حَدِیۡث

78:41.

Important Words:

حدیثا (anything) is derived from حدث meaning, it came into existence, not having been before. حدث (haddatha) means, he talked or related or narrated, etc.حدیث means, a piece of information; an announcement; news or tidings; an account; a narration or story; a tradition; a thing or matter that is talked of or narrated or transmitted; any talk or discourse that one hears. The word also means, new or recent or brought into existence newly (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The expression, will wish that the earth were made level with them, shows that the words 'earth and heaven' as mentioned in the Quran, do not always signify the physical earth and heaven but may represent one’s existing moral and spiritual condition. On the day when men will stand before God, the earth will have ceased to exist for them.

62:9.

Important Words:

مشیدة (strongly built) is derived from شاد meaning, he plastered (a wall, etc.) with the requisite material. شاد البناء means, he raised the building high. شادوا الدین means, they strengthened and exalted the religion. شیدہ means, he raised it high, namely, a place or a building; or he built it firmly and strongly and raised it high (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The words, Wheresoever you may be, death will overtake you, may either refer to the general physical law about the inevitability of death, meaning that when one must die sooner or later, there is no reason why one should be so afraid of death as to refuse to fight in a just cause; or they may be taken as particularly addressed to the hypocrites, who disobeyed the Divine command to fight, thinking that in this way they would be able to avoid death. The verse purports to say that God had decreed that they should suffer death and destruction, however well protected they might be.

It was customary with the hypocrites that when Muslims achieved a success, they attributed it to God, saying that since Islam was a divine religion, it was bound to prosper and succeed. But when a misfortune overtook Muslims, they declared that it was due to mistakes committed by the Prophet. The Quran says that from the viewpoint from which they ascribe success to God, failures are also ascribable to Him. By attributing success to God and failure to the Prophet, the hypocrites sought to discredit the Prophet and to lower him in the estimation of Muslims.

The words, Say, All is from Allah, point to the fact that both successes and misfortunes were foretold by the Holy Prophet (e.g. see 2:156-158). So even the failures which the hypocrites attributed to the Holy Prophet really constituted a proof of his truth. The expression, All is from Allah, is also true in this sense that God is the final controlling power in the universe and whatever good or evil befalls man is attributable either to the general law of nature ordained by God or to one or other of His special decrees.

Commentary:

Taking the particle الی (till) in the sense of فی (in or on for which see Lane), the clause لیجمعنکم الی یوم القیامة may also be rendered as, "He will certainly assemble you on the Day of Resurrection" but the more correct rendering is that given in the text, i.e. He will certainly (continue to) assemble you till the Day of Resurrection. The difference in meaning is obvious. People are born and die and will go on doing so till the Last Day. Thus the process of assembling is always going on and will continue till the Day of Resurrection, when God will call all to account.

6:69.

Commentary:

The reference in the words, has already revealed to you, is to 6:69 where we read, And when thou seest those who engage in vain discourse concerning Our Signs, then turn thou away from them until they enter into a discourse other than that; and if Satan cause thee to forget, then sit not, after recollection, with the unjust people.

The Surah in which the above-quoted verse occurs was revealed at Mecca, i.e. before the present Surah which is a Medinite one. This clearly shows that the present order of the verses and the Surahs of the Quran is not the same as that in which they were revealed. The reference in the words, He has already revealed to you in the Book, is, as stated above, to 6:69 which was revealed prior to the verse under comment; yet the former has been placed after the latter in the existing arrangement of the Quran.

It is also worthy of note here that while referring to a verse already revealed, the verse under comment uses the words نزل علیکم (has revealed to you) and not یتلی علیکم (is recited to you). The latter expression, i.e. "is recited to you" has been used in 4:128 with reference to 4:4 which had not only been already revealed but has also been placed before the former, i.e. 4:128, in the existing order of the Quran. Again 6:146 makes an allusion to 16:116 in the words اوحی الی (has been revealed to me). Thus, the fact that the Quran uses the words نزل and اوحی for alluding to verses that were revealed earlier but were to be placed later and the word یتلی for alluding to those verses that were not only revealed earlier but were also to be placed earlier, clearly shows that the present order was not devised by the Holy Prophet but was devised and revealed by God Himself.

Another noteworthy point that emerges from this verse is that when an address is made to the Holy Prophet, it is not always meant for him personally but is often meant for his followers, i.e. Muslims in general. In 6:69, the commandment appears to have been addressed to the Holy Prophet, because in that verse all the pronouns and verbs have been used in the second person singular number; but the verse under comment, while referring to the commandment contained in 6:69, clearly addresses Muslims generally, for the words used are, He has already revealed to you in the Book that, when you hear the Signs of God being denied and mocked at, sit not with them, which establishes the fact that the addressees in the commandment embodied in both these verses are the same, i.e. Muslims. If the pronoun "thou" in 6:69 was meant for the Holy Prophet himself, the present verse, while referring to the selfsame commandment, could not address Muslims generally by using the pronoun "you", particularly when besides 6:69 there is no verse in the Quran to which the verse under comment can possibly refer.

The substitution in the present verse of the words لا تقعدوا (sit not with them) for the words اعرض (turn away from them), occurring in 6:69, indicates that the latter expression as used at some places in the Quran is meant to convey the sense of "severing connection with".

The underlying principle in the injunction contained in the present verse is threefold: (1) to emphasize the seriousness and importance of religious matters; (2) to protect the Faithful against the demoralizing influences of disbelievers; and (3) to engender and promote feelings of pious jealousy for religion in the hearts of Muslims.

4:141.

Important Words:

ذکری (recollection) is the noun-infinitive from ذکر i.e. "he remembered, etc." for which see 2:41, 153, 201. ذکری means, remembering or recollecting; remembrance; the presence of a thing in the mind; mentioning or relating a thing; accepting of an exhortation; reminding or causing to remember; admonition. Thus the word is used both intransitively and transitively (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

When the disbelievers, in reply to their demand for punishment, were told that there was a time fixed for every prophecy and that the punishment of God could not come before its time, they began to laugh at the prophecy. So the Quran calls upon the Holy Prophet and, through him, the believers to turn away from them, i.e. to quit their company and depart from the place, so that they might not provoke the further wrath of God by indulging in their vain and insolent discourse. Believers are told not to afford disbelievers an occasion to commit further excesses by sitting in their company but to leave them at once on such occasions, so that they may be induced to turn to other talk.

The words, turn thou away from them, may also be taken figuratively, signifying that you should overlook and treat as unnoticed their action of ridiculing and should not dispute with them about it, so that they might drop the subject and turn to some other topic.

"Satan", for which see 2:15, does not always mean the Evil Spirit; the word is also applied to other harmful things.

It has even been applied to "anger" and "jealousy" in some of the sayings of the Holy Prophet. Here, also, it is used in the sense of "anger" and the sentence would thus mean, "if anger or wrath should cause you to forget the injunction to leave the company of such persons and to quit the place…" This interpretation, however, will hold good only in the case of men who stand on a high level of righteousness. In the case of ordinary men, the word would be taken to mean "evil suggestion" or "negligence".

The word ذکری (recollection), as shown under Important Words, means both "recollection", i.e. remembering, and "reminding." Taking it in the intransitive sense, the sentence would mean that when you recollect the injunction to quit the place, you should do so forthwith. Taking the word ذکری in the sense of "reminding," the sentence would mean that before quitting the place, you should remind the scoffers of their mischievous conduct and tell them that it is an evil and dishonourable course which they follow and that it is calculated to excite against them the wrath of God.

It should also be remembered that really it is not the Holy Prophet but every believer that is addressed in this verse.

6:76; 10:102.

45:7; 77:51.

Commentary:

The verse draws the attention of the Meccans to the great and numerous changes that were taking place around them, which pointed to the approach of a new era. All signs pointed to the fact that idolatry was going to disappear from the country, giving place to Islam. The word ملکوت (kingdom) refers to the control which God exercises over heaven and earth. See also 6:76.

The words بای حدیث (in what thing) may also be rendered as "by means of what thing". In this case, the last sentence of the verse would mean that when disbelievers had reached their term, they would have no time left to believe and repent. The sentence thus constitutes a sort of exhortation to them to make haste and avail themselves of the present opportunity before it is too late.

In the former sense of the words, (i.e. as rendered in the text), the sentence would mean, "When the disbelievers are rejecting the Quran,which is such a perfect and complete Law, what else is left for them to believe in?"

10:38.

16:90.

Commentary:

This verse, which is the last one of the present Surah, means that a careful study of the histories of ancient Prophets leads one to the definite conclusion that the Holy Prophet is a true Messenger of God; for he not only bears a close resemblance to most of them, but in his person are fulfilled the prophecies of some of the previous Scriptures. If he be a liar or an impostor, these prophecies would prove to be false, for, if they are not taken as applying to the Holy Prophetthere is no other person to whom they apply particularly when the Signs that were to appear at the advent of the Promised Prophet have already come to pass. This is what is hinted at in the words, a fulfilment of that which is before it.

The second reason given in this verse about the truth of the Holy Prophet is that the Book revealed to him fully satisfies all the needs and requirements of humanity, being a detailed exposition of all things. When such is the case, what purpose will any Law given to a Prophet in some future time serve? This argument throws overboard the claim of any person who should lay claim to having come with a new Law after the Holy Prophet.

Moreover, the Quran is also "a guidance" i.e. it is a book that not only guides man to truth but also leads and guides him in all the different stages of his moral and spiritual development, till his faith which is at first based only on reason and common sense becomes converted into absolute conviction through personal experience. In this connection see the meaning of ھدی under 1:6. The Quran goes even further, in that its followers not only attain nearness to God but also become recipients of Divine "mercy" when they find the light of God actually descending on them and see God’s help and assistance attending them in all their undertakings.

26:4.

Important Words:

باخع نفسک (grieve thyself to death). باخع is active participle from بخع . They say بخع الشاة i.e. he slaughtered the lamb with extraordinary effectiveness so that the knife reached the back of the neck; the verb بخع is used to denote the doing of anything to a great extent or with extraordinary effectiveness or energy. بخع له نصحه means, he gave him his advice most sincerely. بخع نفسه means, he killed himself with wrath or grief. The Quranic expression فلعلک باخع نفسک means, And maybe thou wilt kill thyself with grief being beyond measure eager for their becoming Muslims (Lane).

Commentary:

It is clear from the context that the people spoken of in these verses are the western Christian nations. God had blessed them with material comforts and wealth and had bestowed upon them power, prestige and dominion. But they fell into the grievous error of taking a frail human being as the son of God. The Holy Prophet’s solicitude and concern for the spiritual well-being of these people and his deep grief over their opposition to truth had almost killed him. But such is human ingratitude that from the very people for whom he felt and grieved so much he received nothing but abuse, invective and ridicule. Never, indeed, were selfless love and kindness so ill requited!

The words, if they believe not in this discourse, allude to the reason of the Prophet’s grief. They mean to say that the Quran contains the solution of all those difficult problems that Christian nations had to face in this life, yet these people who have made so much progress in material sciences are so backward in the spiritual science that they are inviting death and destruction by refusing to accept true guidance.

19:52; 79:16.

Commentary:

موسی (Moses), the founder of Judaism, lived about 1400 years before Jesus. He was a Law-giving Prophet and the founder of a great religious system. As for the name Moses, it may be briefly stated that موسی (Moses) is really a Hebrew name having definite derivation in both Hebrew and Arabic. In Hebrew it is pronounced and written as موشی (Moshe) and means, "a thing drawn out of water" or "saved from water" (Enc. Bib.). See also 2:54.

Against all accepted canons of history Freud in his "Moses and Monotheism" has adumbrated quite a novel theory that Moses was not an Israelite and did not belong to the Hebrew stock and also that the Israelites never settled in Egypt. He has advanced the following arguments in support of this strange and baseless claim:

1. That Moses is an Egyptian name.

2. That the idea of the Oneness of God is originally Egyptian, having been first conceived and adopted by an ancient Egyptian king, named Ikhnaten (or Akhenaten). Moses himself being an Egyptian borrowed it from the Egyptians and preached it among the Israelites.

3. That, being an Egyptian, Moses popularized the Egyptian custom of circumcision as a religious rite among the Israelites.

4. That like the teaching of the Egyptian king, Akhenaten, there is no mention of the life after death in the teachings of Moses which also shows that he was an Egyptian.

5. That the Egyptians had a very strong dislike for swine and its flesh and that the Israelites developed this dislike as a result of the teaching of Moses.

6. That because Moses was an Egyptian he could not properly express himself in Hebrew.

1. Firstly, all these arguments in fact possess no basis. As stated above and also in 2:54, Moses is certainly a Hebrew word, having derivation both in Hebrew and Arabic. But even if we admit that the name Moses was of Egyptian origin, it does not follow that the man Moses also was an Egyptian. As the Israelites were a subject race in Egypt, living under the rule of the Pharaohs, it seems quite plausible that they should have adopted Egyptian names. The members of a subject race generally feel a particular delight in adopting the names and imitating the customs, modes of living and dress etc., of their rulers. But the actual fact is that موسی (Moses) is a Hebrew name and Pharaoh’s daughter, who very probably gave him that name, must have certainly been influenced to give the child a Hebrew name, as having taken him out of water she thought that he belonged to the Israelite people. It is also possible that the name might have been suggested by Moses’ mother or sister.

2. The second argument that the idea of the Oneness of God was originally Egyptian, having been first conceived and adopted by Akhenaten, an ancient Egyptian king, and preached by him among the Israelites, is equally wrong. In the first place it is manifestly unreasonable to suppose that a certain concept is the monopoly of one people. Different peoples may independently form similar ideas without having borrowed them from one another. Secondly, even supposing that the idea of God’s Unity is of Egyptian origin, the inference cannot be justified that Moses was an Egyptian. If an American or a German can borrow an idea from an Englishman and vice versa why cannot an Israelite borrow an idea from an Egyptian? The truth is that the idea of God’s Oneness was neither conceived by Egyptians nor by Syrians or any other people. It has its origin in Divine revelation.

3. The contention that circumcision was an old Egyptian practice and Moses being an Egyptian borrowed it from his people and popularized it among the Israelites also possesses no substance. Supposing that the practice of circumcision was Egyptian, how does this fact show that Moses was an Egyptian? Do not one people adopt the customs of another people? Could not the Israelites, during their stay in Egypt, have borrowed this practice from the Egyptians, particularly in view of the fact that the Israelites were a subject race and the subject race have a special liking for the ideas and practices of their rulers. In any case it is not a fact that the practice of circumcision was in vogue among the Egyptians alone. According to the Bible, in pursuance of God’s command, Abraham had himself and his two sons Ishmael and Isaac circumcised and had made the observance of the rite of circumcision incumbent upon his posterity long before Moses was born (Gen. 17:11). This practice was also in vogue among the Arabs who never had good social relations with the Israelites and never had gone to Egypt. Even among the wild tribes of Africa and the aborigines of Australia circumcision is not unknown (Jew. Enc. vol. 4, p. 97 and "Tribes of Central Australia" by Spencer and Gillen, p.323). The earliest traces of this practice among Egyptians are to be found in the 16th century B.C. (Jew. Enc. vol.4, p.97), when the Israelites had already been living there. It can, therefore, be safely inferred that, if at all, the practice was borrowed by the Egyptians from the Israelites and not by the Israelites from the Egyptians. The practice seems to have been introduced into Egypt by the Prophet Joseph who commanded great respect and prestige with Egyptian monarchs. Under his influence it must have become popular among the upper strata of Egyptian society as research scholars are of the view that this practice was much more in vogue among the upper sections of the Egyptian people to which Joseph himself belonged than among the poor classes.

4. Another argument that has been advanced in favour of Moses being an Egyptian is that like the teaching of Akhenaten no reference is to be found in the teachings of Moses about life after death. That this argument is quite weak and flimsy is clear from the fact that Akhenaten has left no book, no teaching and no community of followers from whom his views about life after death might be ascertained. Moreover, there are references to life after death in the teaching of Moses. The Bible says: "And die in the mount whither thou goest up, and be gathered unto thy people; as Aaron thy brother died in mount Hor, and was gathered unto his people" (Deut. 32:50) and "I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness" (Psalms 17: 15). The misconception may have arisen from the absence of any marked emphasis on life after death in the Old Testament. This lack of stress might have been due to the fact that in the course of time the Old Testament had become subject to much interpolation and had been tampered with and many parts of it had been lost during the miseries and misfortunes that overtook the Israelites in the period of their dispersion and captivity. When, however, the Jewish scholars and savants re-edited the Bible, they left out from it those passages which did not quite suit the Jewish temper and genius. The passages dealing with the subject of life after death seem to have been among the parts left out as the Jews, being a particularly worldly-minded people, did not relish its repeated mention.

5. The fifth argument given in support of this thesis is that the Israelites, like the Egyptians, had an extreme dislike for pork. This argument, too, seems to stand on a flimsy ground. Though Egyptians did not like pork, pigs were kept and reared in Egypt and were even offered as sacrifice at the altars of the Egyptian gods (Enc. Bib. cols. 4825, 4826). Thus the reason for the Egyptians to refrain from slaughtering pigs seems to have been that they considered it a sacred animal unlike the Israelites to whom its eating was forbidden on account of its being filthy and abominable.

6. The sixth argument given in favour of Moses being an Egyptian is that he could not properly speak Hebrew, the language of the Israelites. This argument is based on Exod. 4:10 where it is stated that Moses was not eloquent and was slow of speech and of a slow tongue. It is true that Moses suffered from an impediment in his speech and could not freely express himself. But how could the fact that Moses was not fluent and was slow of speech prove that he was slow of speech in Hebrew and therefore was not an Israelite. On the contrary, as it appears from the Bible and the Quran, when commanded by God to go to Pharaoh to preach his mission to him, Moses requested to be excused on the plea of his inability to express himself adequately. This fact, if anything, shows that Moses could not freely talk in the tongue which Pharaoh spoke and understood i.e. the Egyptian tongue, and therefore he was not an Egyptian.

In short, there is no reason or justification for supposing that the name Moses is of Egyptian origin or that the man Moses was not an Israelite. The linguistic evidence of Hebrew and Arabic, combined with reason and the evidence of Jewish history and tradition, added to the account of Moses as given in the Bible and the Quran, all go to substantiate and support the fact that Moses was not an Egyptian nor was his name of Egyptian origin.

Commentary:

Life is a very serious thing. Man has been created to serve a very noble and grand purpose. To this seriousness and sublimity of human life, an emphatic and pointed reference has been made in the words "do you think that We have created you in vain and that you will not return to Us" (23:116). But in spite of this emphatic admonition, men of frivolous turn of mind fritter away their precious time and energy in vain pursuits and foolish diversions, treating the signs of God lightly, with the result that (as the verse says) they meet with disgrace and failure in this life, and a humiliating punishment awaits them in the Hereafter.