يَكُونُ

6:102.

3:48; 6:74; 16:41; 36:83; 40:69.

Important Words:

بدیع (Originator) is derived from بدع which means, he originated a thing or brought it into existence newly (i.e. for the first time, the thing not having existed before) and not after the similitude of anything pre-existing (Lane). The word ابداع(which is the infinitive form of بدیع), when used about God, means, originating a thing without any tool or instrument or pattern and without matter (Mufradat). Thus the word combines the idea of originating and creating.

Commentary:

This verse not only contains a contradiction of the Christian dogma of the Godhead of Jesus but also effectively repudiates the Hindu theory that the soul and matter are primeval and eternal. God has been declared here to be: (1) the Creator of the heavens and the earth which means that He did not require the help of a son, and for that matter of anybody, in creating the universe; (2) the Originator of the Universe, i.e., He created all things out of nothing, without a pre-existing model and without pre-existing matter; (3) All-Powerful, i.e. whenever He decrees that a certain thing should come into being, it does come into being in conformity with His decree and design. It may be noted here that the verse does not necessarily mean, as is sometimes erroneously understood, that when God decrees that a certain thing should be, it comes into being at once. The verse only means that God’s will is all-powerful, so when He decrees a thing, nothing can thwart His decree. The verse does not thus refer to the factor of time, which may be short or long as God wills it.

3:27.

Important Words:

طالوت (Talut) is the attributive name of an Israelite king who lived about two hundred years before David and about the same number of years after Moses. Most commentators regard Talut to be a name of Hebrew origin and consider him to be synonymous with Saul (1. Sam. ch. 9). As Hebrew is only an offshoot of Arabic, the word Talut appears to be derived from the Arabic root طال i.e. he became tall or high___a description coinciding with the one given in the verse under comment viz. one increased abundantly in knowledge and body. It is, however, not right to identify Talut with Saul. The description of the Quran fits more with Gideon (Judg. chs. 6-8) than with Saul. Gideon lived in about 1250 B.C. and the Bible calls him a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6:12) which is the same as Talut.

Commentary:

There has been a difference of opinion as to the identity of the person to whom the name Talut has been applied. According to a number of Muslim commentators, Talut stands for Saul, and the passage refers to the reign of Saul. Christian writers have, however, taken exception to this view. According to them the incidents related in this passage refer to two different periods which are separated from each other by the long interval of 200 years; and these critics refer to this passage as an instance of historical anachronism, found in the Quran. The passage does indeed refer to two different periods, but if Christian critics had carefully thought over their own history, they would have seen that there is no confusion of dates in the passage in question and that the Quran has here referred to both these periods. Its object in doing so is to show how the unification of the different tribes of Israel began in the time of Gideon (i.e. Talut) two hundred years before David, and was finally consummated in the time of David.

In order to determine the identity of Talut, let us glance over the main incidents related in verse 247 to 252. These are as follows: 1. The people of the period to which Talut belongs had been driven forth from their homes and their children (2:247). 2. One who was not originally a king was appointed as such (2:248). 3. God helped the followers of this king, giving them the Talut as a token of His sovereignty (2:249). 4. The people were tried by means of water (2:250). 5. There existed a great disparity in numbers between these people and the enemy, and the trial reduced their number still further (ibid). 6. In spite of the small number of his followers, this king overcame the enemy (2:252).

Now some of these details do indeed apply to Saul, but there are others which do not. The key words which afford a clue to the identity of Talut are, Hast thou not heard of the chiefs of the children of Israel after Moses. The words "after Moses" indicate that the incident belongs to an early period when the Jews as a nation had just begun to take a definite shape in history. For two hundred years after Moses, the Israelites were divided into different tribes and had no king and no fighting force. In 1256 B.C., owing to their iniquity, God delivered them into the hands of the Midianites who plundered and ravaged them for seven long years, and they were compelled to take refuge in caves (Judg. 6:1, 2). This is why they are represented in the Quran as saying, we have been driven forth from our homes. The Midianites attacked them and carried away their sheep and oxen and asses, and destroyed their crops and pillaged them as far as Gaza (Judg. 6:4-6). The Israelites then cried to their Lord, and God raised among them a Prophet; and an angel of the Lord appeared to Gideon, appointed him king and promised him divine help. Then Gideon said to God, "Oh my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? Behold, my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house" (Judg. 6:15). This tallies with the description given in the Quran which represents the chiefs among the Israelites as saying with regard to the new king, How can he have sovereignty over us while we are better entitled to sovereignty than he and he is not given abundance of wealth (2:248). What makes the identification of Talut with Gideon still more certain is the fact that it was in the time of Gideon and not Saul that the Israelites were tried by means of water and the description of the trial as given in the Bible (Judg. 7:4-7) is the same as that of the Quran.

From Judg. 7:6, 7 we learn that after the aforesaid trial, there remained with Gideon only 300 men. It is interesting to note that a Companion of the Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "We were 313 men in the Battle of Badr, and this number corresponds to the number of men who followed Talut" (Tirmidhi, ch. on Siyar). Thus this tradition also lends support to the conclusion that Talut was no other than Gideon.

What further confirms the identity of Talut with Gideon is that the Hebrew word Gideon is identical in meaning with the Arabic word Talut. The former is derived from a root which in Hebrew means "to fell" (Enc. Bib.) or "to hew" (Jew. Enc.). Thus, Gideon means "one who cuts down his adversary and fells him to the ground" and the Bible itself speaks of Gideon as a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6:12), and we have already noted that in Arabic Tala means one who is tall and towers above others (see Important Words above).

The clause, how can he have sovereignty over us while we are better entitled to sovereignty than he, and he is not given abundance of wealth, indicates that the people raised two objections against Talut or Gideon: (1) that he did not belong to a highly placed family and was therefore not entitled to kingship, and (2) that he did not possess the requisite wealth for exercising influence. Both of these are plausible objections that are usually made by ordinary people of the world; but a chosen people guided by the will of the Just and Wise God must think otherwise. With them the real title to sovereignty is neither family status nor wealth but the personal qualities of a man; hence the clause, surely Allah has chosen him above you and has increased him abundantly in knowledge and body. The superiority of a man in physical and mental faculties coupled with knowledge and prowess must remain the basis for all title to rulership. And in the case of Talut the title had the additional strength of coinciding with the choice of God Who is the best and, in fact, the only true Judge of all titles.

19:9, 10.

Important Words:

غلام (son) is derived from غلم i.e. he became excited by lust or carnal desire. اغتلم الشراب means, the beverage became strong in its influence upon the head. غلام means: (1) a young man, one whose moustache is growing forth; (2) a son, a male child; (3) a man of middle age; (4) a male slave or servant (Lane).

Commentary:

Zachariah’s question contained in the words, how shall I have a son? implies no disbelief on his part in God’s promise, as alleged by the Bible (Luke 1:20). It is simply a spontaneous expression of innocent surprise at the divine promise. It also contains a veiled prayer that he might live long enough to see the child born and grow up into a young man. Zachariah has referred to his old age and the barrenness of his wife to make God’s mercy take a practical shape all the more speedily.

The expression کذالك الله یفعل ما یشاء may be rendered as: (1) thus Allah does what He pleases; (2) this is really so, but Allah does what He pleases; (3) such is the way of Allah, He does what He pleases.

19:21.

See 2:118.

Commentary:

The news of a son, however happy in ordinary circumstances, greatly perplexed Mary who was not only as yet unmarried but was also meant to remain so for life. The verse reflects her justified perplexity. It also shows that Jesus had no father, as hinted in Mary’s words, no man has touched me. Having been dedicated to the service of the Temple, Mary could not, consistently with her vow of celibacy, marry. If she was to marry and have children in due course there was no occasion for her to be surprised when the birth of a child was announced to her by the angel in a vision. No normal girl would be surprised if she were told in a vision that a son would be born to her; for she would naturally infer that the promised child would be born to her after marriage. In the Gospel of Mary, the vow of celibacy is clearly referred to. In chapter 5 of the said Gospel we read that when the high priest made a public order that all the virgins living in the temple who had reached their fourteenth year should return home, all the other virgins yielded obed-ience to this command, but "Mary the virgin of the Lord" alone answered that she could not comply with it; and for this refusal of hers she assigned the reason that both she and her parents had devoted her to the service of the Lord, and that she had vowed virginity to the Lord, which vow she was resolved never to break (Gospel of Mary, 5: 4, 5, 6).

Mary’s subsequent marriage with Joseph was thus contrary to the vow and against her own wish. She was, however, compelled by circumstances to marry when found with child. The priests had to arrange her marriage with Joseph in order to avoid scandal. It does not, however, appear from the Gospels how Joseph was prevailed upon to consent, for he was obviously in the dark about her being pregnant at the time of marriage (Matt. 1:18, 19). Presumably some plausible excuse was found to justify the breaking of the vow.

Christians and Jews are both agreed that the birth of Jesus was something out of the ordinary–the Christians holding it as supernatural and the Jews as illegitimate (Jew. Enc.). Even in the family birth register, Jesus’ birth was recorded as such (Talmud). This fact alone should constitute a sufficient proof of Jesus’ birth being out of the ordinary. But it was neither supernatural nor illegitimate. To quote only one medical authority: "Medical men have not ruled out altogether the possibility of natural parthenogenesis of the production of a child by a female, without any relation to a male. Such a statement off-hand appears ridiculous, yet its possibility, from a purely biological standpoint, under certain conditions cannot be disregarded. Dr. Timme calls attention to this possibility as the result of a certain type of tumours, known as arrhenoblastoma (from the Greek words for "male" and "germ") which are occasionally found in the female pelvis or lower body. These tumours are capable of generating male sperm cells. Naturally, if these male sperm cells were alive and active and came in contact with the female’s own egg cell or ovum, conception might occur. There is nothing illogical in this process of reasoning…Dr. Timme states that there are twenty authentic cases reported in Europe in which an arrhenoblastoma had been found to develop male sperm cells…The arrhenoblastoma is a tumour that contains blastodermic cells...These cells are creative structures and are capable of development at any time and the fact, therefore, that arrhenoblas-tomacontaining these "embryonic cells" might create testicular tissue, capable of producing male sperm cells seems scientifically not impossible. If living male sperm cells are produced in a female body by arrhenoblastoma, the possibility of self-fertilization of a woman, even though a virgin, cannot be denied. That is to say, her own body would produce the same result as though sperm cells from a man’s body had been transferred to hers in the more usual way, or by a physician’s aid" (American Medical Journal).

There are cases on record of children having been born without fathers: "A young girl of great moral purity became pregnant without the slightest knowledge of the source… There is a case of pregnancy in an unmarried woman, who successfully resisted an attempt at criminal connection and yet became impreg-nated and gave birth to a perfectly formed female child" (Anomalies and Curiosities of Medicine by George M. Gould, A.M., M.D., and Walter L. Payle, A.M., M.D., published by W. B. Saunders & Co., London).

43:60; 61:7.

5:111.

Important Words:

اخلق (I fashion out) is derived from خلق. They say خلقه meaning: (1) he measured it, or he determined its measure or proportion (e.g. they say خلق الادیم meaning, he determined the leather with a view to cutting it); (2) he designed or fashioned or planned it; (3) he made it according to a certain measure or design; (4) He (God) produced or created or brought into existence a thing or being without there being any previously existing pattern or model or similitude, i.e.He originated it; (5) he forged or fabricated a story or a lie; (6) he made a thing smooth, even and equable (Lane & Lisan).

الطین (clay) is derived from طان i.e. he made his work or deed good; he performed or executed his work or deed well. طانه الله علی الخیر means, God created him with a disposition or adaptation to that which is good, i.e. created him with a good natural disposition. طانه means, he coated or plastered it with clay or mud. طین means, clay, earth, mould, soil or mud. طینةmeans, any material sub-stance of which anything having form consists; the natural constitution or disposition of a thing. The term ابن الطین is sometimes used to signify Adam (Lane). Figuratively الطین may signify such persons as possess docile natures suitable for being moulded into any good shape like pliable clay.

الطیر (bird) which is the plural of طائر (a bird) and is also sometimes used as singular is derived from طار i.e. (1) he or it flew or moved in the air by means of wings; (2) he or it ran or moved quickly or fled. طار عقله means, his reason fled. طارت الابل means, the she-camel conceived. طار لکل منھم سھمه means, the share of each came to him. الطیر or طیر is both the plural of طائر (bird) and the noun infinitive from the verb طار. So طیر means: (1) flying birds, insects, etc.; (2) a flying bird, insect, etc., for طیر is sometimes also used as singular; (3) as an infinitive noun طیر would also give the different meanings conveyed by its verbal forms (Lane).

ھیئة (manner) is the noun infinitive from ھاء. They say ھاء الرجل meaning, the man was or became of good form and appearance or other properties denoted by ھیئة, the noun infinitive. ھاء الیه means, he desired or longed to see or find him or it. ھیأه means, he gave him or he made him have a garb or guise, etc.; he prepared or arranged it and put it in a good state. تھیأ لامر means, he became prepared for the thing, or the matter. ھیئة means, form, fashion, appearance or figure; guise or garb; state, condition or case; manner, mode or quality (Aqrab & Lane).

ابری (I heal) is derived from بری i.e. he was or became clear or free from a thing. بری من المرض means, he became free from disease, i.e. he recovered from it. بری من الدین means, he became clear of debt. ابرأه means, he cured or healed him of the disease; he declared him innocent or free from the defect attributed to him; he acquitted him (Aqrab & Lane).

الاکمه (blind) is derived from کمه i.e. he became blind; or his eyes did not see at night. کمه فلان also means, he was or became deprived of reason or understanding. کمه النھار means, the day became dark, i.e. the sun became overcast with clouds. اکمه means, one who cannot see at night; one who is born blind; one who becomes blind afterwards; one who is deprived of reason and understanding (Aqrab & Mufradat).

ابرص (leprous) is derived from برص i.e. he was or became affected with برص (leprosy) viz. a sort of whiteness that appears upon parts of the body by reason of a corrupt state of health or constitution. The moon is sometimes called الابرص because of its white hue. ارض برصاء means, a land of which the herbage has become depastured at several places so that it has become bare thereof (Aqrab & Lane). A variety of leprosy of the Hebrews (probably identical with modern leprosy) was characterized by the presence of smooth, shining, depressed white patches or scales, the hair on which participated in the whiteness, while the skin and adjacent flesh became insensible (Webster).

تاکلون (you will eat) is derived from اکل i.e. he ate; he ate up; he devoured; he consumed; he wore away, etc. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, امرت بقریة تاکل القری i.e. I have been commanded to migrate to a town (Medina) which shall devour, (i.e. subdue and conquer) other towns (Lane).

Commentary:

With this verse begins an account of Jesus’ ministry as a Prophet of God. By using the words, a Messenger to the Children of Israel, the verse makes it clear that Jesus’ mission was confined to the House of Israel. He was not a universal Messenger. In fact, as the Gospel itself states, he expressly ordered his disciples not to preach his message to any but the Israelites: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel' " (Matt. 10:5, 6). It cannot be argued that this prohibition was confined to the lifetime of Jesus and that after his death his disciples were at liberty to preach to all the nations of the world, for this supposition is belied by the Gospel itself: "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the son of man be come" (Matt. 10:23). According to this verse, the followers of Jesus were enjoined to confine their preaching to the Children of Israel till the time of his second coming. The same injunction is contained in Matt. 15: 24; 18: 11, 12; 19: 28; Acts 3: 25, 26; 13: 46; Luke 19: 10; 15: 4; 22: 28-30.

Only in Matt. 28:19 there appears some ambiguity about the mission of Jesus but on deeper reflection it becomes clear that here too it is the tribes of Israel that are meant, and not all peoples and all nations. The early disciples understood these words of Jesus in this very sense: "Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only" (Acts 11: 19).

For a clear understanding of the other parts of the present verse, i.e. making birds of clay, etc. it is necessary to remember that it was Jesus’ habit to talk in parables—a way of talking which was predicted in the previous Scriptures to be a characteristic of his speech. Says the Gospel: "All these things spake Jesus unto the multitudes in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables" (Matt. 13:34, 35). Later historians also have referred to this peculiar characteristic of Jesus: "In his popular addresses Jesus would make free use of parables. He spoke in parables to all classes but especially to the people. Without parables he was not wont to speak to them" (Enc. Bib. under Jesus). With this torchlight of history in our hands, it does not remain difficult for us to understand or explain the "signs" of Jesus as mentioned in the present verse.

There is no mention in the Bible of the miracle of creating birds popularly believed to have been performed by Jesus. If Jesus had really created birds, there is no reason why the Bible should have omitted to mention it, particularly when the creation of birds was a miracle the like of which had never been shown before by any Messenger of God. The mention of such a miracle would certainly have established his superiority over other Prophets and would have lent some support to the claim to divinity which has been foisted upon him by his later followers. Of the different meanings of خلق i.e. measuring, determining, designing or fashioning; making and creating, etc. given under Important Words above, it is in the former sense that this word has been used in this verse. In the sense of "creating'', the act of khalq has not been attributed in the Quran to any other being or thing except God. In fact, the Quran has laid the greatest emphasis on this exclusive attribute of God Who has been again and again declared to be the sole "Creator" of all things. All others to whom creation has been attributed are declared by the Quran to have been themselves created by God and to be devoid of all power to create anything (e.g. see 13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41 and 46:5). Even the silly notion that the power of creating though the unshared prerogative of God, might have been temporarily delegated by Him to another is rejected by the Quran (39:30 & 16:72).

In the light of the above explanation, and keeping in view the figurative sense of "clay", for which see Important Words above, the clause, I will fashion out for you a creation out of clay after the manner of a bird, then I will breathe into it (a new spirit) and it will become a soaring being, would mean that if ordinary men of humble origin but possessing the inherent power of growth and development came into contact with Jesus and accepted his message they would undergo a complete transformation in their lives. From men grovelling in the dust and not seeing beyond their material cares and mundane concerns, they would become converted into birds soaring high into the lofty regions of the spiritual firmament. And this is exactly what happened. The humble and despised fishermen of Galilee, under the impact of the ennobling teaching of their Master, began soaring like birds, preaching to the world of Israel the word of God and bravely facing all sorts of hardships and privations and making sacrifices that should adorn the history of any nation. Says Jesus: "I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, and what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?" (Matt. 6:25, 26).

The miracle relating to the making of birds from clay may be interpreted in another way as well. In the time of Jesus people had a special liking for the practice of occult sciences —hypnotism, mesmerism, etc. So it is possible that God granted him special power of this kind in order to impress the people and make them believe in him. In this case the sign of making birds would mean that Jesus made small clay models of birds and then through a sort of mesmerism made them appear to fly in the air. But this did not convert them into real living birds; for as soon as the influence was removed, they fell down to the ground like so many lumps of earth. This miracle of Jesus was more or less like the miracle of the rod of Moses which was temporarily made to look like a real serpent but was actually not so. But whatever the significance of the sign, it was performed, as the verse clearly puts it, by the command of Allah, and Jesus possessed no power of creation. (For fuller description see Izalah’-e-Auham by Ahmad, the Promised Messiah).

As for healing the blind and the leprous, it appears from the Bible that persons suffering from certain diseases (leprosy, etc.) were considered unclean and were, therefore, not allowed to come in contact with other men. If, therefore, the word ابری be taken to mean, "I declare to be free", the clause would signify that the legal or social disabilities and disadvantages under which persons suffering from such maladies laboured were removed by Jesus. If, however, the word be interpreted as "I heal," then the clause would mean that Jesus used to heal persons suffering from these diseases. But as indicated above, Jesus used to speak in metaphors. So just as the "creation" spoken of is spiritual creation, the diseases mentioned are spiritual diseases. The Prophets of God are spiritual physicians; they give eyes to those that have lost spiritual sight, and they give hearing to those who are spiritually deaf, and they restore life to those who are spiritually dead (see also Matt. 13:15). In this case the word اکمه (blind or one who is blind at night) would stand for such person as possesses the light of faith but being weak, cannot stand trials. He sees in the daytime, i.e. so long as there are no trials and the sun of faith shines forth unclouded; but when the night comes on, i.e. when there are trials, and sacrifices have to be made, he loses his spiritual vision and stands still (cf. 2:21). Similarly, the word ابرص(leprous) would, in the spiritual sense, stand for one who is imperfect in faith, having patches of diseased skin among healthy ones. But even if these words be taken in their physical sense, Jesus is proved to possess no peculiar power. All Prophets heal diseases and ailments by the power of prayer. In this case, however, the word اکمه (blind) would be taken in the sense of one who cannot see at night or one whose sight is weak.

The clause, I will quicken the dead, does not mean that Jesus actually brought the dead to life. Those actually dead are never restored to life in this world. Such a belief is diametrically opposed to the whole Quranic teaching (23:100, 101; 21:96; 39:59, 60; 2:29; 40:12; 45:27). The sayings of the Holy Prophet are also clear on this point. For instance, it is related that when Jabir’s father, who was a Companion of the Holy Prophet, was killed in the Battle of Uhud and the lad was much grieved, the Holy Prophet consolingly told him that God had lovingly spoken to his father in the other world and had asked him to beg of Him anything he liked, for that would be given to him. Thereupon Jabir’s father said, "Grant me, my Lord, another lease of life on earth that I may again be killed in Thy way". God replied, "I would certainly have done so, but the word has gone forth from Me that the dead shall not be sent back to the earth" (Tirmidhi & Majah).

That the so-called dead who are reported to have been raised by Jesus were not actually dead is clear from the Gospels as well. The incident described in Matt. 9:23-25 sheds some light on it. As a matter of fact, Prophets are only sent to give life to those who are spiritually dead. Jesus, Moses, Abraham and, above all, the Holy Prophet of Islam brought about a complete change in the lives of their followers. This, in religious language, is termed raising the dead to life. Literally, too, the word موتی (the dead) does not necessarily mean those physically dead. It is also used about those who are dead spiritually, morally or intellectually. The Quran freely speaks of the quickening of the dead in the sense of granting life to the spiritually dead (e.g. 3:28; 6:123; 8:43; 25:50; 36:71). In 8:25 the Holy Prophet himself has been spoken of as giving life to the dead. Says the Quran: O ye who believe, respond to Allah and the Messenger when he calls you that he may give you life. Here it is spiritual and intellectual life that is meant, for Muslims do not believe that the Holy Prophet ever brought an actually dead person to life.

The miracles of Jesus, as mentioned in this verse, have been stated in a natural order. First of all is mentioned the change in the outlook and way of life of those that came in contact with him. From men of the world, they became men of God. They rose from the dust and began soaring in the air. Then are mentioned some of the more common spiritual diseases of which Jesus cured the people; the blind were given spiritual sight and those having diseased skins were healed. Finally, the spiritually dead are declared to have received through Jesus a new life. Thus not only a natural order but a sort of progressive order is found in the verse, the climax, so far as individual reformation is concerned, being reached with the miracle relating to the quickening of the dead. But if the verse be interpreted literally, no arrangement seems to exist in the order in which the miracles are described here, i.e. (1) the creation of birds out of clay; (2) the healing of the blind; (3) the healing of those suffering from leprosy, i.e. those who had patches of disease on their skin; and (4) the raising of the dead to life.

The true climax, however, reaches in the miracle or sign mentioned in the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat and what you will store up in your houses. According to Abul-Baqa’, the words نبأ (news) and انبأ (he gave the news) are used in the Quran for announcing matters of great importance (Kulliyyat). This shows that, what Jesus is here represented as announcing to the people, are matters of supreme im-portance to his followers. The language of the verse being parabolic, the word تاکلون (you will eat) will be taken figuratively, mean, "you will subdue or conquer" (see under Important Words above). Thus the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat, would mean, "I will let you know what you will subdue or conquer", i.e. "I will announce to you the conquests you are destined to make in future". The other expression, i.e. I will also let you know what you will store up in your houses, would mean, "I will let you know the deeds which you should or would leave behind for posterity".

The entire clause may have yet another meaning. It may mean that Jesus told his disciples: (1) what they should eat, i.e. what they should spend to meet their physical needs, and (2) what they should store up, i.e. what they should lay up as a spiritual treasure in Heaven. In other words, Jesus told them that their earnings should be honestly and lawfully acquired and that they should spend their savings in the way of God, having no thought for the morrow which should be left to God (see Matt. 6:25, 26 as quoted above).

Commentary:

The word مثل (case) is used to express resemblance, which may be of different kind and different degrees. Sometimes, the thing likened is equal to that to which it is likened, sometimes the former is superior to the latter, and sometimes the latter is superior to the former. So it is not necessary that the thing likened to another should be equal, or ever similar, to the latter in all respects. The likeness between Adam and Jesus referred to in this verse, may, therefore, not be stretched too far.

In the verse the word 'Adam' primarily stands for man, i.e. the sons of Adam generally. Jesus is thus declared to be like other mortals who have all been created from dust (40:68), and so there can be no divinity about him. If, however, the word 'Adam' be taken to refer to the progenitor of the human race, then the verse would be taken to point to the resemblance between Jesus and Adam in being born without the agency of a male parent. In this case, the fact that Jesus had a mother would not affect the likeness which, as stated above, need not be complete in all respects.

The words, then He said to him, "Be" and he was, show that the command refers not to the birth of Jesus (for the fact of his creation has already been mentioned in the words خلقه i.e. He created him, occurring in the preceding part of the verse), but to his death. The use of the word کن (Be) in relation to death should not sound odd, for, according to the teaching of Islam, death is not the end of life but simply a change, the beginning of a new life. The meaning in this case would be that after having created Jesus and having allowed him the prescribed lease of life in this world, God caused him to die and took his soul away to the next world. The expression, "Be" and he was, may also refer to the creation or birth of Jesus in the sense that, after giving him the human form in the womb of his mother, God said to him "Be", i.e. become quickened with life, whereupon he became alive. Again, the reference may also be to the spiritual life, i.e. after creating Jesus in the form of a man, God called upon him to become a Prophet, which was the ultimate end of his creation, and consequently he became a Prophet. Whatever the interpretation, the verse constitutes a clear refutation of the Christian belief in the divinity of Jesus on the plea of his unusual birth.

As for the creation of man from تراب (dust), we shall give a suitable note when we come to the verses directly dealing with the subject.

Commentary:

The use in the present verse of the word انتم (you) which is in the plural number clearly shows that in the previous verses it was not the Holy Prophet, but Muslims in general who were addressed. The Holy Prophet could not be expected to dispute on behalf of dishonest people. The Quran addresses him merely because he is the recipient of the Word of God and it is through him that people receive Divine commands.

Commentary:

Whereas the preceding verse spoke of the Prayer in time of fear in the case of individuals, the present one gives the details of the manner of its performance when the Faithful are in the form of a company or group and the Prayer is to be performed in congregation. Apparently the Holy Prophet alone seems to have been addressed here, but really the verse possesses general application. When a Muslim army is about to say their Prayer in congregation, half of them should say the Prayer with the Imam, carrying their arms, and the other half should stand facing the enemy, to fight him or repulse his attack, as the case may be. When the first half have finished one Rak‘at, they should retire to take the place of those who are facing the enemy. The latter should then come forward and say one Rak‘at with the Imam.

As many as eleven different ways in which these Prayers were said on different occasions are described in the Hadith(for details see Al-Bahrul-Muhit). In some cases, each of the two parties said only one Rak‘at of Prayer, while the Imam said two. In other cases, each of the parties said two Rak‘at, one Rak‘at with the Imam and the other alone, thus all saying two Rak‘at. On yet other occasions each of the two parties said two rak‘at of Prayer with the Imam, the Imam himself having said four Rak‘at—two Rak‘at with each party. These different methods were observed in different circumstances. If the danger was great, each of the parties said only one Rak‘at of Prayer with the Imam while the Imam himself said two; but if the danger was not so great, each party said two Rak‘ats while the Imam said four. Again, methods varied with the varying position of the army. If the enemy, for instance, was in front of the Imam, the congregation followed a method different from that which they followed on other occasions.

To sum up, whereas Prayer in a state of simple journey consists of two Rak‘ats in such Prayers as ordinarily consist of four Rak‘ats, the Prayer in time of fear may assume different forms, the more important being:

(a) Splitting up the worshippers into two parties, each party either saying one part of its Prayer with the Imam and then retiring, or saying one part of its Prayer with the Imam and the other part separately, the number of Rak‘ats performed by the worshippers being either one or two as the case may be (the present verse);

(b) Shortening the duration of Prayers only (the preceding verse);

(c) Doing away with all form and repeating the words of Prayer while walking, running or riding (2:240).

The verse observes a difference between: اسلحة (arms) and حذر (means of defence or simply precautions). Whereas the former may be put aside in moments of comparative security, the latter should always be adhered to and never neglected. See also 4:72.

5:118.

Important Words:

The pronoun "it" in the clause, believe in it, stands for the false belief (referred to in the preceding verses) that Jesus met his death on the cross. So the verse signifies that both Jews and Christians will continue to believe in the supposed crucifixion of Jesus till the time of their death, when the veil will be lifted and everything will become clear. They are indeed bound to believe in the alleged death of Jesus on the cross. If the Jews do not do so, his truth becomes established and their whole position becomes indefensible. Similarly, if the Christians do not believe in it, the doctrine of Atonement becomes untenable and the entire fabric of Christianity crashes to pieces. So both these peoples go on sticking to this absurd and unfounded belief in the face of all reason and all established facts of history.

The attempts to make the words لیؤمنن به قبل موته (will believe in it before his death) mean "will believe in him (Jesus) before his (Jesus’) death" is simply ridiculous. The context spurns the idea, as does the second reading of the expression موته (his death) viz. موتھم (their death) reported by Ubayy (Jarir, vi. 13).

5:110; 9:78; 34:49.

Important Words:

The words ما یکون لی (I could not) may be interpreted in various ways, such as, it was not fitting or proper for me to do so; or it did not behove me; or it was beyond my power or position; or it was impossible for me; or I had no right to do so, etc. See also 3:80.

نفس (mind) means, among other things, knowledge; purpose or intention (Lane). See also 3:29.

Commentary:

The expression, Holy art Thou, besides hinting that it is only God Who is free from error, embodies a beautiful reply on the part of Jesus to the question put to him by God in the words, didst thou say to men, 'Take me and my mother for two gods', which seemed to imply a sort of reproach and an expression of displeasure. The reply of Jesus appears to be something like this: "I was only a humble Messenger, O God, therefore I could not ask men to take me and my mother as gods beside Thee, for if I had done so, that would have been a reflection on Thee that Thou didst choose as Thy Messenger a person who turned faithless to Thee and asked his followers to take him and his mother as gods beside Thee. But Thy choice, o God, cannot be wrong; hence it was impossible that I, a Messenger of Thine, should have bidden men take me and my mother as gods, and Thine own all-embracing knowledge, o God, is a testimony of my innocence."

The word نفس (mind) when used about God implies "intention." Thus the last sentence of the verse would mean, "I do not know what Thou meanest by this question. Thou, being All-Knowing, well knowest that I did not say so; hence, I fail to understand the object or purpose of Thy ques-tion." This reply of Jesus shows that in his heart he was afraid that some shortcoming in the execution of his duty might have displeased the Almighty.