ROOT د ب ر

59:13.

Commentary:

The words, they cannot harm you save a slight hurt, signify that Jews, in spite of their great enmity to Islam, will not be able to do Muslims more than a slight injury, and this is what actually happened.

The words, they shall show you their backs, contain a prophecy which met with its fulfilment three times by the defeat at Medina of the hostile Jewish tribes who made common cause with the Arab tribes. They were guilty of treachery and met with the punishment they deserved.

The words are equally applicable to the enemies of Islam in general. Preaching of the Divine Message can bring upon Muslims only temporary trouble. If they persevere in preaching with sincerity and patience, they are sure to come out successful in their endeavour. On the other hand, if the enemies of Islam take up arms against Muslims for their preaching of Islam, God will help the latter against their enemies and grant them victory.

47:25.

Commentary:

The word اختلاف (disagreement) may have two meanings: (1) either it may refer to contradictions in the text of the Quranand the teachings contained therein; or (2) it may refer to the non-agreement between the Quranic announcements in the form of prophecies and their result or fulfilment. The Quran is free from اختلاف (disagreement) in both these respects. In spite of covering an extremely vast field of reform—spiritual, moral, social, economic, political, legal, etc.—its teachings are perfectly harmonious, no part clashing in letter or spirit with another, no section nourished at the cost of another.

Taken in the second sense, the verse means that all the different announcements and prophecies made by the Quran are proving, and will prove, to be true; and there can be no disagreement in this respect either. If the Quran had not been the Word of God, but the fabrication of man, most of the prophecies and promises made by it under extremely adverse conditions would have failed to materialize.

So the fact that the prophecies made in the Quran have been, and are being, fulfilled against all calculations and all expectations and in a most wonderful manner is a proof positive of the fact that it is the revealed Word of God.

The word, much, qualifying the word disagreement should not be construed to mean that some disagreement in the Quran is possible. The expression is simply intended to mean that, whereas otherwise there would have been much disagreement, the Quran being the Word of God, there is, in fact, none.

7:73; 15:67.

Important Words:

دابر (last remnant) is derived from دبر. They say دبرہ i.e. he followed behind his back; or he followed him with respect to place, time or rank. ادبر means, he went turning his back, or he turned back. دبر means, the back or the hinder part; latter or the last part. دابر means, person or thing following behind the back; last remains of a people; the root, stock, race, or the like (Lane).

Commentary:

The words قطع دابر القوم (the last remnant of the people was cut off) mean: (1) the people were cut off to the last man, i.e.the whole people were cut off; (2) the leaders of the people were cut off just as a tree is cut down to its roots, the leaders occupying the position of the roots; (3) the leaders’ followers were cut off, i.e. the leaders were deprived of their political power, for it is on the strength of their followers that the political power of the leaders depends.

Apparently, there is no occasion here for saying, All praise belongs to Allah, for these words are spoken on an occasion when one receives a favour from God and is thankful to Him. When, however, one is afflicted with a misfortune, then the words which suit the occasion and which Muslims are bidden to recite are إنا لله و إنا إلیه راجعون i.e. Surely to Allah we belong and to Him shall we return (2:157). The apparent incongruity is, however, easily explained. The words الحمد لله (all praise belongs to Allah) have been used here in order to point out that the cutting-off of what is injurious is in fact a thing to feel grateful for, and not a matter of regret. When a limb becomes diseased and is incurable, we get it amputated and cheerfully pay the fee to the surgeon for the operation, and also express our thanks to him. Just as a diseased limb is amputated to save the rest of the body, it sometimes becomes necessary to cut off that section of mankind which has become corrupt, so that the infection may not spoil all of humanity.

7:165; 26:120,121.

Commentary:

The word دابر (last remnant) also means "root" (see 6:46), in which case it may be taken to signify leaders of a community, i.e. those who lead and organize opposition to a Prophet and devise plans to compass his ruin. The tribe of ‘Ad was destroyed by a furious wind, (see 69:7).

Important Words:

الشوکة (sting) is derived from شاك. They say شاکنی الشوك i.e. the thorn hurt or wounded me or it pierced my body. الشوکة is both the noun-infinitive from شاك and the singular of الشوك (thorns, spines, etc.). الشوکة means, thorn; sting; point of a spear, etc.; any weapon or weapons; sharpness of weapons; strength or might or vehemence thereof in war and fighting (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The "two parties" mentioned in the verse refer to (1) the Meccan army that had come forth to fight the Muslims, and (2) the Meccan caravan that was returning from the north and proceeding home. The former, besides being much larger in number, was heavily armed and very well-equipped; while the caravan was only lightly armed. Both belonged to Mecca and were equally hostile to Islam.

The verse signifies that as Allah had already made a promise to the Holy Prophet that He would give victory to Muslims over one of the two Meccan parties, viz. the caravan or the army, so against all hope He granted them victory in fulfilment of His promise. This shows that while yet at Medina, the Holy Prophet had been informed by God of the possible attack by the Meccan army, for without this Allah could not refer to "one of the two parties," but that the Holy Prophet kept the matter secret. The words, thy Lord Who rightfully brought thee forth from thy house, while a party of the believers were averse (8:6 above), also show that at Medina the Holy Prophet had undoubtedly received Divine revelation informing him of the coming attack by the enemy and that it was God Who had ordered the Holy Prophet to come forth. The above-quoted words also hint that the Holy Prophet kept this information secret, revealing it to only a few of his chosen comrades.

The words غیر ذات الشوکة (without sting) imply that the Muslims wanted to meet the party that was without sting, (i.e. the caravan) which they could easily overcome but that God desired to bring about an encounter with the army which could not be easily conquered, and His object in doing so was to establish the truth by His words and to cut off the root of the disbelievers, so that the prophecies with regard to the destruction of the enemy might be fulfilled that day, and their fulfilment against all hope might become the means of establishing the truth of Islam. For a more detailed account of the Battle of Badr see notes on 3:14 & 8:42-45.

8:46; 47:5.

Important Words:

زحفا (advancing in force) is derived from زحف i.e. he walked, marched or went on foot little by little; he crept or crawled along; or he went leisurely or heavily; or he walked or moved with an effort; or he dragged himself along upon the ground. They say زحف العسکر meaning, the army moved heavily on account of its great numbers. زحف means, an army or military force marching slowly or heavily by reason of their multitude; a numerous army (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The word زحفا (advancing in force) qualifies and refers to the believers and not the disbelievers, as supposed by some commentators. The following verse, as well as the wording of the present one, makes the reference positively clear.

When a Muslim army (not a small detachment) meets the enemy, they are strictly forbidden to flee from the field of battle. They must fight and go on fighting till they win or die; there is no third course open to them. This command constitutes a great secret of success, besides being a sure source of self-discipline.

47:28.

3:182; 22:10.

Commentary:

The verse signifies that angels will smite the faces and the backs of disbelievers as a fitting punishment for their evil actions. The punishment corresponded with the actions of disbelievers, because the latter used to confront the believers and meet them face to face when fighting them. Again, they used to turn their backs disdainfully when truth was preached to them. So both faces and backs would receive punishment.

3:124.

Important Words:

مواطن (battlefields) is the plural of موطن which is derived from وطن. They say وطن بالمکان i.e. he dwelt or resided or settled in the place. الوطن means, the place of one’s abode or residence; place of permanent residence; home; place where cattle are tied or kept. موطن means, place of residence; a scene of battle or a battlefield (Aqrab).

حنین (Hunain), scene of an important battle between the Holy Prophet and certain pagan tribes of Arabia in 8 AH. The place lies to the south east of Mecca about 18 miles from it.

In this battle a number of the newly subdued disbelievers of Mecca took part on the side of the Muslims.

Commentary:

Muslims are here reminded of the great truth that mere numbers do not count much and that they should not think that the presence of disbelievers would contribute to their strength or prosperity. Their attention is drawn to their temporary reverse at the battlefield of Hunain which was due to the presence of 2,000 Meccans who, though professing to be Muslims, were but newly converted and were not yet well established in faith, 80 of them actually being idolaters. (Zurqani, iii. 6).

After the Fall of Mecca, the powerful tribes of Hawazin and Thaqif, fearing lest Islam should become established in the Hijaz, joined forces and advanced to attack the Muslims. The Holy Prophet met them at Hunain, 18 miles from Mecca. He was accompanied by 12,000 men, among whom were 2,000 new converts mentioned above, who had joined the army at Mecca. Contrary to the practice of the Holy Prophet, these men hastened to attack the enemy, 20,000 strong, but were quickly repulsed and fled from the battlefield in great confusion, throwing into disorder the advancing Muslim force which was passing through a narrow gorge and which was consequently forced to flee. In the stampede that followed the Holy Prophet, who stuck to his place like a rock, was left on the battlefield with only 100 men around him. Arrows from the archers of the enemy fell thick and fast all round him. It was a moment of extreme danger but the Prophet, urging his mule towards the enemy, advanced undaunted, shouting at the top of his voice: انا النبی لاکذب انا ابن عبدالمطلب i.e. "I am indeed the Prophet of God. There is no untruth about it. I am the son of ‘Abdul-Muttalib". ‘Abbas, an uncle of the Prophet, who possessed a stentorian voice, called out to the fleeing Muslims to stop and return to their Master who wanted them. This clarion call roused the Muslims as the trumpet call of the Day of Judgement will rouse the dead from their graves and, rallying with a giant effort they rushed back to their beloved Master and attacked the enemy with such vehemence as put terror in his heart and made him flee in utter confusion. Thus the scales were turned and the day ended in a signal victory for the Muslims, and no less than 6,000 disbelievers were taken prisoner (Tabari and Hisham).

7:55; 11:8; 25:60; 32:5.

13:3; 20:6.

32:6.

2:256.

Important Words:

عرش (Throne). See under 7:55.

یدبر (He governs) is derived from دبر (dabbara) which again is derived from دبر (dabara). They say دبرہ i.e. he followed behind his back or he simply followed him with respect to time, place or rank. دبر الامر (dabbara) means, (1) he considered the issues or results of the affair or the case; (2) he performed or executed the affair with thought or consideration; (3) he devised or planned the affair; (4) he governed, managed, conducted or regulated the affair (Lane, Taj & Aqrab).

Commentary:

In the verse under comment, the word ایام (periods), of which the singular is یوم, does not refer to the period which is determined by the rising and setting of the sun, for the obvious reason that the verse speaks of a time when the sun had not yet come into existence. The word is used here in the sense of time absolutely (see 1:4). Many eminent authorities (e.g. Mujahid, Ahmad bin Hanbal and Ibn ‘Abbas) have held that here یوم (period) stands for a thousand years (see Kathir & Ma‘ani, under 7:55). They have drawn this inference from 22:48 where a day is spoken of as equal to a thousand years. They are certainly right in holding that the word یوم in this verse does not denote the period of time determined by the rotation of the earth, but they are not right in holding that it stands here for a thousand years, for according to the Quran there is also a یوم (period) which is equal to fifty thousand years (70:5). If we compute the period of six days by this standard, it will mean that the creation of the heavens and the earth was completed in 300,000 years. But we cannot presume that God has disclosed to us the extent of all His days. If some of God’s days extend over a thousand years, and others over fifty thousand years, there may be still others which extend over millions or billions of years. Science has discovered the fact that it took the heavens and the earth millions of years to be evolved into their present shape. A vision of the eminent Muslim scholar Muhy-ud-Din Ibn ‘Arabi also leads to a similar conclusion (see under 2:31). Hence, the truth is that we cannot determine with certainty the length of the "six days" during which the creation of the heavens and the earth was completed. All that we can say is that God brings about different changes in different periods, some taking a thousand years, others fifty thousand years, and yet others even longer periods, but that, taken all together, the creation of heavens and earth was completed in six periods. See also 7:55.

It will be invariably seen that when a certain verse of the Quran is found liable to objection, the very next verse or passage provides an answer to that objection. Often the question is not mentioned and only the answer is given. These answers serve as a link between what passes in the mind of the reader and the contents of the Quran. Thus the reader finds that as soon as a question arises in his mind, he is given the answer there and then. Those who are not acquainted with this psychological trait of the Quran are inclined to say that there exists no order or arrangement in the Quranic verses, while the fault is all their own, for they do not care to ponder over the Quranic verses. The verse under comment answers a question that arises from the previous verse. That question is, how can Muslims prosper when there are no outward signs of their prosperity? In fact, the previous verse had given promise of lasting success to Muslims—and that at a time when they enjoyed no peace even in their own homes and were surrounded on all sides by powerful enemies. The objection was bound to arise, how could Muslims prosper in such adverse circumstances, and disbelievers naturally thought that promises about the future prosperity of Muslims were nothing but a delusion and a mirage. This implied objection has been answered in the present verse, in which it is pointed out that signs of future developments need not be visible at the outset, and that in this respect the spiritual system resembles the physical system. So attention is drawn to the creation of the heavens and the earth in six periods, and it is hinted that, if it were necessary for the Divine Word to be fulfilled all at once, then the heavens and the earth should also have come into existence all at once. But the fact is that their creation took six long cycles to become perfect and complete. If the creation of the heavens and the earth out of invisible atoms in a period extending over millions of years does not belie that God is their architect, how can the fact that means for the full expansion of Islam did not come into existence with the very announcement of his mission by the Holy Prophet, show that its triumph is doubtful, or that its foundations have not been laid by God? Divine works are brought about through a perfectly planned system and often have their bases hidden from the human eye.

It appears from this and other verses of the Quran that it is a law of God, working both in the physical and the spiritual world, that all things find their completion and consummation at the seventh stage. They pass through six stages of development and then become perfect and complete at the seventh stage. The movement set on foot by the Holy Prophet was likewise to pass through six stages of development and was to see its completion in the seventh stage and so it actually came to pass (for details and fuller discussion see Tafsir-e-Kabir by Hadrat Khalifatul Masih II, under 10:4).

The words, then He settled Himself on the Throne, point to the fact that, just as after the creation of the physical universe, God settled Himself on the Throne and all its affairs began to be conducted through the set laws of nature, so, after the establishment of Islam on earth, all spiritual progress will be attainable only through Islam.

The words, He governs everything, have been added to show how God governs the universe and conducts its affairs. Elsewhere the Quran says, When He decrees a thing He does only say to it, 'Be' and it is (2:118). These words do not mean that after God ordains a certain thing, it at once comes into being in its full-fledged form and that there is no intervening period between God’s decree and the coming into being of the decreed thing in its fully developed form. It only means that when God decrees a thing, nothing can stop its fulfilment. Indeed, God’s decree is often fulfilled in subtle ways. The words, He governs everything, thus point to the working of the universe and to the means which God uses to fulfil His decree and will. For, as explained under Important Words, تدبیر (governing) gives a number of meanings including consideration or, performance of a thing with a well thought-out and planned regulation.

The word عرش (Throne), for which see 7:55, needs some explanation. On careful consideration of all relevant verses and facts it becomes clear that this word represents the transcendent attributes of God, i.e. such attributes as are not found in any other being and are technically known as صفات تنزیھیة. These attributes are eternal and unchangeable and are manifested through God’s other attributes known as صفات تشبیھیة i.e. such attributes as are found more or less in other beings also. The former attributes are said to be the bearers of the عرش (Throne). In 69:18, we read that eight (attributes) shall bear the Throne of the Lord above them on that day. The number "eight" in this verse refers to the eight attributes through which God will manifest Himself on the Day of Judgement, just as He is manifesting Himself through His four attributes (mentioned in 1:2-4) in the present world. These four attributes, which belong to the group of صفات تشبیھیة are رب العالمین (Lord of all the worlds), الرحمان (Gracious), الرحیم (Merciful) and مالك یوم الدین (Lord of the Day of Judgement). On the Day of Judgement the four corresponding transcendent attributes, i.e. صفات تنزیھیة will also come into operation. The صفات تشبیھیة may be called attributes of similitude, because these attributes are similar to the attributes manifested by human beings. For instance, as kings display their majesty by seating themselves on their thrones, similarly the glory of God lies in His being the "Lord of the Throne." But on the Day of Judgement, this attribute will manifest its transcendent phase and no other being will bear to God the slightest resemblance in that respect.

Some scholars have erroneously inferred from certain verses of the Quran that عرش (Throne) is something created. This inference, among other verses, is drawn from 69:18, in which angels are represented as "bearing" the Throne of God. It is wrongly considered that, having been represented as being "borne" by angels, the عرش must be something material. But the truth is that the word حمل (bearing) is used not merely to denote the bearing of a material thing in the physical sense but also figuratively. Thus in 33:73 man is spoken of as "bearing" the Law which was offered to him by God as a trust; but the Law of God is not a material thing. The expression only means that man accepted and acted upon the Law of God and thereby helped to bear it aloft by revealing its manifold beauties and excellences. Similarly, the bearing of the عرش (Throne) by angels means only that its true reality is disclosed and manifested through them. It is evident that man cannot understand and realize the transcendent attributes of God except through His attributes of similitude, i.e. such as are manifested in relation to His creatures and are shared by them. Thus the attributes of God as are manifested in relation to His creatures are, as it were, the bearers of His transcendent attributes, which means that the former kind of attributes help man to understand and realize the latter kind of attributes.

Another verse giving rise to the idea that the عرش is created is 23:87, in which God is spoken of as "the Lord of the seven heavens and the Lord of the Great Throne." It is argued that as God is the رب (Lord) of the عرش (Throne), therefore He must be its Creator, for the word رب (Lord) also means Creator. But رب (Lord) does not necessarily mean Creator; it also means Owner or Possessor. So رب العرش would mean "the Possessor or Owner of the Throne." God has been spoken of as ذو الرحمة (the Possessor of mercy) in 18:59. But mercy is an attribute of God and has not been created by Him. The description of God as the Possessor of "mercy" or as the Owner of عرش (Throne) does not therefore imply His creation of either of them.

It may be asked, if the word رب (Lord) has been used in the sense of ذو or صاحب (Owner or Possessor), why has not either of the two latter words been used instead of رب (Lord)? The answer is that the use of the word رب fulfils an additional purpose. Some philosophers look upon God only as the First Cause. According to them, the attributes of God are working spontaneously and automatically and are not subject to the will of God. The Quran has, therefore, used the word رب (Lord) in relation to عرش in order to show that the attributes of God do not work involuntarily but according to His will, for the word رب conveys the idea of control coupled with ownership.

Another verse from which it has been erroneously inferred that the عرش is something created is 11:8. It has been argued that as in that verse عرش is spoken of as "being on water", which is a created element, therefore it must itself be something created. But it must be remembered that the word "water" in 11:8 does not mean material water. The عرش(Throne) could not be said to have been resting on water before the creation of the heavens and the earth, for water forms part of the earth and evidently could not have existed before the creation of the latter. Again, for a material throne to be represented as resting on the surface of water after the creation of the heavens and the earth appears to be quite absurd. Moreover, as all words of the Wise God are full of deep wisdom, what possible purpose can be served by the mention of a thing which does not, in any way, concern or interest us? The disclosure that the Throne of God rested on water does not even reveal the glory or majesty of God, because we are kept in the dark as to the nature and reality of this resting of the Throne on water. So neither does "water" here mean material water nor does "Throne" mean a material throne. In fact, "water" in the language of revealed Scriptures often means the word of God. In this sense, the verse would signify that the Throne of God rests on the word of God, which means that it is beyond man fully to comprehend and realize the majesty and glory of God except with the help of His word.

That the عرش really represents the transcendent attributes of God is also clear from 23:117, where we read: There is no God but He, the Lord of the Exalted Throne. These words show that the "Unity of God" and "His Exalted Throne" are intimately connected, for it is the transcendent attributes of God which constitute the real proof of Divine Unity. It requires a good deal of reasoning to convince a person of ordinary intelligence of Divine Unity by means of the other attributes which are shared by man in different degrees.

In the words, There is no intercessor with Him save after His permission, some light is thrown on the subject of intercession which has been dealt with at some length in 2:49 and 2:256. Suffice it here to say that the word شفیع (intercessor) is derived from شفع which means the connecting or the joining together of two like things. In view of this meaning, it would be wrong to say that belief in intercession can in any way encourage a sinner to sink deeper in sin. Nothing is farther from the Islamic conception of شفاعة (intercession) than this baseless notion. According to Islamic teaching only those good people who lack a requisite number of good works to make them heirs to the grace and mercy of God but who, at the same time, have a true spiritual connection with His Prophet can avail themselves of intercession; and not those habitual sinners who deliberately break the commandments of God and have no true connection with His Prophet.

27:65; 34:25; 35:4.

3:28; 6:96.

See 10:4.

Commentary:

This verse explains in a beautiful manner the relation between Divine revelation and human reason. It says that all physical or spiritual sustenance is provided by heaven and earth acting in concert. Neither of them can do it singly. For example, if heaven should continue to send down rain but the earth should lack the necessary power and capacity for bringing forth vegetation, the rain would produce nothing. On the other hand, if no rain falls, then the fertility of the soil alone will not suffice to produce vegetation. Exactly in the same way human reason, which is like soil, cannot produce spiritual vegetation, which serves as spiritual food for man, unless the water of Divine revelation comes to its aid from heaven. It is, therefore, vain to hope that man can attain to God by the help of reason alone, without the aid of Divine revelation.

The verse proceeds to say that it is foolish to think that God should have given eyes and ears to men but should have failed to provide for them the task they were meant to perform. That task is provided through Divine guidance. Similarly, the verse draws our attention to the process of life and death in this world. Oftentimes the living come out of the dead and things which to all outward appearance are dead begin to show signs of life and vice versa. Is it not then possible that there should sometimes gush forth a fountain of life from a dead heart? When such a possibility exists, why should not God grant respite to the sinful so that such of them as possess the germs of life may revive?

The verse continues the argument in the words, And who governs all affairs?, meaning that it is inconceivable that a being who is entrusted with the conduct of an affair should himself seek to destroy it. No wise man can ever think of undoing his own handiwork. How then can God wish to destroy the universe which is the means for the manifestation of His powers and attributes? He would much rather save it than destroy it. This is why He is slow in punishing.

There exists an extremely beautiful and intelligent order in this verse. It begins with a reference to sustenance, which is the means of the preservation of life. Then it speaks of the organs of sight and hearing, which are the means of acquiring wisdom and knowledge. After that the verse speaks of the system of life and death, pointing to man’s power of action which naturally comes into operation after the acquirement of wisdom and understanding. Last of all, it speaks of the government or management of affairs which is needed when one begins to exercise the power of action, for تدبیرmeans, conducting an affair in an ordered and regulated manner and maintaining proper balance between different acts. In short, all the four means which are needed for the achievement of the purpose of man’s existence have been mentioned here in their natural order. Now can there be a being so unreasonable as to first create life and endow man with feelings and the necessary capabilities for work and also provide a well-regulated order in his actions, and then, having endowed him with all these gifts, leave him alone and give him no instructions to employ these great gifts for the attainment of a particular object? A man with even a grain of sense can see that such a thing is impossible. And it is equally impossible that, after having done all this, God should be hasty in bringing about destruction or awarding punishment.

Sometimes even Christian commentators of the Quran feel constrained to admire the beauty and force of its teachings. Commenting on this and the following few verses, the Rev. E.M. Wherry says: "This passage contains very cogent reasoning against idolaters. These teachings account for much of the success of Islam as a missionary religion." It is a pity, however, that even in the face of such admissions some Christian writers should have the hardihood to ascribe the success of Islam to the sword and the so-called "temptations" which Islam is alleged to have offered to its followers.