-->
See Appendix II.
For an explanation of this composite rendering of the adjective mubin, see note [2] on 12:1 . In the present instance, the term kitab ("divine writ") is preceded by the conjunction Wa, which primarily signifies "and", but in this case has a function more or less similar to the expression "namely"; hence, it may be replaced in translation by a dash without affecting the meaning of the sentence.
This is obviously the meaning of the term zakah in the above context, since at the time of the revelation of this surah it had not yet received its later, specific connotation of a tax incumbent upon Muslims (cf. surah {2}, note [34]).
The implication is that people who do not believe in life after death concentrate all their endeavours, as a rule, on material gains alone, and cannot think of anything worthwhile beyond "their own doings". See also note [7] on 2:7 , which explains why the "causing" of this spiritual blindness and confusion - in itself but a consequence of man’s own behaviour - is attributed to God.
This stress on the spiritual illumination offered to man through divine revelation not only connects with the opening verses of this surah, but also forms a link between this passage and the following one, which calls to mind the sudden illumination of Moses, symbolized by the vision of the burning bush.
Cf. 20:9 ff., and particularly note [7] on verse [10] of that surah.
Thus Zamakhshari explains the expression hawlaha (lit., "around it"). According to some of the earliest commentators, quoted by Tabari, the "fire" (nar) is in this context synonymous with "light" (nur), namely, the illumination which God bestows on His prophets, who - one may presume-are a priori "near it" by virtue of their inborn spiritual sensitivity. Alternatively, the phrase man fi 'n-nar wa-man hawlaha may be understood as referring to God's Own light, which encompasses, and is the core of, all spiritual illumination.
Cf. {20:17-20}.
For a tentative explanation of the symbolism underlying the miracle of the staff, see note [14] on {20:20-21}.
For my rendering of illa, in this context, as "and neither", see note [38] on 4:29 .
I.e., by sincere repentance. Apart from its general significance, this may also be an allusion to the crime which Moses had committed in his youth bv slaying the Egyptian (see {28 :15-17}).
See note [85] on 7:108 .
Cf. 17:101 -"We gave unto Moses nine clear messages" - and the corresponding note [119].
See note [99] on 10:76 . The people referred to as "they" are Pharaoh and his nobles.
I.e., spiritual insight.
Apart from 114:6 , which contains the earliest Qur'anic reference to the concept of jinn, the above is apparently the oldest instance where this concept occurs in the personalized form of "invisible beings". (For a fuller discussion, see Appendix III.)
In this instance, Solomon evidently refers to his own understanding and admiration of nature (cf. {38:31-33} and the corresponding notes) as well as to his loving compassion for the humblest of God's creatures, as a great divine blessing: and this is the Qur'anic moral of the legendary story of the ant.
Lit., "a clear evidence". The threat of "killing" the hoopoe is, of course, purely idiomatic, and not to be taken literally.
Thus, we are parabolically reminded that even the most lowly being can - and on occasion does - have knowledge of things of which even a Solomon in all his wisdom may be ignorant (Razi) - a reminder which ought to counteract the ever-present danger (fitnah) of self-conceit to which learned men, more than anyone else, are exposed (Zamakhshari). - As regards the kingdom of Sheba, see note [23] on 34:15 .
I.e., their own immoral impulses (which is the meaning of ash-shaytan in this context) had persuaded them that they should not submit to the idea of man's responsibility to a Supreme Being who, by definition, is "beyond the reach of human perception", but should worship certain perceivable natural phenomena instead.
An allusion to the appearance and disappearance of the sun and other celestial bodies which the Sabaeans - in common with almost all the Semites of antiquity - used to worship. (Cf. the story of Abraham's search for God in 6:74 ff.)
See surah {9}, note [171].
My interpolation, at the beginning of this verse, of the words "God says" is based on the fact that, within the context of the above legend, the information brought by the hoopoe is the very first link between the kingdoms of Sheba and of Solomon. In the absence of any previous contact, hostile or otherwise, there would have been no point whatever in Solomon's telling the people of Sheba that they should not "exalt themselves" against or above himself. On the other hand, the narrative of the hoopoe makes it clear that the Sabaeans did "exalt themselves" against God by worshipping the sun and by being convinced "that they ought not to worship God" (verses 24-25 above). Hence, Solomon, being a prophet, is justified in calling upon them, in the name of God, to abandon this blasphemy and to surrender themselves to Him. (Cf. the almost identical phrase, "Exalt not yourselves against God", in {44:19.}
Lit., "on this case [or "problem"] of mine".
In this context - as pointed out by all classical commentators - the term dukhul undoubtedly connotes "entering by force ('anwatan)", whether it be by armed invasion or by usurpation of political power from within the country. (The term muluk, lit., "kings", may be understood to denote also persons who, while not being "kings" in the conventional sense of this word, wrongfully seize and forcibly hold absolute power over their "subjects".)
Thus, the Queen of Sheba rules out force as a suitable method for dealing with Solomon Implied in her statement is the Qur'anic condemnation of all political power obtained through violence ('anwatan) inasmuch as it is bound to give rise to oppression, suffering and moral corruption.
I.e., not only worldly wealth but also faith, wisdom and an insight into realities normally hidden from other men.
I.e., people who prize only material things and have no inkling of spiritual values.
Lit., "and they will be humbled". Since the Qur'an explicitly prohibits all wars of aggression (see {2:19-194} and the corresponding notes), it is not plausible that this same Qur'an should place a crude threat of warlike aggression in the mouth of a prophet. We must, therefore, assume that here again, as in verse {31} above, it is God who, through His prophet, warns the people of Sheba of His "coming upon them"-i.e., punishing them - unless they abandon their blasphemous belief that they "ought not" to worship God. This interpretation finds considerable support in the sudden change from the singular in which Solomon speaks of himself in the preceding (as well as in the subsequent) verses, to the majestic plural "We" appearing in the above sentence.
I.e., evidently in response to his message (Razi, Ibn Kathir).
Lit., "before they come unto me as people who surrender themselves (muslimin)" i.e. to God (see verse {31} above). The term "throne" ('arsh) is used here and in the sequence - as well as at the end of verse {23} - in its metonymic sense of "dominion" or "regal power" (Raghib). It appears that Solomon intends to confront his guest with an image of her worldly power, and thus to convince her that her "throne" is as nothing when compared with the awesome almightiness of God.
Lit., "he who had knowledge out of [or "through"] revelation (al-kitab)"-i.e., Solomon himself (Razi).
I.e., faster than any magic could achieve: thus alluding to the symbolic nature of the forthcoming appearance of the "throne". Here, as in the whole of the story of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, symbolism and legendary "fact" are subtly intertwined, evolving into an allegory of the human soul's awakening to a gradual realization of spiritual values.
Lit., "established before him". Since the verbal form istaqarra and its participle mustaqirr often indicate no more than that something "has being" or "exists" (cf. Lane VII, 2500), the phrase ra'ahu mustaqirran 'indahu may be understood as "he saw it being [i.e., actually] before him": hence my rendering.
I.e., "whether I attribute my spiritual powers to God or, vaingloriously, to myself".
I.e., whether she remains satisfied with perceiving only the outward appearance of things and happenings, or endeavours to fathom their spiritual reality. Seeing that the people of Sheba were, until then, motivated by love of luxury and worldly power, Solomon intends to show the Queen her "throne", or the image of her domainion, as it could be if it were inspired by faith in God and hence, by a consciousness of moral responsibility.
Sc., "and yet not quite the same": thus, she expresses doubt - and doubt is the first step in all spiritual progress. She realizes that the "altered throne" is outwardly the same as that which she has left behind; but she percieves intuitively that it is imbued witha spiritual quality which the other did not possess, and which she cannot quite yet understand.
Thus Tabari, Zamakhshari and Ibn Kathir, on whose interpretation of this passage my rendering and the above interpolation are based.
An allusion to her and her people's worship of celestial bodies (cf. verses {2-25} and the corresponding notes [20] and [21]).
Lit., "she was [sc., "born"] of people...", etc. - thus stressing the role of the idolatrous tradition in which she had grown up, and which in the past had made it difficult for her to find the right path. Considering this cultural background, Solomon points out, her awakening at the very moment of her leaving her ancestral environment must be deemed most remarkable and praise-worthy.
I.e., in order to wade into it, or perhaps to swim through it, thus braving the seemingly fathomless deep: possibly a symbolic indication of the fear which a human being may feel when his own search after truth forces him to abandon the warm, soothing security of his erstwhile social and mental environment, and to venture into the - as yet - unknown realm of the spirit.
I.e., not a dangerous, bottomless deep, as it appeared at first glance, but, rather, the firm, glass-clear light of truth: and with her perception of the ever-existing difference between appearance and reality, the Queen of Sheba comes to the end of her spiritual journey.
For the story of the Thamud and their prophet Salih, see notes [56] and [57] on 7:73 . My interpolation of the word "likewise" at the beginning of this verse is based on the fact that Salih's message to the tribe of Thamud is identical with that of Solomon to the Queen of Sheba - which in itself, is an indication of the sameness of the fundamental truths underlying all revealed religions.
Lit., "hasten the evil before the good": cf. 13:6 and the corresponding note [14]; also the second sentence of 10:50 and note [71].
See surah {7}, note [95].
Sc., "who has tied every human being's destiny (ta'ir) to his neck": see 17:13 and the corresponding note [17].
Or "nine clans", since, in the above context, the term raht is liable to either of these two interpretations. The "city" referred to is evidently the region known as Al-Hijr, in northern Hijaz (cf. surah {7}, notes [56] and [59]). - In contrast with the preceding story of the Queen of Sheba's eager way to faith, the stories of the tribe of Thamad and (in verses {54-58}) of Lot's people are meant to call attention to the hostility which a call to righteousness so often evokes in people who are strong but vain, or, alternatively, weak and addicted to senseless passions.
Lit., "by God". As is evident from 7:73 ff. and from the above allusion, the Thamud did have a vague notion of God, but their erstwhile faith had been overlaid by their excessive arrogance and thus deprived of all spiritual value.
The story of Lot and the perverted people of Sodom is mentioned in several places, particularly in {7:80-84}, {11:69-83} and {26:160-173}.
Thus Zamakhshari and Razi, stressing the principle that a revolt against the God-willed nature of heterosexuality is a revolt against God Himself.
See note [65] on 7:82 .
See note [66] on 7:83 ; also 11:81 and 66:10 , and the corresponding notes.
Cf. 26:173 and the corresponding note [73].
Lit., "Is God better, or that to which they ascribe. . .", etc.: thus including, by implication, not only deified beings or forces of nature, but also false social and moral values to which custom and ancestral tradition have lent an almost "religious" sanction.
Lit., "place of rest" (qarar). But see also {77:25-26} and the corresponding note [9].
See 25:53 and the corresponding notes [41] and [42].
Cf. 2:30 and the corresponding note [22]. In the present instance the accent is on God's having caused man to "inherit the earth" by endowing him with specific faculties and abilities - an implicit denial of man's claim that he is independent and "master of his fate".
I.e., metonymically, through all the seemingly insoluble complexities of human life.
See 7:57 and the corresponding note [44].
This relates to man's life on earth and his resurrection after bodily death as well as to the this - worldly cycle of birth, death and regeneration manifested in all organic nature.
As in 10:31 , the term "sustenance" (rizq) has here both a physical and a spiritual connotation; hence the phrase, "out of heaven and earth".
Lit., "if you are truthful" - the implication being that most people who profess a belief in a multiplicity of divine powers, or even in the possibility of the One God's "incarnation" in a created being, do so blindly, sometimes only under the influence of inherited cultural traditions and habits of thought, and not out of a reasoned conviction.
In this context, the term al-ghayb - rendered by me here as "the hidden reality" - apparently relates to the "how" of God's Being, the ultimate reality underlying the observable aspects of the universe, and the meaning and purpose inherent in its creation. My repetition, within brackets, of the words "none knows it", i.e., save God, is necessitated by the fact that He is infinite, unlimited as to space, and cannot, therefore, be included among the beings "in the heavens or on earth" who have all been created by Him.
I.e., they cannot truly visualize the hereafter because its reality is beyond anything that man may experience in this world: and this, it cannot be stressed often enough, is an indirect explanation of the reason why all Qur'anic references to the conditions, good or bad, of man's life after death are of necessity expressed in purely allegorical terms.
I.e., blind to its logical necessity within God's plan of creation. For, it is only on the premise of a life after death that the concept of man's moral responsibility and, hence, of God's ultimate judgment can have any meaning; and if there is no moral responsibility, there can be no question of a preceding moral choice; and if the absence of choice is taken for granted, all differentiation between right and wrong becomes utterly meaningless as well.
I.e., those who denied the reality of a life after death and, hence, of man's ultimate responsibility for his conscious doings. As pointed out in the preceding note, the unavoidable consequence of this denial is the loss of all sense of right and wrong: and this, in its turn. leads to spiritual and social chaos, and so to the downfall of communities and civilizations.
Lit., "by their scheming". For the Qur'anic use of the term makr in the sense of "devising false arguments [against something]", see 10:21 and the corresponding note [33].
I.e., the end of their own life, which must precede their resurrection.
For this rendering of the verb yaqussu, see note [5] on 12:3 .
I.e., where they differ from the truth made evident to them in their scriptures. The term "children of Israel" comprises here both the Jews and the Christians (Zamakhshari) inasmuch as both follow the Old Testament, albeit in a corrupted form. It is precisely because of this corruption, and because of the great influence which Jewish and Christian ideas exert over a large segment of mankind, that the Qur'an sets out to explain certain ethical truths to both these communities. The above reference to "most" (and not all) of the problems alluded to in this context shows that the present~passage bears only on man's moral outlook and social life in this world, and not on ultimate, metaphysical questions which - as the Qur'an so often repeats - will be answered only in the hereafter.
Lit., "thou art [or "standest"] upon the obvious [or "self-evident"! truth".
This passage corresponds to the oft-repeated Qur'anic statement that "God guides him that wills [to be guided] (yahdi man yasha)".
Lit., "comes to pass against them" - i.e., when the truth becomes obvious to them against all their expectations, and thus confounds them utterly: an allusion to the approach of the Last Hour, Resurrection and God's Judgment, all of which they were wont to regard as "fables of ancient times" (cf. verses {67-68} above). Alternatively, the phrase idha waqa'a al-qawl 'alayhim may be understood as "when the sentence [of doom] is passed on them", i.e., at the approach of the Last Hour, when it will be too late for repentance.
The "creature brought forth out of the earth" is apparently an allegory of man's "earthly" outlook on life - in other words, the soul-destroying materialism characteristic of the time preceding the Last Hour. This "creature" parabolically "tells" men that their submergence in exclusively materialistic values - and, hence, their approaching self-destruction - is an outcome of their lack of belief in God. (See also {7:175-176} and the corresponding note [141].)
I.e., without having understood them or made any attempt to understand them (Zamakhshari).
Or: "the sentence [of doom] will have been passed on them in recompense of...". etc. (see note [73] above)
In the present context (as in 10:67 or 40:61 ) the reference to "night" and "day" has a symbolic significance: namely, man's God-given ability to gain insight through conscious reasoning ("the day that makes them see") as well as through the intuition that comes from a restful surrender to the voice of one's own heart ("the night made for rest") - both of which tell us that the existence of God is a logical necessity, and that a rejection of His messages is a sin against ourselves
I.e., in perfect consonance with the purpose for which He has created them: which is the approximate meaning of the verb atqana. In this particular instance, stress is laid on the God-willed transitory nature of the world as we know it (cf. 14:48 and {20:105-107}, and the corresponding notes) in contrast with the lasting reality of the life to come.
Lit., "good shall be his from it", i.e., in consequence or in result of it (Ibn 'Abbas, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Ibn Jurayj, all of them quoted by Tabari) - thus stressing the Qur'anic doctrine that what is metaphorically described as "rewards" and "punishments" in the life to come are but the natural consequences, good or bad, of man's attitudes and doings in this world. On a different level, the above phrase may also be understood thus: "Whoever shall come with a good deed will gain something better than [or "through"] it" - an allusion to the fact that whereas the deed itself may be transitory, its merit is enduring (Zamakhshari).
I.e., those who did only evil, or whose evil deeds greatly outweigh their good deeds (Ibn Kathir).
Lit., "Are you requited for anything else than...", etc.
I.e., Mecca, where the first temple dedicated to the One God was built (cf. 3:96 ).