, which tend to undermine his moral convictions and to lead him away from God.
Or: "who make him their master". Cf. in this connection {14: 22} and the corresponding note [31].
I.e., inasmuch as they pay an almost worshipful reverence to such blandishments as wealth, power, social position, etc.
I.e., by substituting the message of the Qur'an for the earlier dispensations - and not, as some Muslim scholars maintain, "abrogating" one Qur'anic verse and replacing it by another. (Regarding the untenable "doctrine of abrogation", in the latter sense, see {2: 106} and the corresponding note [87]; see also note [35] on {41: 42}.)
I.e., the gradualness of revelation (implied in the verbal form yunazzil) corresponds to God's plan, according to which He has gradually unfolded His will to man, substituting one dispensation for another in the measure of mankind's intellectual and social development, bringing it to its culmination in the message of the Qur'an.
I.e., they do not understand the necessity of a new dispensation and, therefore, do not really understand the Qur'an.
As in the three other places in which the expression ruh aI-qudus occurs ({2 :87} and {253} and {5: 110}), I am rendering it here, too, as "holy inspiration" (see surah {2}, note [71]), a term which, to my mind, is a Qur'anic synonym for "divine revelation". However, a literal rendering - "spirit of holiness" - is also possible if one applies this term to the angel who communicates God's revelations to the prophets. (See also verse {2} of this surah and the corresponding note [2].)
I.e., to Muhammad - thus insinuating that his claim to divine revelation was false.
Whereas some of the pagan Quraysh regarded the ideas expressed in the Qur'an as "invented" by Muhammad, others thought that they must have been imparted to him by a foreigner - perhaps a Christian - who lived in Mecca at that time, or whom the Prophet was supposed to have encountered at an earlier period of his life. Various conjectures have been advanced - both by early Muslim commentators and by modern orientalists - as to the "identity" of the person or persons whom the suspicious Meccans might have had in mind in this connection but all these conjectures are purely speculative and, therefore, of no historical value whatever. The suspicion of the pagan Meccans implies no more than the historical fact that those of the Prophet's opponents who were unwilling to pay him the compliment of having "invented" the Qur'an (the profundity of which they were unable to deny) conveniently attributed its authorship - or at least its inspiration - to a mythical non-Arab "teacher" of the Prophet.
For an explanation of this composite rendering of the descriptive term mubin, see surah {12}, note [2]. The term is used here to stress the fact that no human being - and certainly no non-Arab - could ever have produced the flawless, exalted Arabic diction in which the Qur'an is expressed.
I.e., the scurrilous allegation referred to in verse {103}. Although this statement alludes,in the first instance, to the hostile contemporaries of the Prophet, it extends, by obvious implication, to people of all times who refuse to believe in the reality of Muhammad's revelations, and try to explain them away as obsessive illusions or even as deliberate fabrications.
Lit., "except" - but the Arabic construction of the sentence that follows makes it necessary to render the simple particle illa in the manner adopted by me ("and this, to be sure, does not apply to...", etc.).
Lit., "one who is coerced, the while his heart is at rest in [his] faith". This relates to believers who, under torture or threat of death, ostensibly "recant" in order to save themselves. Although the Qur'an makes it clear in several places that martyrdom in the cause of faith is highly meritorious, "God does not burden any human being with more than he is well able to bear" (cf. 2:233 and {286}, 6:152 , 7:42 , 23:62 , and many other Qur'anic statements to the same effect).
Sc., "of what is good and what is bad for them". - For an explanation of God's "sealing" the hearts of those who are bent on denying the truth, see 2:7 and the corresponding note.
For an explanation of the concept of fitnah (appearing here in the verbal form futinu) and of my rendering it as "temptation to evil", see surah {8}, note [25]. As regards the expression alladhlna hajaru in its spiritual connotation, see surah {2}, note [203] and surah {4}, note [124].
Lit., "the garment" (libas) - idiomatically used in classical Arabic to describe the utmost degree of misfortune which "envelops man like a garment" (Taj al-'Arus, with specific reference to the above verse).
This parable is meant to show that deliberate ingratitude for the manifold blessings which God bestows upon man - in other words, a deliberate refusal to submit to His guidance - is bound, in the long run and in the context of aggregate social life, to have disastrous consequences not only in the hereafter but in this world as well, inasmuch as no society may expect to live in security and ease unless it conforms to the ethical and social standards inherent in the concept of man's "bond with God" (as explained in surah {2}, note [19]).
It is this call to gratitude that provides a connection between the present passage and the foregoing parable of the ungrateful town and, thus, with the opening passages (verses {1-15}) of this surah.
It is to be noted that the above two verses are almost identical with {2:172-173}, and ought, therefore, to be read in conjunction with the whole passage of which those two verses form a part - namely, {2:168-173}. Cf. also {6: 145}.
Regarding the very important problem of an arbitrary determination, based on subjective preferences, of what is to be considered ethically right or wrong, see surah {2}. note [137].
I.e., in {6: 146}, revealed shortly before the present surah. The conjunctive particle "And" at the beginning of this sentence establishes a connection with the precept laid down in verse {114} above, "partake of all the lawful, good things which God has provided for you as sustenance": the implication being (as in 6:145 ) that none of the really good and wholesome things have been forbidden to the believer, and that the many dietary prohibitions and restrictions imposed on the Jews were imposed on them alone in punishment of their persistent sinning (cf. 3:93 ).
For this rendering of thumma, see surah {6}, note [31].
This is one of the many meanings of the term ummah and, to my mind, the one most appropriate in the above context. - The mention of Abraham at this place contains a subtle allusion to verse {118}, where the Jews are spoken of: for, the latter claim to be "the chosen people" on account of their descent from Abraham, whereas the Qur'an consistently rejects all claims to a special status by virtue of one's descent. Moreover, the Qur'an states in many places that whereas this particular ancestor of the Hebrews - and, by the way, of most of the Arab tribes as well - was a personification of all that is good and upright, so that "God exalted him with His love" ( 4:125 ), his Jewish descendants always tended to rebel against God and, thus, "persistently wronged themselves".
For an explanation of this rendering of the term hanif, see surah {2}, note [110].
Lit., "thereafter" or "afterwards" (thumma): but since this particle evidently alludes here to the climax of all revelation as manifested in the Qur'an, the above rendering seems to be suitable.
I.e., about Abraham. The implication is that the majority of the Jews had deviated from the true creed of Abraham (which is the meaning of the phrase, "those who came to hold divergent views about him") inasmuch as most of them became convinced that they were "God's chosen people" simply because of their physical descent from that great Prophet: an assumption which obviously runs counter to every truly religious principle. As the Qur'an repeatedly points out, this spiritual arrogance was punished by God's imposition on the children of Israel - and on them alone - of all manner of severe restrictions and rituals, of which the obligation to refrain from all work and even travel on the Sabbath was one. In its widest implication, this passage is meant to stress the fact that all God-imposed rituals are only a means towards the achievement of spiritual discipline, and never a religious goal in themselves.
I.e., He will judge between those who are convinced of their ultimate salvation on the basis of their alleged status of "God's chosen people", and those who believe in man's individual responsibility before God: and thus the discourse returns to the problem of God-consciousness and righteous living.
Cf. 29:46 - "And do not argue with the followers of earlier revelation otherwise than in the most kindly manner". This stress on kindness and tact and, hence, on the use of reason alone in all religious discussions with adherents of other creeds is fully in tune with the basic, categorical injunction, "There shall be no coercion in matters of faith" ({2: 256}).
Lit., "retaliate [or "respond"] with the like of what you have been afflicted with": thus, the believers are admonished to observe self-restraint while arguing with people of another persuasion, and never to offend against decency and intellectual equity. Although retaliation in argument is permissible if one's integrity is impeached by an opponent, the sequence makes it clear that it is morally preferable to renounce it altogether and to bear the unjust attack with patience.
Lit., "and thy patience in adversity (sabr) is due to [or "rests with"] none but God" - i.e., it must never be allowed to become a source of spiritual arrogance and false self-righteousness.
Lit., "all that they are scheming", i.e., by inventing false and irrelevant arguments against God's messages.