-->
According to the classical commentators, this is a reference to the case of Khawlah (or Khuwaylah) bint Tha'labah, whose husband Aws ibn as-Samit divorced her by pronouncing the arbitrary pre-Islamic oath known as zihar (explained in note [3] on 33:4 ). When she pleaded before the Prophet against this divorce - which deprived her of all her marital rights and, at the same time, made it impossible for her to remarry - the iniquitous custom of zihar was abolished by the revelation of verses {2-4} of this surah. - In view of the sequence, as well as of several Traditions to this effect, there is no doubt that the above verse alludes, in the first instance, to the divine condemnation of zihar. However, the deliberately unspecified reference to "her who pleads concerning her husband" seems to point to all cases where a wife has reason to complain against her husband: that is to say, not merely to an appeal against an unjustified or cruel divorce, but also to a wife's demand for release from an unbearable marriage. Such a dissolution of the marriage-tie at the wife's instance - termed khul' - is fully sanctioned by the shari'ah on the basis of 2:229 and a number of extremely well-authenticated Traditions. (For a fuller discussion of this problem, see note [218] on the second paragraph of 2:229 .)
Lit., "does hear the mutual contentions of both of you (tahawurakuma)", i.e., of husband and wife alike, embracing with His infinite wisdom and justice the innermost motivations of both. Alternatively - if the above verse is understood as referring specifically to the case of Khawlah - the second person indicated by the suffix kuma ("both of you") may relate to the Prophet, who, before the revelation of this surah, thought that a divorce through zihar was valid and, therefore, repeatedly told Khawlah, "Thou art now indeed unlawful to him" (Tabari). This opinion was subsequently - almost immediately - reversed by the divine prohibition of zihar expressed in verses {2} ff.
For this explanatory rendering of the verb yuzahirun, see surah {33}, note [3]. My interpolation of the word "henceforth" is necessary in view of the fact that the custom of zihar - in its sense of a definitive act of divorce - had been abolished by verses {2-4} of the present surah.
For this particular rendering of the term munkar, see surah {16}, note [109].
I.e., the freeing or purchasing the freedom of a slave or captive. In modern times, when slavery is more or less non-existent, the concept of tahrir raqabah may, I believe, be legitimately extended to the redeeming of a human being from the bondage of debt or of great poverty.
Cf. 2:225 - "God will not take you to task for oaths which you may have uttered without thought, but will take you to task [only] for what your hearts have conceived [in earnest]".
I.e., in the manner prescribed for fasting during the month of Ramadan (see {2:183-187}). As regards the phrase "he who does not find the wherewithal (lam yajid)", it may indicate either a lack of financial means or the impossibility of finding anyone else who could be redeemed from factual or figurative bondage (see note [5] above). According to many Islamic scholars of our times (e.g., Rashid Rida', commenting on 4:92 ), this relates, in the first instance, to circumstances in which "slavery will have been abolished in accordance with the aim of Islam" (Manar V, 337).
Or, alternatively, one needy person for sixty days. The inability to fast for two consecutive months may be due either to ill-health or to really compelling external circumstances (for instance, the necessity of performing labours which require great physical and/or mental vigour and alertness).
Sc., "by showing that you have renounced the practices of the Time of Ignorance" (Razi). In other words, the pronouncement of zihar is not to be considered a divorce, as was the case in pre-Islamic times, but solely as a reprehensible act which must be atoned for by a sacrifice.
Sc., "which they chose to disregard". Thus, proceeding from the particular to the general, the present passage connects with the reference, at the end of verse {4}, to "all who deny the truth", i.e., of divine revelation.
The prohibition referred to here arises from the Qur'anic statement, "No good comes, as a rule, out of secret confabulations - save those which are devoted to enjoining charity, or equitable dealings, or setting things to rights between people" (see 4:114 and the corresponding note [138]). Although there is no doubt that, as the classical commentators point out, the "secret confabulations" spoken of in this passage relate to intrigues aimed against the Prophet and his followers by some of their unbelieving contemporaries, there is no doubt, either, that the passage has a general import, and is, therefore, valid for all times.
I.e., in the wider sense, disobedience to the Apostle's ethical teachings.
The reference to "approaching" the Prophet has here a twofold meaning, relating literally to his unbelieving contemporaries, and figuratively to an intellectual "approach" to his person and his teachings by hostile critics of all later times. The same observation is valid with regard to the next clause as well.
Lit., "with which God has never saluted thee". Historically, this is an allusion to the hostile attitude of the Jews of Medina towards the Prophet. It is recorded that instead of pronouncing the traditional greeting "Peace be upon thee" when encountering him, some of them used to mumble the word salam ("peace") in such a way as to make it indistinguishable from sam ("death"); and they employed the same scurrilous play of words with regard to the Prophet's Companions as well. (The relevant ahadith are quoted in full, with indication of the sources, by Tabari and Ibn Kathir in their commentaries on the above verse.) But see also the preceding note.
Sc., "if Muhammad is truly a prophet".
See note [12].
I.e., in and by itself, the force of evil epitomized in the concept of "Satan" has no power whatever: cf. 14:22 - "I had no power at all over you: I but called you - and you responded unto me. Hence, blame not me, but blame yourselves." (See also Razi's views quoted in my note [31] on the above-mentioned verse.) As regards the problem of God's "letting" or "allowing" a person to go astray (implied in the phrase "unless it be by God's leave"), see note [4] on 14:4 .
Lit., "in the assemblies (al-majalis)". Although it is frequently assumed that this refers to the assemblies held by the Prophet, when his followers would throng around him in their eagerness the better to hear what he had to say, or - more generally - to congregations in mosques, etc., in later times, I am (with Razi) of the opinion that the plural noun majalis is used here in a tropical or metaphorical sense, denoting the totality of men's social life. Taken in this sense, the "making room for one another" implies the mutual providing of opportunities for a decent life to all - and especially to the needy or handicapped - members of the community. See also next note.
Commenting on this passage, Razi says: "This verse indicates that if one widens the means (abwab) of happiness and well-being of God's creatures ('ibad), God will widen for him all that is good in this life and in the hereafter. Hence, no reasonable person (al-'aqil) could ever restrict [the purport of] this verse to merely making room for one another in an [actual] assembly."
The interpretation implied in the words "for a good deed" interpolated by me above is analogous to that offered by most of the classical commentators, and most explicitly by Tabari; in the words of Qatadah (ibid.), "Whenever you are called upon to do a good deed, respond to this call."
Cf. the saying of the Prophet: "The superiority of a learned man ('alim) over a [mere] worshipper ('abid) is like the superiority of the moon on the night when it is full over all other stars" (Ibn Hanbal, Abu Da'ud, Tirmidhi, Nasa'i, Ibn Majah and Darimi).
This call to an exercise of charity on every occasion (bayna yaday) of one's "consultation" with God's Apostle has been widely misunderstood as applying only to factual consultations with him, i.e., in his lifetime, supposedly with a view to lessening the encroachments on his time by some of his too-eager followers. This misunderstanding, together with the qualified dispensation from the above-mentioned injunction expressed in the next verse, has given rise to the unwarranted contention by some of the commentators that this injunction has been "abrogated". But apart from the fact that the theory of "abrogation" as such is entirely untenable (see 2:106 and the corresponding note [87]), the above verse reveals its true meaning as soon as we realize that the term "the Apostle" (ar-rasul) is used in the Qur'an not merely to designate the unique person of the Prophet Muhammad but also the sum-total of the teachings conveyed by him to the world. This is evident from the many Qur'anic exhortations, "Pay heed unto God and the Apostle", and, more specifically (in 4:59 ), "if you are at variance over any matter, refer it unto God [i.e., the Qur'an] and the Apostle [i.e., his sunnah]", which latter is but meant to elucidate the former.
Lit., "if you do not find", sc., anyone on whom to bestow charity at that particular moment, or have - for whatever reason - no opportunity to exercise it.
I.e., the obligatory tax (zakah) which is meant to purify a believer's possessions and income from the taint of selfishness: implying that one's inability to do more by way of charity does not constitute a sin.
For the meaning of "God's condemnation", see note [4] on the last verse of Al-Fatihah. In this particular context, the ones "who would be friends with people whom God has condemned" are the half-hearted who - while dimly perceiving the truth of God's existence and self-revelation - are nevertheless unwilling to surrender themselves to this truth for fear of estranging themselves from their God-denying environment and, thus, of losing what they regard as the material advantages of a spiritually uncommitted life: and it is this moral falsehood to which the last sentence of this verse refers. (See also the last verse of surah {60}.)
I.e., by sowing doubts in other people's hearts.
Namely, that their preference of worldly benefits to a spiritual commitment is and, therefore, morally "justified". It is to this flagrant self-deception that the next sentence refers.
The definite article al prefixed to the participial noun kadhibun indicates that the people thus characterized have reached the utmost degree of self-deception; hence my interpolation of the adjective "greatest" in consonance with Zamakhshari's interpretation of the above phrase.
The operative phrase of this passage is contained in the words, "anyone who contends against (man hadda) God and His Apostle": i.e., anyone who is engaged in active hostility against God's message and the person or the teachings of His Apostle. As regards relations with non-believers who are not actively hostile to Islam, the Qur'an explicitly permits and implicitly ordains in many places (e.g., in {60:8-9}) kindness and friendliness towards them.
For my rendering of ruh as "inspiration" or, occasionally, as "divine inspiration", see note [2] on 16:2 . As pointed out by Zamakhshari, the pronominal suffix in minhu may relate either to God - as in my rendering - or to the believers' faith, in which latter case the phrase could be rendered as "strengthened with inspiration [flowing] therefrom".