Al-Kahf

See ayat 5 for tafseer.

See ayat 5 for tafseer.

See ayat 5 for tafseer.

See ayat 5 for tafseer.

Surah Al-Kahf, like some other Surahs of the Quran, begins with praise and glorification of Allah. Since praise is due for something important and worthy of recognition, immediately after this the revelation of the Quran is mentioned, which is free from any distortion. It is stated: Praise be to Allah who revealed the Book to His servant and did not place any crookedness in it (الْحَمْدُ لِلّٰہِ الَّذِی اَنزَلَ عَلیٰ عَبْدِہِ الْکِتَابَ وَ لَمْ یَجْعَلْ لَہُ عِوَجَا). This is a Book which is firm and upright, balanced and straight, intended for the establishment of a true human society, and it is the preserver of all the divine scriptures (قَیِّمًا). So that it may warn those who commit evil and the blind-hearted with severe punishment from Him, and give glad tidings to the believers who do righteous deeds that they will have a good reward (لِیُنذِرَ بَاْسًا شَدِیدًا مِنْ لَدُنْہُ وَیُبَشِّرَ الْمُؤْمِنِینَ الَّذِینَ یَعْمَلُونَ الصَّالِحَاتِ اَنَّ لَھُمْ اَجْرًا حَسَنًا). A reward that is everlasting and whereby they will remain forever (مَاکِثِینَ فِیہِ اَبَدًا). After this, pointing towards the general deviation of all types of opponents—whether Jews, Christians, or polytheists—it is stated: One of the aims of this heavenly Book is that the Prophet may warn those who say that Allah has taken a son (وَیُنذِرَ الَّذِینَ قَالُوا اتَّخَذَ اللهُ وَلَدًا). That is, it warns the Christians because their belief is that Jesus is the son of God; warns the Jews because their belief is that Uzair is the son of God; and warns the polytheists because their belief is that the angels are the daughters of God. Then, the basis of such unfounded beliefs is pointed out: They have no knowledge or certainty about their belief, and if they follow their forefathers, their forefathers too were in the same state (مَا لَھُمْ بِہِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ وَلَالِآبَائِھِمْ). Yet they utter an exceedingly great and terrible word from their mouths (کَبُرَتْ کَلِمَةً تَخْرُجُ مِنْ اَفْوَاہِھِمْ). That God having a body, God having offspring, God having material needs—in short, God being limited—what terrible things these are. Indeed, they only say lies (إِنْ یَقُولُونَ إِلاَّ کَذِبًا).

Five surahs of the Holy Qur’an commence with the expression “الحمد للّٰہ”. In these five surahs, after the praise of God, there appears a reference to the creation (or dominion) of the heavens and the earth or to the sustenance of the worlds—except in the surah under discussion. Here, after the praise of God, mention is made of the revelation of the Qur’an to the Messenger of Allah. In reality, in Surah al‑An‘am, Saba’, Fatir, and al‑Fatihah, the discourse pertains to the “Book of Creation,” whereas in Surah al‑Kahf the “Book of Revelation” is mentioned. It is evident that these two “books”—that is, the created order and the Qur’an—complement one another. This indicates that the Qur’an possesses a significance comparable to the entirety of the created world and that it is likewise a blessing of the realm of existence. Fundamentally, the nurturing and development of the worlds, as expressed in “الحمد لله رب العالمین,” cannot be realized without benefiting from this great heavenly book.

"Qayyim" (according to Burzn "Sayyid") is derived from the root word "qiyam." Here, this word means stable, firm, and established. Additionally, it refers to a book that serves as a protector and preserver of other books, as well as a book that embodies moderation and steadfastness, free from any kind of crookedness or deviation. After first stating that the Quran is free from every form of distortion, this word is used to praise the Quran. It emphasizes the Quran’s steadfastness, its moderation, and its freedom from any kind of contradiction. It also indicates the eternal nature of this great book and conveys the meaning of it being a guardian of original principles. Furthermore, it signifies a book that reforms every kind of misguidance and demonstrates that this book is a model for safeguarding divine commandments and human justice and virtue. This attribute "Qayyim" is essentially derived from Allah’s attribute of “Qayyumiyyah,” according to which God is the protector and sustainer of all beings and things in existence. مابہ تُو قائم چو تُو قائم بذات We remain established by You since You are established by Yourself. Since the Quran is the Word of God, it shares this same attribute. It is noteworthy that the word "Qayyim" has been used repeatedly in the verses of the Quran as a characteristic of the religion of Islam. To the extent that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) is commanded: فَاَقِمْ وَ جْھَکَ لِلدِّینِ الْقَیِّمِ Align yourself with the upright, pure, and straight religion. (Ar-Rum 30:43) In the above lines, the explanation of "Qayyim" has been given, which essentially encompasses all interpretations that commentators have expressed in this regard. Some have understood it to mean the book that will never be abrogated. Some have taken it to mean the protector of previous scriptures. Others have interpreted it as the book that establishes the matters of religion, and some have understood it as a book free from disagreement and contradiction. However, all these meanings are encompassed in the comprehensive meaning we have explained. Some commentators have taken "Lam yaj‘al ‘iwajan" ("He did not make [it] crooked") to mean the eloquence of the words of the Quran, while "Qayyiman" is taken to mean the firmness of its eloquence and meaning. (Reference: Ruh al-Ma‘ani, vol. 15, under discussion of the relevant verse.) However, there is no clear evidence distinguishing these differences, and it seems more appropriate that each is an emphasis on the other. The difference is that the meaning of "Qayyim" is broader, including not only inherent firmness but also the preservation, correction, and protection of others within its meaning. (Explanatory note: Grammatically, "Qayyim" is a hal (circumstantial accusative) and its governing verb is "anzala" [He revealed].)

In the foregoing verses, after a comprehensive and general mode of address, particular warning is directed toward those who ascribe offspring to God. This indicates that this deviation holds special significance. As has been noted, this doctrinal deviation is not confined to Christians alone; rather, Jews and polytheists were also implicated in it, and at the time when the Qur’an was being revealed, it had become a widespread belief. It is evident that such a doctrine entirely undermines the essence of monotheism and places God among material and corporeal beings. Its consequence is that human emotions and attributes are attributed to Him, that likeness and partners are ascribed to Him, and that He is regarded as possessing needs. For this reason, this matter has been mentioned with particular emphasis. In Surah Yunus, verse 68, it is stated: قَالُوا اتَّخَذَ اللهُ وَلَدًا سُبْحَانَہُ ھُوَ الْغَنِی They said that God has taken a son, whereas He is exalted and self‑sufficient. In Surah Maryam, verses 88–91, it is stated: وَقَالُوا اتَّخَذَ الرَّحْمَانُ وَلَدًا ،لَقَدْ جِئْتُمْ شَیْئًا إِدًّا ،تَکَادُ السَّمَاوَاتُ یَتَفَطَّرْنَ مِنْہُ وَتَنشَقُّ الْاَرْضُ وَتَخِرُّ الْجِبَالُ ھَدًّا ، اَنْ دَعَوْا لِلرَّحْمَانِ وَلَدًا They said that the Most Merciful has taken a son. You have indeed brought forth a grave and momentous assertion; the heavens are almost rent asunder, the earth split open, and the mountains fall in ruin because they attribute a son to the Most Merciful. This highly emphatic mode of expression indicates the grave consequences and the extreme severity of such a belief. Its adverse effects are extensive; indeed, its outcome is to reduce God from the apex of exalted grandeur and to place Him among inferior material existences. (Explanatory note: A detailed discussion concerning the doctrine of the Trinity and the attribution of offspring to God is presented in Tafsir‑e‑Namuna, vol. 2, p. 653 (Urdu translation).)

A study of deviant doctrines reveals that most of them are tantamount to claims made without evidence. At times, such beliefs come into existence on the basis of empty slogans: an individual raises a claim, and one generation after another follows it uncritically; alternatively, a belief is transmitted from one generation to the next in the form of inherited customs and traditions of forefathers. Implicitly, the Qur’an instructs us that, in all circumstances, we must avoid baseless assertions, regardless of their source or the persons who advance them. In the aforementioned verses, regarding such conduct, Allah declares it to be a grave and abhorrent matter and identifies it as a source of falsehood. This is a fundamental principle: if Muslims were to adhere to it throughout their lives—neither making claims without evidence nor accepting them, and paying no heed to propaganda or assertions devoid of proof—then many of their troubles and difficulties would be removed.

In the aforementioned verses, while discussing the believers, “عمل صالح” is presented as their continuous and enduring mode of conduct, because “یعملون الصالحات” is a present‑tense verb, and it is known that the present tense denotes continuity and persistence. In reality, it should indeed be so, for a few isolated good deeds may be performed incidentally or due to certain circumstances, and therefore they cannot serve as evidence of genuine faith. True faith is that righteous action which is characterized by continuity and permanence.

In the verses under consideration, while mentioning the descent of the divine book, it is stated: “All praise is due to that God who sent down the Book upon His ‘servant.’” This indicates that the designation “servant” is one of the highest forms of honor and distinction. Such a description can only apply to a person who is truly a servant of Allah—one who regards all that he possesses as belonging to Him; whose sight and hearing are wholly devoted to His command; who entertains no thought of anything besides Him; and who does not tread any path apart from His way. Only such an individual is worthy of this exalted privilege and distinction of being His devoted servant.

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, the discourse pertained to the prophethood and guidance of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him. In the present verse, an exceedingly important condition of guidance is indicated, namely compassion and deep concern for others. It is stated: it is as though you would consume yourself with grief, out of sorrow that these people do not believe in this revelation (فَلَعَلَّکَ بَاخِعٌ نَفْسَکَ عَلیٰ آثَارِھِمْ إِنْ لَمْ یُؤْمِنُوا بِھٰذَا الْحَدِیثِ اَسَفًا).

1. Meaning of "باکع": "باکع" comes from the root "بخع" (meaning the palm tree trunk). It means to overpower oneself with intense grief. 2. Meaning of "اسفًا": "اسفا" expresses the intensity of sorrow and grief. Here, the word emphasizes this severity. 3. Meaning of "آثار": "آثار" is the plural of "اثر." It primarily means footprints or traces left behind. But anything left as a sign or indication is also called "اثر." The use of this word here points to a subtle aspect: sometimes a person leaves a place, and their traces remain for a while, but after a long time, even those traces vanish. This suggests the depth of distress caused by their disbelief — before even their traces disappear, they overpower themselves with grief and sorrow. It is also possible that "آثار" refers to their deeds and character. 4. The word "حدیث" for the Quran: Calling the Quran "حدیث" points to the book’s recent revelation, meaning they do not bother even to study this newly revealed scripture with new content. This is a clear sign of heedlessness, as people pass by a new thing carelessly. 5. Compassionate guide: From the Quranic verses and history, it is well known that divine guides are more anguished by the misguidance of people than anyone can imagine. They yearn for people to believe, as they see people thirsty, sitting near clear, pure springs, yet still crying out in extreme thirst. Truthful guides feel troubled by this state, shed tears, pray, and strive day and night. They preach secretly and openly, delivering the message of truth. They invite individuals and groups in seclusion and in gatherings. They are deeply saddened that people have abandoned the straight path and chosen a crooked way. Their grief is such that sometimes it seems they would give their lives in sorrow. Indeed, unless a guide is this compassionate, the profound essence of guidance cannot be practically embodied. Sometimes this grief becomes so intense that even the life of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) comes under threat, and in such moments Allah comforts and reassures him. In Surah Ash-Shu’ara, verses 3 and 4: لَعَلَّكَ بِاخِعٌ نَفْسَكَ أَلَّا يَكُونُوا مُؤْمِنِينَ إِن نَّشَأْ نُنَزِّلْ عَلَيْهِم مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ آيَةً فَظَلَّتْ أَعْنَاقُهُمْ لَهَا خَاضِعِينَ “You seem (O Messenger) as if you would overpower yourself with grief because they do not believe. Do not grieve; We have made them free in choice. If We willed, We could send down to them from the sky a sign before which their necks would bow in submission.” The following verse describes this state and explains that this world is a field of trial for humans. It states: “Indeed, We have placed that which is on the earth as an adornment for it” (إِنَّا جَعَلْنَا مَا عَلَى الْأَرْضِ زِينَةً لَهَا). The world has been beautified; every corner draws the heart, invites the eyes to behold, and awakens various feelings within a person. This conflict of emotions, the brilliance of beautiful things, and the attraction of charming faces serve as a test for a human’s faith, willpower, and spiritual merit. Therefore, it is also said: “That We may test them as to which of them is best in deed” (لِنَبْلُوهُمْ أَيُّهُمْ أَحْسَنُ عَمَلاً). Some commentators tried to limit the meaning of "ما على الأرض" to scholars only, or to men only, claiming these adornments belong only to them. However, the word has a broad meaning, including all beings upon the earth. It is notable that the expression “best in deed” (أحسن عملاً) is used here, not “most in deed” (أكثر عملاً). This indicates that in the sight of Allah, the value lies in the excellence and quality of deeds, not their quantity. In any case, this is a warning and call to awakening for all humans, especially all Muslims, urging them not to be deceived by the attractions of this world, for it is merely a field of trial. Instead of attaching their hearts to these alluring appearances, they should think about performing good deeds. Then it is stated: This world is impermanent and will eventually perish, and We will destroy everything on the earth, “and We shall transform what is on it into barren ground” (وَإِنَّا لَجَاعِلُونَ مَا عَلَيْهَا صَعِيدًا جُرُزًا). “صَعِيد” comes from the root “صعود” and here means the surface of the earth — that surface where the soil is fully exposed. “جُرُز” refers to land that bears no grass, as though it eats its own grass. In other words, “جرز” denotes land from which, due to drought, the plants have disappeared. Indeed, the beautiful and charming scenes seen in springtime in deserts and foothills — the smiling flowers, swaying trees, whispering leaves, and babbling streams — all vanish in autumn. Trees shed their branches, streams become silent, buds dry, leaves wither, and the sounds of life cease. This is also the condition of the colorful life of humans.These palaces and these towering buildings, these colorful clothes, these various blessings, these servants and these positions and ranks are all perishable things. One day will come when nothing will remain except the dry and silent graveyard, and this is a very great lesson of admonition.

See ayat 12 for tafseer.

See ayat 12 for tafseer.

See ayat 12 for tafseer.

Exegetes have transmitted an occasion of revelation for the aforementioned verses, the summary of which is as follows. The leaders of Quraysh sent two of their associates to the Jewish scholars in Medina in order to investigate the claim of the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad, may blessings and peace be upon him and his family. They wished to ascertain whether anything concerning this matter could be found in previous scriptures. Upon reaching Medina, they consulted the Jewish scholars and presented to them the concerns of Quraysh. The scholars said: ask Muhammad three questions; if he provides a complete and knowledgeable answer to all of them, then he is a messenger from God. (In some reports it is stated that they said: if he answers two questions comprehensively and one in a concise manner, then he is a messenger.) They continued: first, inquire about those youths of ancient times who separated themselves from their people—who were they? For their account and what befell them is exceedingly extraordinary. Then ask about the one who traversed the earth and reached both its eastern and western limits—what is his story? They further said: also ask about the reality of the spirit. The representatives of Quraysh returned to Mecca and informed its leaders that they had found a criterion by which to determine the truth or falsehood of Muhammad’s claim, and they related the entire account. Thereafter, they came to the Messenger of Allah and presented these questions before him. The Messenger of Allah said: I shall answer you tomorrow. However, he did not say “انشاء الله.” Fifteen days passed without any revelation being sent down from Allah, and Jibril did not come to him. Thereupon, the people of Mecca began to spread propaganda and fabricate various statements. This weighed heavily upon the Messenger of Allah. Eventually, Jibril came and brought Surah al‑Kahf from God, in which the account of those youths as well as the narrative of the traveler of the world was included; moreover, the verse “وَیَسْئَلُونَکَ عَنِ الرُّوحِ” was revealed to him. The Prophet asked Jibril why there had been such a delay. He replied: I do not descend except by the command of your Lord; I was not granted permission. It should be noted that of the three questions mentioned, the answers to two appear in this surah, while the verse concerning the spirit has already appeared in Surah Bani Isra’il. Instances of this kind also occur elsewhere in the Qur’an, wherein a verse is revealed concerning a particular matter and, by the instruction of the Messenger of Allah, is placed within a specific surah and position.

In the preceding verses, the nature of worldly life was described, and it was made clear that this world constitutes a test for human beings. Since the Qur’an, in addressing fundamental and sensitive issues, often presents illustrative examples or draws upon historical precedents, the account of the Companions of the Cave is introduced here as a model for conduct. A small number of perceptive and thoughtful youths were living a life of comfort and luxury; however, in order to safeguard their faith and in opposition to the tyrannical authority of their time, they renounced all such blessings and sought refuge in a cave in the mountains—a cave devoid of all provisions. By taking this step, they demonstrated steadfastness and resolute perseverance on the path of faith. It is noteworthy that at this point the Qur’an employs a principle of eloquence and rhetoric by first presenting the narrative in a concise manner so as to direct the attention of the listeners. In this regard, the event is summarized in four verses, after which it is elaborated in detail over fourteen verses. Thus it is first stated: “Do you suppose that the Companions of the Cave and al‑Raqim were among Our most wondrous signs?” (اَمْ حَسِبْتَ اَنَّ اَصْحَابَ الْکَھْفِ وَالرَّقِیمِ کَانُوا مِنْ آیَاتِنَا عَجَبًا). There are, in the heavens and the earth, numerous wondrous signs of God, each of which is a manifestation of the grandeur of creation. Even within your own lives exist remarkable mysteries, each serving as a sign of the truth of your mission; and the account of the Companions of the Cave is certainly not more astonishing than these. They are termed “Companions of the Cave” because they sought refuge in a cave to preserve their lives, as will be detailed in the account of their circumstances. As for “رقیم,” it is derived from the root “رقم,” meaning to write. Most exegetes are of the view that it serves as another designation for the Companions of the Cave, because their names were eventually inscribed on a tablet and affixed to the entrance of the cave. Some have considered it to be the name of the mountain in which the cave was located; others have regarded it as the name of the land wherein that mountain stood; still others have suggested that it was the name of the city from which the Companions of the Cave departed. However, the first interpretation appears to be more sound. As for the suggestion that the Companions of the Cave and the Companions of al‑Raqim were two distinct groups, this does not accord with the apparent meaning of the verse, since its outward indication is that both terms refer to a single group. This is further supported by the fact that after mentioning both terms, the narrative proceeds using only the designation “Companions of the Cave,” without any reference to another group, thereby indicating their unity. With respect to those individuals who were confined within a cave in another account involving three persons, well‑known traditions cited in Tafsir Nur al‑Thaqalayn relate that each of them supplicated to God by invoking a sincere deed, as a result of which they were delivered from that confined and dark place; however, in these reports there is no mention of the designation “ashab al‑Raqim,” although some exegetical works have discussed them under this heading. In any case, there is no doubt that “Companions of the Cave and al‑Raqim” refers to a single group, and the occasion of revelation of these verses also supports this understanding. It is then stated: recall the time when the youths sought refuge in the cave (إِذْ اَوَی الْفِتْیَةُ إِلَی الْکَھْفِ). When they had despaired of all else, they turned to the presence of God and supplicated: “Our Lord, grant us mercy from Yourself and prepare for us, in our affair, a right course” (فَقَالُوا رَبَّنَا آتِنَا مِنْ لَدُنْکَ رَحْمَةً وَھَیِّءْ لَنَا مِنْ اَمْرِنَا رَشَدًا)—a path through which they might be delivered from that difficult situation, drawn nearer to divine pleasure, and guided toward goodness and felicity while fulfilling their responsibility. “We answered their prayer, and We cast a covering of sleep over their ears in the cave for many years” (فَضَرَبْنَا عَلیٰ آذَانِھِمْ فِی الْکَھْفِ سِنِینَ عَدَدًا). Then We raised them and awakened them so that We might determine which of the two parties would better calculate the duration of their stay (ثُمَّ بَعَثْنَاھُمْ لِنَعْلَمَ اَیُّ الْحِزْبَیْنِ اَحْصَی لِمَا لَبِثُوا اَمَدًا).

1. The meaning of "اوی الفتیة": "اوی" is derived from "ماوی," which means "a place of peace and safety." This indicates that when these youths fled from a corrupt and evil environment and reached the cave, they felt tranquility and comfort there. 2. "فتیة" is the plural of "فتیٰ," which essentially means young and passionate youths. However, sometimes this term is also used for older individuals whose spirits remain youthful and enthusiastic. Generally, this word broadly implies courage and steadfastness in upholding the truth, as well as humble submission to the truth. This is supported by a hadith narrated from Imam As-Sadiq (peace be upon him). The Imam asked one of his companions: "Who is called a 'فتی'?" He replied: "أما علمت أن أصحاب الكهف كانوا كلهم خوﻻء فسماهم الله فتیةً بإيمانهم" "Do you not know that the Companions of the Cave were all of mature age, yet Allah named them 'youths' because of their faith in Him." He further said: "من آمن بالله واتقى فهو الفتیٰ" "Whoever believes in Allah and is God-fearing is a 'فتی' (youthful and courageous)." (Reference: Nour al-Thaqalayn, Vol. 3, pp. 244-245) A similar hadith from Imam As-Sadiq (peace be upon him) is also cited in Rawdat al-Kafi. (Reference: Nour al-Thaqalayn, Vol. 3, pp. 244-245) 3. The meaning of "من لدنك رحمة": It means "mercy from You." This expression indicates that when they took refuge in the cave and saw that nothing was under their control and all apparent means had failed, they solely relied on the mercy of Allah. 4. The meaning of "ضربنا على آذانهم": "We cast a cover over their ears." This is a subtle Arabic metaphor for causing someone to sleep. To "cast a cover on someone's ears" implies that they do not hear anything, referring to the veil of sleep. True sleep is that which renders a person’s hearing ineffective. Hence, when waking a sleeping person, one calls out to them so that their hearing power is affected and they wake up. 5. The meaning of "عدد سنين": It means "multiple years." This expression indicates that they slept for many years, a detail whose elaboration will be provided, God willing, in the commentary of subsequent verses. 6. The meaning of "بعثناكم": This expression refers to their awakening. Perhaps this word was used because their sleep was so prolonged that it resembled death, and their awakening was like resurrection after death. 7. The meaning of "لنعلم": It means "that We might know." This does not imply that Allah wishes to acquire new knowledge. Such expressions frequently appear in the Qur’an to indicate that what is known to Allah is manifested in reality. In this case, it means: We awakened them so that this fact becomes practically evident, that they will ask each other about their sleep. 8. The meaning of "أي الحزبين": This matter will be clarified in the forthcoming verses. The point is that when they awoke, they disputed about the duration of their sleep; some believed they had slept for one day, others thought it was half a day, while in fact, they had slept for many years. Some have said that these words indicate that there were different groups: the "Aṣḥāb al-Raqīm" and the "Aṣḥāb al-Kahf." This notion is very unlikely and does not require extensive discussion. (Reference: This view is mentioned on page 179 of A‘lam al-Qur’ān.)

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

As we have stated, after narrating the event concisely, its details are explained in fourteen verses. The discourse begins thus: "Their story, as has been said, We relate to you (نَحْنُ نَقُصُّ عَلَیْکَ نَبَاَھُمْ بِالْحَقِّ)." We present the incident in such a manner that it is free from all kinds of frivolous talk, baseless things, and falsehood. They were a few brave youths who believed in their Lord, and We increased them in guidance (إِنَّهُمْ فِتْيَةٌ آمَنُوا بِرَبِّهِمْ وَزِدْنَاهُمْ هُدًى). As we have mentioned, "فتیہ" is the plural of "فتی," meaning young and spirited youths. Since in youth a person’s body is strong and their emotions intense, spiritually the heart is more receptive to the light of truth and to sentiments of love, generosity, and forgiveness. Therefore, often "فتی" and "فتوت" when spoken of elders are used collectively for these qualities. Similarly, the word "جوانمردی" (chivalry) and "فتوت" are used in Persian with meanings aligned to these attributes. From the Qur’anic verses concisely and historical sources in detail, it is understood that the Companions of the Cave lived in an era and environment of disbelief and idolatry, under an oppressive regime that commonly upheld polytheism, disbelief, ignorance, immorality, and cruelty. This tyrannical rule was imposed upon the people. However, these brave youths, who possessed wisdom and sincerity, eventually recognized the corruption of the time. They resolved firmly to rise against it and decided that if they lacked the strength to abolish that religion, they would migrate. Therefore, after the previous discussion, the Qur’an says: When they stood up and said, “Our Lord is the Lord of the heavens and the earth,” We strengthened their hearts (وَرَبَطْنَا عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ إِذْ قَامُوا فَقَالُوا رَبُّنَا رَبُّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ). They declared that they would never worship any god besides Him (لَنْ نَدْعُوَا مِن دُونِهِ إِلٰهًا). They said that if they did so and regarded another as a god besides Him, they would have indeed spoken an absurd and false thing (لَقَدْ قُلْنَا إِذًا شَطَطًا). From "رَبَطْنَا عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ" it is understood that initially the thought of monotheism arose within their hearts but they could not express it openly; God strengthened their hearts and granted them the power to stand up and openly proclaim the call of monotheism. Whether they first declared this before the tyrant king Daqyanus, or before the general public, or both, or among themselves, is not clearly established. However, the apparent meaning of "قَامُوا" is that they made this proclamation in the presence of the oppressive king. "شَطَطَ" (plural "أَشْطَاط") means to go beyond bounds and to deviate greatly. Thus, those things that are far from the truth are called "شَطَط." It is noteworthy that the large banks of rivers are called "شَطْ" because they are distant and high from the water. These faithful youths relied on clear evidence for affirming monotheism and negating other gods, namely that they can clearly see that there is an Owner and Lord of the heavens and the earth— the existence of the orderly system of creation is proof of His existence, and they themselves are part of this created universe. Therefore, their Lord must be the Lord of the heavens and the earth. Then they also relied on another argument: “Our people have taken gods besides Him” (هٰؤُلَاءِ قَوْمُنَا اتَّخَذُوا مِن دُونِهِ آلِهَةً). Can belief be based without evidence and proof? “Why do they not bring any clear authority in support of their divinity?” (لَوْلَا يَأْتُونَ عَلَيْهِمْ بِسُلْطَانٍ بَيِّنٍ). Can such belief be accepted based on mere imagination, conjecture, or blind imitation? What a blatant and great deviation this is! “Who could be more unjust than one who fabricates lies against God?” (فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَىٰ عَلَى اللّٰهِ كَذِبًا). This falsehood is an injustice upon oneself and society: upon oneself by consigning oneself to wretchedness and destruction, upon society by propagating such beliefs that lead it astray. It is also a transgression against the sacred domain of the Lord and a desecration of His exalted station. These monotheistic brave youths strove greatly that the rust of polytheism be removed from people’s hearts and the sprout of monotheism might emerge therein. However, in that place there was such noise of idols and idol worship, and the melody of monotheism stuck in their throats due to the tyrant king. Hence, out of compulsion for their salvation and the search for a better environment, they resolved to migrate. Thus, they began to consult amongst themselves about where to go and in which direction to proceed, saying to one another: “When you separate yourselves from that idolatrous people and from those whom they worship instead of God, and sever your account with them, then take refuge in the cave” (وَإِذِ اعْتَزَلْتُمُوهُمْ وَمَا يَعْبُدُونَ إِلَّا اللّٰهَ فَأْوُوا إِلَى الْكَهْفِ).So that your Lord may spread over you His mercy and appoint for you a facility from your affair (يَنشُرْ لَكُمْ رَبُّكُمْ مِنْ رَحْمَتِهِ وَيُهَيِّئْ لَكُمْ مِنْ أَمْرِكُمْ مِرْفَقًا). "يُهَيِّئْ" is derived from the root "تھیہ," meaning to prepare. And "مرفق" refers to something that provides comfort and ease. Therefore, "يُهَيِّئْ لَكُمْ مِنْ أَمْرِكُمْ مِرْفَقًا" means "May God provide you with a source of comfort and ease." It is not unlikely that "نشر رحمة" in the previous phrase refers to the spiritual blessings of Allah, while the second phrase points to physical and material salvation and comfort.

Monotheism and noble human qualities invariably accompany one another. Monotheism serves as a source for elevated human virtues, and these two exert a mutual influence upon each other. On this basis, it is stated in the account of the Companions of the Cave: “they were youths who believed in their Lord.” For this reason, some scholars have said: راس الفتوة الایمان The source of chivalry is faith. Others have said: الفتوة بذل الندی و کف الاذی و ترک الشکوی Chivalry consists in generosity and liberality, refraining from causing harm to others, and abstaining from complaint in times of hardship. Yet others have interpreted “فتوت” as follows: ھی اجتناب المحارم و استعمال المکارم Chivalry is to abstain from prohibitions and to employ noble human virtues.

In the aforementioned verses, this reality is manifested with great clarity at several points: if a human being takes the first step on the path of God and rises for His sake, then divine assistance and aid hasten toward them. In one place it is stated: “they were youths who believed, and We increased them in guidance.” In another place it is stated: “We strengthened their hearts and endowed them with firmness.” And at the end of the verses as well, it is indicated that they were awaiting the overshadowing of divine mercy and the attainment of the path of deliverance. This reality is also affirmed in other verses of the Qur’an. For example: وَالَّذِینَ جَاھَدُوا فِینَا لَنَھْدِیَنَّھُمْ سُبُلَنَا Those who strive in Our way, We shall surely guide them to Our paths (al‑‘Ankabut, final verse). Likewise, in Surah Muhammad, verse 17: والذین اھتدوا راوھم ھدی Those who are guided—Allah increases them in guidance. We know that on the path of truth there are many hardships and obstacles, and without the grace of God it is extremely difficult to reach the goal. We also know that the divine grace does not, under any circumstances, abandon a servant who seeks and pursues the truth along this path.

The "Alif Lam" in "الکھف" perhaps indicates that they had previously arranged for a cave in a distant area, where if their call to monotheism bore no fruit, they would take refuge in it to escape that polluted and dark environment. "Khaf" is a meaningful word. It brings to mind the very primitive way of human life—the environment when nights were dark and cold, and light was absent, and people lived in desolate valleys. It was a life devoid of material comforts, with no soft beds or prosperity. Now, consider the historical narration that the Companions of the Cave, at that time, were ministers and high-ranking officials of the king. They revolted against the king and his religion. This clearly shows how much resolve, courage, bravery, and self-sacrifice it required to abandon a life full of luxury and prefer hermitage in a cave. It also reveals how noble their souls were. Indeed, this cave was dark, cold, and silent, and there was a danger of poisonous animals within it. Yet, a world of light, purity, monotheism, and spirituality thrived there. The rays of divine mercy illuminated the walls of this cave as if they had engraved fine patterns, and traces of divine grace were present within it. It contained no laughable idols, and the oppressive king’s grasp could not reach there. Its atmosphere liberated them from the stifling environment of ignorance and crime, and there was no restriction on human thought in it. Complete freedom of thought existed in its entire expanse. Yes! These God-worshipping brave youths abandoned this world, which was like a painful prison despite its vastness, and chose the cave, which, despite its narrowness and darkness, was expansive. Much like the pure-hearted Prophet Joseph (peace be upon him), who, despite the persistent insistence of the beautiful wife of the Aziz of Egypt, did not submit to her rebellious lust and accepted imprisonment in a dark and dreadful prison. Allah increased their steadfastness, and eventually, they uttered this astonishing statement before the Divine Presence: رَبِّ السِّجْنُ اَحَبُّ إِلَیَّ مِمَّا یَدْعُونَنِی إِلَیْہِ وَإِلاَّ تَصْرِفْ عَنِّی کَیْدَھُنَّ اَصْبُ إِلَیْھِنَّ "My Lord! Prison, despite its stifling narrowness and darkness, is dearer to me than that to which these women invite me; and if You do not turn away their scheming from me, I shall incline towards them and be among the ignorant." (Yusuf 33)

See ayat 18 for tafseer.

In these two verses, the Qur’an presents certain details of the extraordinary life of the Companions of the Cave within the cave. Their condition is depicted in such a vivid manner that it is as though a person is seated before the cave and observing with their own eyes those who are asleep inside it.

In these two verses, six signs and characteristics of the cave and the Companions of the Cave are presented: 1. he entrance of the cave faced north, and since the cave was located in the northern hemisphere of the earth, sunlight did not fall upon it directly. As the Qur’an states: if you were to observe the sun at its rising, it would incline away from their cave toward the right, and at its setting it would pass them by on the left (وَتَرَی الشَّمْسَ إِذَا طَلَعَتْ تَتَزَاوَرُ عَنْ کَھْفِھِمْ ذَاتَ الْیَمِینِ وَإِذَا غَرَبَتْ تَقْرِضُھُمْ ذَاتَ الشِّمَالِ). In this way, direct sunlight did not continually fall upon them; otherwise, their bodies might have decayed. The expression “تزاور,” which denotes inclining, suggests a subtle point, as though the sun was assigned to pass by from the right side of the cave. Similarly, the expression “تقرض,” meaning to cut across, also conveys a sense of assignment. Apart from this, “تزاور” derives from the root “زیارت,” which contains an indication of commencement, corresponding to sunrise, while “تقرض,” signifying cutting or terminating, corresponds to sunset. Because the entrance of the cave faced north, gentle and refreshing winds could enter it, since such winds generally blow from the north; thus, fresh air would easily circulate within the cave and maintain a sense of vitality. 2. They were situated in a spacious part of the cave (وَھُمْ فِی فَجْوَةٍ مِنْہُ). This indicates that they were not at the mouth of the cave, which is usually narrow, but rather in its central portion, so as to remain hidden from the sight of onlookers and also from the direct glare of sunlight. At this point, the Qur’an appears to pause the narrative and present a spiritual conclusion, for the entire account has been related for this purpose. It states: this is among the signs of Allah; whoever Allah guides, he alone is rightly guided, and whoever He leads astray, for him you will never find a protecting guide (ذٰلِکَ مِنْ آیَاتِ اللهِ مَنْ یَھْدِ اللهُ فَھُوَ الْمُھْتَدِ وَمَنْ یُضْلِلْ فَلَنْ تَجِدَ لَہُ وَلِیًّا مُرْشِدًا). Indeed, those who step onto the path of God and strive in His way are encompassed by divine grace at every step; this grace is not limited to the general framework of their affairs but extends even to their details. 3. Their sleep was not like ordinary sleep: if you had seen them, you would have thought them awake, while they were in fact in a deep sleep (وَتَحْسَبُھُمْ اَیْقَاظًا). This indicates that their eyes were fully open like those of an awake person. This exceptional condition may have been so that predatory animals would not approach them, being afraid of one who appears awake, or so that the environment might remain awe‑inspiring, deterring any human from approaching them and thereby serving as a form of protection. 4. In order that their bodies might not decay as a result of lying for many years, “We turned them to the right and to the left” (وَھُمْ رُقُودٌ وَنُقَلِّبُھُمْ ذَاتَ الْیَمِینِ وَذَاتَ الشِّمَالِ), so that the blood in their bodies would not stagnate in one place, and their nerves would not be damaged due to prolonged concentration on one side. 5. During this time, their dog, which accompanied them, lay stretching its forelegs at the entrance of the cave, keeping watch (وَکَلْبُھُمْ بَاسِطٌ ذِرَاعَیْہِ بِالْوَصِیدِ). As Raghib has stated in al‑Mufradat, “وصید” refers to a chamber or store in mountainous regions used for storing goods; here, it denotes the entrance of the cave. Before this, the Qur’an had not mentioned the dog of the Companions of the Cave, but during the course of events it at times introduces such details that illuminate related matters; thus, here it becomes evident that a dog accompanied them, remaining with them and serving as their protector. As for how this dog came to join them—whether it was their hunting dog or the dog of a shepherd whom they met along the way, and who, upon recognizing them, sent his livestock toward the settlement and himself joined these righteous individuals, being a seeker of truth and one desirous of divine vision—these possibilities remain. In any case, the dog did not part from them and accompanied them. Does this not imply that all seekers of truth may step onto the path toward it and that the door of the Beloved’s court is not closed to anyone—from ministers who repented before a tyrannical king to a shepherd, and even to his dog, the doors of the divine presence remain open? Is it not the case that the Qur’an states that all particles of the heavens and the earth, all trees, and all creatures are engaged in the remembrance of God, filled with His love and devotion (Bani Isra’il, 44)? 6. The scene of the Companions of the Cave within the cave was so awe‑inspiring that if you had looked upon them, you would have turned away in flight, and your entire being would have been filled with terror (لَوْ اطَّلَعْتَ عَلَیْھِمْ لَوَلَّیْتَ مِنْھُمْ فِرَارًا وَلَمُلِئْتَ مِنْھُمْ رُعْبًا). This is not the only instance in which God has made awe and fear a shield for His believing servants. In Surah Al‑Imran, verse 151, it is stated: سَنُلْقِی فِی قُلُوبِ الَّذِینَ کَفَرُوا الرُّعْبَ We shall soon cast terror into the hearts of the disbelievers. In Du‘a al‑Nudbah, it is also reported from the Prophet that he said: "ثمّ نصرتہ بالرعب" O God, You supported Your Prophet by casting terror into the hearts of his enemies. However, whether this awe, which caused anyone who saw them to tremble entirely, resulted from their physical condition or from a mysterious spiritual force is not clarified in the Qur’anic verses. Although exegetes have discussed various possibilities, these lack decisive evidential support, and therefore they may be set aside. It should also be noted that “وَلَمُلِئْتَ مِنْھُمْ رُعْبًا” (you would have been filled with terror) is, in reality, the cause of “لَوَلَّیْتَ مِنْھُمْ فِرَارًا” (you would have turned away in flight); that is, you would flee because you would be overtaken by fear. In any case, when the divine will is involved, great results can emerge even from seemingly trivial means.

See ayat 20 for tafseer.

If God wills, we will read under the following verses that the sleep of the People of the Cave became so long that they slept for three hundred and nine (309) years, and their sleep was exactly like death, while their awakening was like [the awakening on] the Day of Judgment. Therefore, in the verses under discussion, the Qur’an says: "And thus We raised them up" (وَکَذٰلِکَ بَعَثْنَاھُمْ). That is, just as We were able to make them sleep for a long period, We were also able to awaken them again. We awakened them from their sleep "so that they might ask each other, one of them said, 'How long have you stayed here?'" (لِیَتَسَائَلُوا بَیْنَھُمْ قَالَ قَائِلٌ مِنْھُمْ کَمْ لَبِثْتُمْ). (Explanatory note: The "lam" in "لِیَتَسَائَلُوا" is a lam of result (لامِ عاقبت) and not a lam of cause (لامِ علت)—meaning that their awakening resulted in their questioning one another about the duration of their sleep.) They said, "We have stayed a day or part of a day" (قَالُوا لَبِثْنَا یَوْمًا اَوْ بَعْضَ یَوْمٍ). Their hesitation in this regard may be because, as commentators have said, when they first came to the cave it was the early part of the day and they slept; and when they awakened it was the late part of the day. That is why initially they thought they had slept one full day, but upon looking towards the sun they felt they might have slept only a part of the day. But in the end, since they could not determine exactly how long they had slept, "they said, 'Your Lord (alone) knows best how long you have remained'" (قَالُوا رَبُّکُمْ اَعْلَمُ بِمَا لَبِثْتُمْ). Some say this was said by the eldest among them, whose name was Tamlikha; the use of "قالوا" in the plural form here is common. They said this probably because there was no doubt about their long sleep from their faces, nails, hair, and clothes. In any case, they felt hunger and thirst because the food they had in their bodies had been completely consumed. Therefore, initially, they suggested, "Send one of you with this silver coin to the city so that he may find out who has the best and purest food and bring to you provision from it as much as you need" (فَابْعَثُوا اَحَدَکُمْ بِوَرِقِکُمْ ھٰذِہِ إِلَی الْمَدِینَةِ فَلْیَنظُرْ اَیُّھَا اَزْکَی طَعَامًا فَلْیَاْتِکُمْ بِرِزْقٍ مِنْہُ). "But let him go subtly so that no one may become aware of you" (وَلْیَتَلَطَّفْ وَلَایُشْعِرَنَّ بِکُمْ اَحَدًا). "Because if they become aware of you and capture you, they will stone you or turn you back to their religion (idolatry)" (إِنَّھُمْ إِنْ یَظْہَرُوا عَلَیْکُمْ یَرْجُمُوکُمْ اَوْ یُعِیدُوکُمْ فِی مِلَّتِھِمْ). "And if that happens, you will never succeed" (وَلَنْ تُفْلِحُوا إِذًا اَبَدًا).

It is highly noteworthy that, in this account, we have read that when the Companions of the Cave awoke, they were naturally very hungry, for whatever nourishment their bodies had contained during that prolonged period had been exhausted. Nevertheless, when they sent one of their companions to procure food, they instructed him not to purchase any and every kind of food, but rather to carefully obtain it from those vendors who offered the purest provisions. Some exegetes have maintained that this refers specifically to slaughtered animals, for they were aware that in that city there were people who sold impure and unclean items, and at times even carrion, or whose livelihood involved forbidden practices. Hence, they advised that food should not be purchased from such individuals. However, it appears that this expression carries a broader meaning, encompassing every form of outward and inward purity. In reality, it constitutes an exhortation for all travelers on the path of truth that they should not only be concerned with their spiritual nourishment but should also maintain the purity of their physical sustenance, ensuring that it is free from every kind of contamination; and they should not neglect this principle even in the most difficult circumstances of life. In the present age, many people in the world have, to some extent, become aware of the importance of this principle and strive to ensure that their food is free from all forms of external contamination. They keep food covered, protected from unclean hands, and shielded from dust and dirt; this is commendable. However, one should not be content with this alone, but should also ensure that the food is not unlawful and is free from adulteration, deception, and every form of internal impurity. In Islamic traditions, great emphasis has been placed upon lawful sustenance for the acceptance of supplication and the purification of the heart. It is reported in a tradition that a man came into the presence of the Messenger of Allah and said: احبّ ان یستجاب دُعائی I wish that my supplication may be accepted. He replied: طھّر ماکلک ولاتدخل بطنک الحرام Keep your food pure, and take care that no unlawful substance enters your stomach. (Reference: Wasa’il al‑Shi‘ah, vol. 4, chapters on supplication, chapter 67, hadith no. 4. For further details, see Tafsir‑e‑Namuna, vol. 1, commentary on Surah al‑Baqarah, verse 186.)

From the words of the above verses, it is clearly understood that the People of the Cave insisted that no one in that environment should know the location of their refuge, lest those people force them to adopt the religion of idol worship or badly kill and stone them. They wanted no one to be aware so that for the future struggle, at least to protect their faith, they could conserve their strength. This is a form of reformative Taqiyah, because Taqiyah means to avoid wasting one’s forces unnecessarily and to protect oneself by hiding or concealing one’s belief, so that one can struggle effectively when the need arises. It is clear that Taqiyah is prohibited where hiding one’s belief harms the objective and program; there, everything should be made apparent. لو بلغ ما بلغ then whatever happens, let it happen.

It is well known that, in terms of the count of words, the expression “وَلْیَتَلَطَّفْ” constitutes precisely the midpoint of the Qur’an. This is a subtle and distinctive elegance, carrying a delicate meaning, for it is derived from the root of “لطف” and “لطافت.” Here, the term conveys the sense of acting with caution and meticulous care; that is, the person going to obtain food should proceed in such a manner that no one becomes aware of them. Some exegetes have stated that the intended meaning here is to act with gentleness in the purchase of food; namely, not to adopt harshness in transaction, nor to generate dispute, but rather to select the best quality. It is also a refined point of significance that the word located at the center of the Qur’an itself embodies the notion of لطافت and تلطف. (Explanatory note: By the great grace of the Lord, after a full ten years we have reached the halfway point of the exegesis of the Holy Qur’an. For this we express our gratitude to Allah, for although severe conditions and upheavals befell us and our country during this period, the light of Islam in this region was not extinguished; rather, its sphere expanded. We are also grateful that no interruption occurred in the writing of this exegesis. Therefore, we remain hopeful that the remaining portion of the exegesis will, انشاء الله, be completed with greater speed. It is true that ten years is not a short duration; however, the work accomplished thus far in this exegesis is, al‑ḥamdu li‑llāh, by no means insignificant.)

See ayat 24 for tafseer.

See ayat 24 for tafseer.

See ayat 24 for tafseer.

Soon the account of the migration of those noble youths spread among the people. The tyrannical king became enraged lest their departure or escape might become a cause for the awakening and awareness of others. He also feared that they might go to a distant or nearby region and begin to propagate the religion of monotheism and initiate a struggle against polytheism and idol‑worship. Therefore, he appointed certain individuals to search for them everywhere; and wherever any trace of them might be found, they were to be pursued for arrest and punished. However, despite all their efforts, nothing was found. This matter itself became a mystery for the people of the region and a focal point for their minds and thoughts. Moreover, the fact that several highly important officials of the government had renounced everything and exposed themselves to various dangers perhaps became a source of awakening and awareness for some people. In any case, the astonishing account of these individuals was recorded in their history and began to be transmitted from one generation to another, and thus centuries passed over this matter. Now let us see what befell the one who had gone to obtain food. When he entered the city, his mouth remained open in astonishment. The form and structure of the city’s buildings had completely changed; all faces were unfamiliar, garments were of a new style, and even the language and customs of the people had altered. Where there had previously been ancient dwellings, there were now palaces, and where they had once stood, there were desolate expanses. Perhaps for a moment he thought that he was still asleep and that all he was seeing was a dream. He rubbed his eyes and looked at everything with wide‑open astonished eyes. He thought: what kind of reality is this that cannot be believed? He then reflected that if they had slept in the cave for a day or half a day, how could such transformations have occurred within so short a period? On the other hand, his appearance, features, and condition were also strange and unfamiliar to the people. His clothing, his speech, and his face all appeared unusual; perhaps for this reason some people became attentive to him and began to follow him. At that moment, the astonishment of the people reached its peak when he placed his hand in his pocket to pay the price for the food he had purchased. The shopkeeper’s gaze fell upon the coin: it belonged to a period more than three hundred years old, and perhaps the name of the tyrannical king Decius (Daqyanus) of that era was engraved upon it. When the shopkeeper sought an explanation, the buyer replied: this coin has only just come into my possession. From the surrounding circumstances and indications, the people gradually became convinced that this man was among those individuals whose mention had been read in the history of three hundred years earlier and whose mysterious account had been heard in many gatherings. He himself also realized that he and his companions had remained immersed in a deep and prolonged sleep. This news spread throughout the city like wildfire in an instant. Historians have written that at that time a righteous and God‑fearing king ruled, but belief in bodily resurrection and the rising of the dead after death was difficult for the people there. A group among them did not accept that a human being would be raised again after death; however, the incident of the sleep of the Companions of the Cave became a decisive proof for the supporters of bodily resurrection. Therefore, in the first verse under discussion, the Qur’an states: just as We caused them to sleep, so We raised them from that deep and prolonged sleep and informed the people of their state so that they might know that the promise of Allah regarding the Resurrection is true (وَکَذٰلِکَ اَعْثَرْنَا عَلَیْھِمْ لِیَعْلَمُوا اَنَّ وَعْدَ اللهِ حَقٌّ)، and that there is no doubt concerning the Hour (وَاَنَّ السَّاعَةَ لَارَیْبَ فِیھَا). For this prolonged sleep spanning centuries is not dissimilar to death, and their awakening is akin to rising from graves; rather, it may be said that this sleeping and awakening is in some respects even more astonishing than dying and being resurrected, for they slept for centuries yet their bodies did not decay, despite neither eating nor drinking. Then how did they remain alive for such a long period? Is this not evidence that God has power over all things and all actions? When one observes such a scene, the matter of life after death does not appear strange; rather, it appears certainly possible. Some historians have written that when the man who had gone to obtain food saw this situation, he quickly returned to the cave and informed his companions of the entire account. They were all immersed in deep astonishment. They then realized that none of their children, brothers, or friends remained; none of their companions and supporters were left. In such a situation, this life appeared very harsh and disagreeable to them. Therefore, they prayed to Allah that their eyes be closed to this world and that they be transferred to the proximity of divine mercy. Thus it happened: they closed their eyes in this world. Their bodies lay in the cave when people set out in search of them. At this point, a conflict arose between the supporters and opponents of bodily resurrection. The opponents sought that the people quickly forget the matter of the Companions of the Cave’s sleep and awakening; therefore, they proposed that the entrance of the cave be sealed so that they might remain hidden from the sight of people forever (إِذْ یَتَنَازَعُونَ بَیْنَھُمْ اَمْرَھُمْ فَقَالُوا ابْنُوا عَلَیْھِمْ بُنْیَانًا). They urged people to remain silent and not speak excessively about them, saying that their account is mysterious and that “their Lord knows best about them” (رَبُّھُمْ اَعْلَمُ بِھِمْ); therefore, let their story remain confined to them and leave them in their state. Whereas the true believers who had become aware of this incident and regarded it as a living proof for the reality of the Resurrection strove that this event should never be forgotten. Thus, “they said: we shall construct a mosque near their resting place,” so that people would never forget them in their hearts and, moreover, might seek assistance from their pure souls (قَالَ الَّذِینَ غَلَبُوا عَلیٰ اَمْرِھِمْ لَنَتَّخِذَنَّ عَلَیْھِمْ مَسْجِدًا). In the interpretation of this verse, several other possibilities have also been proposed; under the heading “Some Important Points,” some of these will be indicated. In the next verse, reference is made to certain disagreements among people regarding the Companions of the Cave. One of these concerns their number. It is stated: some say they were three, and the fourth was their dog (سَیَقُولُونَ ثَلَاثَةٌ رَابِعُھُمْ کَلْبُھُمْ); some say they were five, and the sixth was their dog (وَیَقُولُونَ خَمْسَةٌ سَادِسُھُمْ کَلْبُھُم). All these statements are without evidence and are like shooting in the dark (رَجْمًا بِالْغَیْبِ). And some say they were seven, and the eighth was their dog (وَیَقُولُونَ سَبْعَةٌ وَثَامِنُھُمْ کَلْبُھُمْ). “Say: my Lord knows best their number” (قُلْ رَبِّی اَعْلَمُ بِعِدَّتِھِمْ). “None but a few know them” (مَا یَعْلَمُھُمْ إِلاَّ قَلِیلٌ). Although the Qur’an does not explicitly state their number in these expressions, certain indications in the verse suggest that the third statement is correct and corresponds to reality, because after the first and second statements comes the phrase رَجْمًا بِالْغَیْبِ, indicating their baselessness, whereas no such expression accompanies the third statement; rather, it is followed by “Say: my Lord knows best their number,” and also “only a few people know their number,” which likewise indicate the truth of the third view. In any case, at the end of the verse it is further stated: do not dispute concerning them except in an outward, reasoned manner (فَلَاتُمَارِ فِیھِمْ إِلاَّ مِرَاءً ظَاھِرًا). As Raghib has stated in al‑Mufradat, “مِرَاء” is derived from “مریة الناقة” (I grasped the udder of a she‑camel to milk it); later, it came to be used for disputing about something doubtful, and often it denotes obstinate argumentation in support of falsehood, though fundamentally it is not restricted to this sense and applies to discussion concerning any doubtful matter. “ظَاھِرًا” means dominant, prevailing, and successful. Thus, the meaning of فَلَاتُمَارِ فِیھِمْ إِلاَّ مِرَاءً ظَاھِرًا is that one should engage them in rational and demonstrative discourse such that the superiority of one’s argument becomes evident. Some have also suggested that it means not to debate obstinate opponents in private, because they would distort whatever is said; rather, one should speak openly in the presence of people so that they cannot distort or deny the reality. However, the first interpretation appears more correct. In any case, the implication is that, relying upon divine revelation, one should speak with them, for this is the most decisive proof in this matter; therefore, do not seek judgment from them regarding the number of the Companions of the Cave (وَلَاتَسْتَفْتِ فِیھِمْ مِنْھُمْ اَحَدًا). In the next verse, the Messenger of Allah is given a general instruction: never say of anything, “I will do this tomorrow” (وَلَاتَقُولَنَّ لِشَیْءٍ إِنِّی فَاعِلٌ ذٰلِکَ غَدًا), except that Allah wills (إِلاَّ اَنْ یَشَاءَ اللهُ). That is, in statements about future matters and intentions, one must certainly say “انشاء الله,” because, first, one has no independence in intention, for if Allah does not will, no person has the power to do anything; therefore, it should be made clear that one’s capacity derives from His enduring power, and hence one must say “انشاء الله.” Second, a human whose power is limited and who faces the possibility of obstacles is not justified in giving a definite and certain statement about the future, as unexpected hindrances may arise; therefore, such statements should be accompanied by “انشاء الله.” Some exegetes have proposed another possibility: that the verse negates any independence in human action, meaning: you cannot say, “I will do this tomorrow,” unless Allah wills. However, this interpretation suggests that adding “انشاء الله” completes the statement, which is an implication rather than the explicit meaning, as maintained in the first interpretation. (Explanatory note: according to the first interpretation, “ان تقول” is implied; the construction would be: “الا ان تقول انشاء اللّٰہ”; whereas the second interpretation does not require such an implication.) The reported occasion of revelation of these verses supports the first interpretation, for the Messenger of Allah gave an answer to those who questioned him about the Companions of the Cave without saying “انشاء الله,” and therefore revelation was delayed for a period so that attention might be drawn to this matter and he might serve as an example for all. (Explanatory note: it should be noted that such addresses, though apparently directed to the Prophet, are in fact intended for the community; hence this part of the report is not considered sound (translator).) After this, the Qur’an states: “and remember your Lord when you forget” (وَاذْکُرْ رَبَّکَ إِذَا نَسِیت). This indicates that if one forgets to say “انشاء الله” when speaking about future matters, one should make amends as soon as one remembers by saying “انشاء الله,” which will compensate for what has passed. And say: perhaps my Lord will guide me to a nearer path of rectitude than this (وَقُلْ عَسیٰ اَنْ یَھْدِیَنِی رَبِّی لِاَقْرَبَ مِنْ ھٰذَا رَشَدًا). Provide your feedback on BizChat

The term “رجم” originally signifies “stone” or “to throw stones.” Subsequently, it came to be used in the sense of all forms of archery. At times, it is also employed figuratively to mean making an accusation or imputing blame. Furthermore, it is used to denote making a judgment based on conjecture. The expression “بالغیب” serves to emphasize this meaning, that is, it refers to making a decision about something in its absence without any source or evidence. This is analogous to the Persian expression: تیر در تاریکی انداختن to shoot an arrow in the dark. An arrow shot in darkness generally does not strike the correct target; similarly, judgments of this kind are usually not correct.

In the verses under consideration, both phrases “رابعھم کلبھم” and “سادسھم کلبھم” occur without the conjunction waw, whereas “وثامنھم کلبھم” begins with waw. Since every expression in the Qur’an embodies a particular wisdom and purpose, exegetes have offered extensive discussion regarding this waw. Perhaps the best interpretation among them is that this waw indicates the final statement and the concluding point. In contemporary literary usage as well, it has become common that while enumerating items they are mentioned without waw, but the final item is necessarily introduced with waw; for example: Zayd, Umar, Hasan, and Muhammad came. (In Urdu, “اور” is used in place of waw (translator)). Here, the waw signals the conclusion of the discourse and the mention of the last person or item. This interpretation is reported from the well‑known exegete Ibn Abbas, and some other exegetes have also supported it. Moreover, they have used this same waw to substantiate the view that the actual number of the Companions of the Cave was seven, because by rejecting other statements as baseless, the Qur’an ultimately states their true number at the end. Some other exegetes, such as Fakhr al‑Razi and al‑Qurtubi, have presented another explanation of this waw. Its summary is as follows: the number seven is considered a complete number among Arabs. Therefore, up to the number seven items are mentioned without waw; however, when exceeding this number, waw is employed, which serves as an indication of the beginning of a new statement. For this reason, in the language of Arab literati it came to be known as “واوِ ثمانیہ”. This pattern is also generally observed in the verses of the Qur’an. For example, in Surah al‑Tawbah, verse 112, where the qualities of those striving in the path of God are enumerated, seven attributes are mentioned without waw; but when the Qur’an reaches the eighth attribute, it states: و النَّاہُونَ عَنِ المُنکَرِ وَ الحَافِظُونَ لِحُدُودِ اللّٰہِ and those who forbid evil and those who preserve the limits of Allah. Similarly, in Surah al‑Tahrim, verse 5, while describing the qualities of the wives of the Prophet, after the seventh category the eighth attribute is mentioned with waw: ثَیِّنَاتٍ وَّاَبْکَارًا widows and virgins. Likewise, in Surah al‑Zumar, verse 71, regarding the gates of Hell it is stated: فَتِحَتْ اَبْوَابُہَا its gates will be opened. But two verses later, when referring to the gates of Paradise, it is stated: وَ فَتِحَتْ اَبْوَابُہَا and its gates will be opened. Is this not because the gates of Hell are seven and the gates of Paradise are eight? However, this may not be an absolute rule, though in most instances it appears so. In any case, this indicates that even the presence of a single waw in the Qur’an is governed by precise consideration and serves to express a particular reality.

The apparent meaning of the interpretation of the Quran is that, ultimately, the Companions of the Cave bid farewell to life and were consigned to the earth, and the word "علیھم" (upon them) is evidence of this claim. Afterward, their devotees intended to build a place of worship near their resting place. The Quran, in the verses under discussion, describes their intention in a tone of approval. This indicates that, contrary to the Wahhabi view regarding the respect of the graves of the pious, building a mosque or place of worship is not only not forbidden but is a good and commendable act. In principle, constructing such buildings that keep alive the memory of important and great personalities has always been practiced by people worldwide and continues today. In fact, this act expresses a form of appreciation and gratitude towards those elders, and it also implies encouraging affection and enthusiasm towards the works they performed. Islam has neither prohibited this act nor considered it unjustifiable. The existence of such buildings serves as a historical document for such personalities, their works, and their history. This is why the histories of those Prophets, Messengers, and other personalities whose graves are not found have also become doubtful and remain a question. It is also clear that such buildings in no way negate the doctrine of Tawhid, nor does their existence in the slightest negate the fact that worship is exclusively for Allah, because respect is one matter and worship is another. However, this is a lengthy discussion which is beyond the scope of this occasion.

Expressing intention for future actions by saying “Inshā’ Allāh” is not only a form of ادب and reverence toward the divine presence, but also an acknowledgment of a fundamental metaphysical reality: that human beings possess nothing independently. Whatever exists is from God. Absolute independence belongs only to Him, while all created beings are dependent upon Him. If all the forces of the world were to act without divine will, they would be incapable of causing even the slightest effect; yet if His will is realized, everything comes to pass with certainty. This formulation reflects the concept of “توحیدِ افعالی,” namely that although human beings possess intention, choice, and agency, all actions ultimately occur within the framework of divine will. The practice of saying “Inshā’ Allāh” not only directs attention toward God in human undertakings, but also instills strength, resolve, and moral clarity. It enhances sincerity (ikhlāṣ) in action and encourages ethical correctness in conduct. Some narrations state that when a person speaks about future plans without saying “Inshā’ Allāh,” God may leave him to his own condition and withdraw divine support. In a reported tradition from Imam Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (peace be upon him), it is related that he once instructed that a letter be written. When the letter was presented to him upon completion, he observed that it did not contain the phrase “Inshā’ Allāh.” He remarked: “How can you expect this matter to be fulfilled when it contains no exception (Inshā’ Allāh)? Review it, and wherever it lacks this expression, include it.

In the verses under discussion, we read that Allah instructed His Messenger PBUH & His Pure Progeny that when you forget Allah and then remember Him, you should remember Him. (Reference: Noor al-Thaqalayn, Vol. 3, p. 254) This indicates that if, in saying “Insha’Allah,” you do not trust in His will, then when you remember, you should make amends for this. Numerous narrations transmitted from Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) in the exegesis of this verse also emphasize this meaning. Even if a year passes and you remember that you did not say “Insha’Allah,” then make amends for the previous omission. (Reference: Noor al-Thaqalayn, Vol. 3, p. 254) At this point, the question arises: How is it possible that the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny forgets, since if forgetfulness were to occur in his thoughts and awareness, then full trust could not be placed in his words and actions. The infallibility of the Prophets and Imams (peace be upon them) from error and forgetfulness is established even in extraneous matters. However, paying attention to the fact that in many Quranic verses the discourse is addressed to the Prophets but the intended and targeted audience is the general people, this clarifies the answer to this question. For such conversation, Arabs have a famous proverb: "ایّاک اعنی واسمعی یا جارة" “My intention is for the one I am addressing, and O neighbor, you also listen.” (Explanatory note: In Persian, the equivalent proverb is: "در بتو می گویم دیوار تو بشنو," meaning: “O door, I speak to you, and O wall, you listen.” In Urdu, the equivalent proverb is: کہوں دِھی کو بہو تو کان رکھیو And in Punjabi, this meaning is perhaps expressed most excellently as: کہنیاں دھی نوں تے سنانیاں نونہہ نوں (Saqib)) (Some senior exegetes have offered another answer to this question, which we have presented under Surah Al-An'am, verse 68. Please refer to volume five.)

See ayat 27 for tafseer.

See ayat 27 for tafseer.

These verses conclude the narrative of the Companions of the Cave by addressing, with clarity, a question that naturally arises from the preceding discussion—namely, the duration of their extraordinary sleep. The earlier verses suggest that their state of dormancy extended over a considerable period, arousing curiosity regarding its precise length. It is stated: “وَلَبِثُوا فِي كَهْفِهِمْ ثَلَاثَ مِائَةٍ سِنِينَ وَازْدَادُوا تِسْعًا” — they remained in their cave for three hundred years, and increased by nine. Accordingly, the total duration of their stay amounts to 309 years. Some have interpreted the expression “وَازْدَادُوا تِسْعًا” as an implicit reference to the difference between solar and lunar reckoning, suggesting that three hundred solar years correspond approximately to three hundred and nine lunar years. The Qur’an then directs attention away from speculation and toward the ultimate source of knowledge: “قُلِ اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا لَبِثُوا” — say: God knows best how long they remained. This statement resolves اختلاف by affirming that complete and precise knowledge rests with the divine. It further declares: “لَهُ غَيْبُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ” — to Him belongs the unseen of the heavens and the earth. The rhetorical expression: “أَبْصِرْ بِهِ وَأَسْمِعْ” — how perfectly He sees and hears, emphasizes the absolute comprehensiveness of divine awareness. It is then asserted: “مَا لَهُمْ مِن دُونِهِ مِن وَلِيٍّ” — they have no protector besides Him. This may be understood either in reference to all beings or specifically to the Companions of the Cave, indicating that their preservation and protection were entirely dependent upon divine guardianship. The verse concludes with: “وَلَا يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا” — He allows no one to share in His authority. This affirms the principle of absolute divine sovereignty, excluding any form of شریک in governance or knowledge. The final verse addresses the Prophet (peace be upon him): “وَاتْلُ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِنْ كِتَابِ رَبِّكَ” — recite what has been revealed to you from the Book of your Lord. This is followed by: “لَا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ” — there is no altering His words. Unlike human knowledge, which evolves and changes, divine knowledge and speech are immutable and complete. Therefore: “وَلَن تَجِدَ مِن دُونِهِ مُلْتَحَدًا” — you will find no refuge besides Him. The term “مُلْتَحَدًا” denotes a place of inclination or refuge, indicating that ultimate reliance and protection rest solely with God. Taken together, these final verses emphasize several interconnected themes: the certainty of divine knowledge, the completeness and permanence of revelation, the exclusivity of divine authority, and the ultimate dependence of all beings upon God as the sole source of guidance and refuge. They bring the narrative to a close by redirecting attention from historical detail to enduring theological and ethical principles.

This narrative of the Companions of the Cave is presented in Islamic sources in numerous traditions. While many of these reports differ in detail and are not all reliable from the perspective of transmission, some accounts show a greater degree of coherence with the Qur’anic text. Among them, a narration reported by ʿAlī ibn Ibrāhīm al‑Qummī—based on a statement attributed to Imam Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (عليه السلام)—is notable for its consistency in both content and spirit. According to this account, the Companions of the Cave lived during the reign of a tyrannical ruler who compelled his subjects to engage in idol worship and executed those who refused. These companions were believers in the one God, concealing their faith due to fear of persecution. The ruler had stationed guards at the gates of the capital to force all who entered or left the city to prostrate before idols. The companions departed the city under the pretext of hunting, intending not to return to such a corrupt environment. On their journey, they encountered a shepherd, whom they invited toward belief in God. Although he did not immediately accept their دعوت, his dog followed them and remained with them thereafter. As night approached, they reached a cave and entered it to rest, where God caused them to fall into a prolonged state of sleep. During their long slumber, the tyrant died, generations passed, and the social order changed. When they eventually awoke, they perceived only a brief passage of time and sent one among them to purchase food, instructing him to remain cautious lest their presence become known. Upon entering the city, he encountered unfamiliar people and surroundings, eventually revealing his identity. The local ruler, now a believer, accompanied him back to the cave with others. At the cave, disagreements arose regarding their number, reflecting the various interpretations also mentioned in the Qur’an. A sense of awe and fear prevented outsiders from entering, except for one of their group, who informed them of the passage of centuries and their role as a divine sign. Upon hearing this, they prayed to return to their previous state. It is also mentioned that they were periodically turned from side to side, and that the dog remained stationed at the entrance as a guard. Another extended narration attributed to ʿAlī (عليه السلام) presents additional details. According to this account, the companions were initially among the ministers of the ruler named Decius. One of them, Tamlīkhā (Talimikha), began reflecting deeply upon the order of the cosmos—the sky without visible supports, the movement of the sun and moon, and the structured nature of the earth—and concluded that a higher power must exist beyond the authority of the king. When he shared these reflections with his companions, they were moved and embraced his reasoning. Together, they renounced their positions and chose to leave behind their status and privilege. Selling their possessions, they departed the city, eventually abandoning their mounts and continuing on foot, symbolizing their rejection of worldly attachment in pursuit of truth. On their journey, they again encountered a shepherd who, after hearing their account, was deeply affected and chose to join them. His dog accompanied him. They eventually arrived at a cave near a mountain, where they took refuge. There, they prayed and were placed into a state resembling death by divine command. This account emphasizes that the Companions consciously chose faith over power, truth over status, and devotion over worldly benefit. Their transformation—from ministers of a tyrant to seekers of divine truth—reflects a profound intellectual and spiritual awakening. The historical figure of Decius, mentioned in this context, is identified by some commentators as a Roman emperor who ruled between 249 and 251 CE and was known for his persecution of Christians prior to the official acceptance of Christianity within the Roman Empire. In sum, while the narrative appears in varying forms across historical and religious traditions, its core meaning remains consistent: it portrays a group of individuals who, through reflection, conviction, and sacrifice, upheld truth in the face of oppression, and whose story serves as a lasting illustration of faith, resistance, and divine preservation.

There is considerable اختلاف among scholars and exegetes regarding the geographical location of the Companions of the Cave and the identification of the cave itself. However, determining the exact location does not materially affect the essence of the narrative, its ethical and educational dimensions, or its historical significance. While such details may contribute to a more detailed understanding of its particular features, the core significance of the account remains intact regardless of precise geographical identification. Among the various views that have been proposed, two appear more plausible than others. The first view maintains that the event took place in the city of Ephesus, and that the cave was located in its vicinity. The ruins of this city are still found near Izmir in present‑day Turkey. Close to this area lies a town known as Ayasoluk, near which there is a mountain containing a cave. This cave is reportedly spacious and contains numerous grave‑like formations, leading many to believe that it may correspond to the cave associated with the Companions. According to certain descriptions, the entrance of this cave faces toward the north‑east. Some exegetes have expressed doubt regarding this identification; however, such an orientation may in fact support its authenticity, since the Qur’anic description—that sunlight passes to the right at sunrise and to the left at sunset—would be consistent with a cave opening toward the north or north‑east. The absence of a visible place of worship at the site today does not necessarily invalidate this possibility, as the passage of many centuries could have effaced such structures. The second view identifies the cave with a site located near Amman, the capital of Jordan, in a locality known as al‑Raqīm (or Rajīb). Above this cave, remains of a church are said to exist, which some sources attribute approximately to the fifth century CE. Following the Islamic conquest of the region, the site is reported to have been converted into a mosque, with the addition of architectural features such as a mihrab and a designated place for the call to prayer, some of which are said to remain visible. These differing identifications illustrate the complexity of reconstructing exact historical locations for ancient events. Nevertheless, the essential purpose of the narrative—its moral instruction, spiritual insights, and illustrative power—remains independent of such geographical precision.

This remarkable narrative, though concise, contains numerous educational and formative lessons beyond its central theme. It is important to consider these collectively in order to approach more closely the fundamental purpose of the Qur’anic discourse. (a) The first lesson is the breaking of blind imitation (taqlīd). This account demonstrates that one should not conform to a corrupt environment merely because it is dominant. As seen, although the majority of society was misguided, the courageous Companions of the Cave preserved their intellectual independence, and this very independence became the source of their salvation. In principle, human beings should act as reformers of society, not passive participants in its فساد. Weak and passive individuals often adopt the attitude: conform to the prevailing order to avoid disgrace. In contrast, people of faith and intellectual freedom reject such conformity and maintain principled استقلال. (b) The second lesson is the legitimacy and necessity of migration (hijrah) away from a corrupt environment. Despite their access to comfort, prosperity, and material abundance, the Companions abandoned such advantages and withdrew to the cave, enduring hardship in order to preserve their faith and avoid strengthening systems of injustice and disbelief. (c) The third lesson concerns the principle of prudent concealment (taqiyyah) in contexts of danger. They took measures to ensure that their identity and beliefs would not be exposed prematurely, thereby protecting their lives and preserving their capacity for future resistance. Such concealment is not an abandonment of truth but a strategic safeguarding of it when open declaration would lead to destruction without benefit. (d) The narrative affirms the equality of human beings in the path of God. Social hierarchy, status, and profession—whether minister or shepherd—are irrelevant in the pursuit of truth. Even the presence of the dog alongside them underscores that material distinctions have no bearing upon inclusion in the circle of divine favor. (e) Another significant lesson is the extraordinary nature of divine assistance. Under hostile societal conditions, God caused them to sleep for an extended period and later awakened them when circumstances had become favorable. During this time, their bodies were preserved, and they were shielded from harm, demonstrating that divine support may manifest in unexpected and extraordinary ways. (f) The narrative also highlights the importance of lawful and pure sustenance. Even under extreme conditions, the Companions emphasized obtaining clean and permissible food, indicating that ethical consumption has a direct influence upon spiritual life and moral orientation. (g) Trust in divine will and reliance upon God constitute another fundamental lesson. Expressions such as “in shā’ Allāh” reflect a recognition that all outcomes ultimately depend upon divine decree, and that human planning must remain grounded in this awareness. (h) The Qur’anic description of them as “فِتْيَةٌ” (youths) illustrates that youthfulness is defined not merely by age but by moral vitality—courage, purity, and readiness for sacrifice. This conceptual framing elevates ethical character as the true measure of vitality. (i) The account further emphasizes the importance of rational and principled discourse in confronting opposition. The Companions challenged prevailing beliefs through logical argumentation, demonstrating that persuasion and intellectual clarity are the primary means of engaging with مخالفین. Force becomes relevant only when rational engagement is obstructed or rendered ineffective. (j) Finally, the narrative points toward the concept of bodily resurrection (ma‘ād jismānī). The prolonged dormancy and subsequent awakening of the Companions provide an example that renders the notion of life after death more accessible to human understanding, illustrating the possibility of renewed existence following apparent cessation. These lessons are not exhaustive, but even a single one would justify the inclusion of such a narrative. The objective is not mere storytelling, but the moral and spiritual formation of human beings—cultivating courage, faith, awareness, and moral integrity. The Qur’anic method employs historical exemplars as a powerful means of ethical instruction, guiding individuals toward transformation and higher انسانی ideals.

It is an established fact that the account of the Companions of the Cave does not appear in any earlier revealed scripture—whether in its original form or in its present altered versions—nor was it necessary for it to appear therein, since, according to historical indications, this event occurred centuries after the advent of Jesus (عليه السلام). This incident is associated with the period of Decius (known in Arabic as “دقیانوس”), during whose reign severe oppression was inflicted upon Christians. European historians place this event approximately between 249 and 251 CE, and they estimate the duration of the companions’ sleep at around 157 years. In European tradition, they are referred to as the “Seven Sleepers of Ephesus,” whereas in Islamic usage they are known as “أصحاب الكهف.” Ephesus was a city in Asia Minor (modern‑day Turkey, formerly part of the Eastern Roman Empire), located near the Cayster River, approximately forty miles southeast of Izmir. It served as a royal center and was renowned for the Temple of Artemis, considered one of the Seven Wonders of the ancient world. Historical records indicate that this story first appeared in written form in the fifth century CE, when a Christian cleric named Jacques composed an account in Syriac, which was later translated into Latin by another writer. This suggests that the narrative was already known among Christians one or two centuries prior to the emergence of Islam, and was recited in ecclesiastical settings. Nevertheless, the details preserved in Islamic sources differ in certain respects from those found in Christian narratives, particularly regarding the duration of the sleep, which the Qur’an explicitly states as 309 years. Various historical sources also record that travelers encountered caves containing human remains which were thought to be associated with this narrative. At first glance, some may question the plausibility of such an extended period of dormancy on scientific grounds. Objections are commonly raised that such longevity is improbable, especially in a state resembling sleep; that survival without sustained nourishment would be impossible; and that the human organism would deteriorate under prolonged inactivity. However, these objections are not conclusive. First, the concept of extended lifespan is not inherently non‑scientific. There is no universally fixed biological limit beyond which life must necessarily terminate. Lifespan is influenced by a variety of conditions, and it remains subject to variation under differing circumstances. Second, regarding nourishment, the assumption presupposes ordinary physiological conditions. Yet observable phenomena in the natural world—such as hibernation—demonstrate that living organisms can enter states in which metabolic processes are drastically reduced. In such conditions, the need for nutrition becomes minimal, and existing reserves may sustain life over extended periods. Third, as previously noted, the state of the Companions of the Cave was not one of ordinary sleep. The Qur’anic description indicates an exceptional condition, distinct from normal انسانی experience. Their حالت was governed by divine will, and it included features such as altered physical activity, preservation of bodily integrity, and regulated environmental conditions. Thus, while the narrative possesses an extraordinary character, it does not contradict the broader possibility—observable in both natural phenomena and theoretical reflection—of suspended or significantly reduced biological activity. Rather, it exemplifies a unique manifestation of divine power, illustrating a reality that transcends ordinary patterns while remaining conceptually intelligible within a broader framework of life processes.

Many living organisms exhibit a phenomenon commonly referred to, in scientific terminology, as hibernation (“winter sleep”). During such a state, the observable signs of life are almost entirely suspended. Only a minimal trace of life remains; the heartbeat becomes extremely weak—so faint that it is scarcely detectable—and respiration is nearly absent. In this condition, the organism may be likened to a furnace that has been extinguished, leaving only a small residual flame. It is evident that whereas a fully active furnace requires substantial fuel—such as oil or gas—even for a single day, that same amount of fuel can sustain a faint flame for a much longer period, possibly extending over years. Naturally, the difference lies in the relative intensity of activity between a fully functioning system and a minimally active state. Scientific observations confirm such states in various species. For example, a frog in hibernation may appear entirely lifeless if removed from its environment: its lungs contain no air, and its cardiac activity is so minimal that it cannot be easily detected. Many cold‑blooded animals enter such states, including numerous insects, reptiles, mollusks, and other small organisms. Even some warm‑blooded animals exhibit forms of hibernation. During this period, metabolic processes slow drastically, and stored bodily reserves—such as fat—are gradually consumed to sustain minimal жизнедеятельность. The essential point is that there exists a form of suspended or near‑suspended life in which the need for nourishment is reduced to an extremely low level, and biological activity approaches a near‑zero state. Interestingly, such conditions may also protect the organism from deterioration, contributing to extended survival. From a biological perspective, this phenomenon is especially beneficial for organisms that would otherwise be unable to obtain sufficient nourishment during severe seasonal conditions. In such cases, hibernation serves as an adaptive mechanism that ensures survival until favorable conditions return.

It has been observed regarding experts of yoga that some of them, before the eyes of disbelievers who are astonished, are sometimes buried underground in a coffin for a period of one week and after the mentioned period ends, they are brought out. They are massaged and given artificial respiration, and gradually they return to a normal condition. For such a duration, even if the issue of food is not significant, the issue of oxygen is very important because we know that brain cells are so sensitive and needy for oxygen that if deprived of it for even a few seconds, they are destroyed. Therefore, the question arises as to how a yogi can endure such a lack of oxygen for a whole week. Referring to the explanation we have already provided, the answer to this question is not very difficult. The point is that the biological activity of the yogi’s body nearly stops during this period. During this time, the cells' need for oxygen and its consumption is greatly reduced. To such an extent that the air inside the coffin is sufficient for the body cells' nourishment for the entire week.

Contemporary discussions have increasingly addressed the possibility of preserving living organisms—particularly humans—by means of controlled freezing in order to extend life. Numerous theories have been proposed, and some have even entered experimental stages. According to these theories, it may be possible to lower the temperature of a human or animal body to sub‑zero levels under specific conditions, thereby suspending its vital processes without causing actual death. At a later stage, through the reintroduction of appropriate temperatures, the organism may be restored to its normal state of life. Such concepts have even been applied in hypothetical plans for long‑distance space travel. For journeys that may extend over hundreds or thousands of years, it has been proposed that astronauts could be placed in specially designed capsules and subjected to freezing conditions. Upon nearing their destination, an automated system would gradually restore them to life, without significant loss of their lifespan during the process. Scientific literature has also explored these ideas. It has been reported that Robert Nelson authored a work on the preservation of the human body through freezing for prolonged life. This subject has gained attention within scientific discourse, leading to the emergence of a specialized field known as cryonics. According to proponents of this field, the long‑standing human aspiration for extended or even “eternal” life has approached practical realization through advanced scientific developments aimed at preserving the human body until future technologies might enable revival. Various reports and discussions in scientific and public media have suggested that research and experimentation in this domain are ongoing. It has also been observed in certain cases that organisms preserved in frozen conditions over long periods may exhibit restoration of activity when returned to suitable environments. While such observations remain limited and subject to further verification, they have contributed to broader interest in the subject. From these considerations, it may be inferred that the slowing or temporary suspension of biological processes is, at least in principle, conceivable under specific conditions. In such a state, metabolic activity is greatly reduced, and the consumption of energy approaches minimal levels, so that limited internal reserves may suffice over extended durations. However, it must be emphasized that invoking such scientific possibilities does not diminish or deny the extraordinary character of the account of the Companions of the Cave. Their حالت was not analogous to ordinary sleep, nor fully comparable to known biological states. Rather, their prolonged dormancy represents an exceptional condition under divine will. The Qur’anic verses themselves indicate that their state differed significantly from ordinary sleep: “وَتَحْسَبُهُمْ أَيْقَاظًا وَهُمْ رُقُودٌ … لَوِ اطَّلَعْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ لَوَلَّيْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِرَارًا وَلَمُلِئْتَ مِنْهُمْ رُعْبًا” This description suggests a condition resembling suspended life rather than typical sleep. Additional indications—such as the absence of direct sunlight within the cave and the statement: “وَنُقَلِّبُهُمْ ذَاتَ الْيَمِينِ وَذَاتَ الشِّمَالِ” — further highlight the exceptional nature of their condition, wherein their bodies were preserved through means beyond ordinary human experience. Thus, while contemporary scientific reflections may help render the concept more approachable to human understanding, the narrative itself retains its distinct and extraordinary character. It illustrates that prolonged suspension of life, followed by restoration, is not beyond comprehension, and thereby provides a conceptual bridge toward understanding the possibility of resurrection (معاد) and life after death, by analogy with awakening after an extended state resembling death.

See ayat 31 for tafseer.

See ayat 31 for tafseer.

See ayat 31 for tafseer.

Regarding the occasion of revelation of some of these verses, exegetes have written that a number of wealthy, arrogant, and self‑centered elites came to the Messenger of God (peace be upon him). Referring to figures such as Salman, Abu Dhar, Suhayb, and Khabbab, they said: O Muhammad, if you preside over a gathering and keep such individuals—whose condition offends refined sensibilities and who wear coarse garments—away from yourself (that is, if only the elites and prominent people are present), then we will come to you, attend your gatherings, and benefit from your teachings; otherwise, we cannot sit here in their presence. At this point, these verses were revealed, instructing the Prophet (peace be upon him) not to incline toward such deceptive and hollow propositions, but instead to remain steadfast in the company of sincere believers—individuals like Salman and Abu Dhar—throughout all stages of life, even if they lacked worldly wealth and wore simple clothing. Following the revelation of these verses, the Prophet (peace be upon him) rose to seek out these believers. They, having heard the remarks of the wealthy elites, had withdrawn to a corner of the mosque and were engaged in the remembrance of God. The Prophet (peace be upon him) found them at the far end of the mosque, absorbed in devotion. He then said: Praise be to God who commanded me, before my death, to remain in the company of people such as you. “مَعَكُمُ الْمَحْيَا وَمَعَكُمُ الْمَمَاتُ” — with you is my life, and with you is my death. Thus, the verses affirm the fundamental principle that spiritual integrity, sincerity, and devotion—not wealth or social status—constitute the true معیار of companionship and انسانی قدر.

In these verses, the Qur’an once again presents meanings in the form of a vivid comparison, emphasizing the contrast between two groups within society: the self‑centered, affluent elite and the sincere, humble believers. It highlights that the true معیار of human worth is neither wealth nor outward status, but faith, sincerity, and consciousness of God. The account illustrates that those who are materially privileged may develop arrogance and view themselves as superior, while looking down upon those who are poor yet spiritually elevated. However, the Qur’an challenges this perception by presenting the موقف of true believers—individuals who, though materially deprived, are deeply engaged in the remembrance of God and seek only His pleasure: “وَاصْبِرْ نَفْسَكَ مَعَ الَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ رَبَّهُم بِالْغَدَاةِ وَالْعَشِيِّ يُرِيدُونَ وَجْهَهُ”. These individuals remain constant in their devotion and exhibit complete sincerity, directing their intentions solely toward the divine. Their devotion is not motivated by the desire for worldly gain, nor even by the hope for reward or fear of punishment as primary incentives; rather, it is rooted in pure recognition of the divine reality. In contrast, the affluent and arrogant are described as those whose hearts are heedless of divine remembrance and who follow their own desires: “وَلَا تُطِعْ مَنْ أَغْفَلْنَا قَلْبَهُ عَن ذِكْرِنَا وَاتَّبَعَ هَوَاهُ وَكَانَ أَمْرُهُ فُرُطًا”. Their lives are characterized by excess, imbalance, and a lack of reflection, as they exceed proper limits in their pursuits. The Qur’an places these two groups in direct contrast: on one side are the sincere, humble believers devoted to God; on the other are those consumed by materialism and self‑indulgence. Furthermore, the passage warns against being drawn toward the outward beauty and allure of worldly life, emphasizing that such attraction can lead to moral compromise: “وَلَا تَعْدُ عَيْنَاكَ عَنْهُمْ تُرِيدُ زِينَةَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا”. The message is not that one should avoid interaction with the wealthy, but rather that such interaction must not be motivated by desire for their material advantages. If, however, the intention is guidance, reform, or the constructive use of resources for good purposes, such engagement remains legitimate and even necessary. The Qur’an then underscores the principle of moral choice: “وَقُلِ الْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّكُمْ فَمَن شَاءَ فَلْيُؤْمِن وَمَن شَاءَ فَلْيَكْفُرْ”. Human beings are free to accept or reject the truth, but they must also bear responsibility for that choice. The consequences are vividly depicted: the arrogant and unjust, who mocked the humble believers and took pride in their worldly advantages, will face severe recompense. The imagery of fire and punishment reflects the inner reality of their actions—an embodiment of the harm they inflicted upon others. In contrast, those who believed and acted righteously are promised enduring نعمت and honor: “إِنَّ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ… أُولَٰئِكَ لَهُمْ جَنَّاتُ عَدْنٍ”. Their reward is presented not merely as a counterpart to worldly deprivation, but as a manifestation of their inner purity, sincerity, and commitment to justice. Their surroundings—gardens, flowing rivers, adornment, and comfort—symbolize the lasting effects of their righteous intentions and actions. Thus, the verses articulate a comprehensive ethical vision: they challenge superficial معیار of worth, critique social inequality rooted in arrogance, and redirect attention toward enduring spiritual values. They affirm that true honor lies in sincerity, faith, and righteous conduct, rather than in wealth or social power, and they highlight the ultimate consequences that arise from these distinct paths.

These verses are part of a broader Qur’anic effort to challenge social structures based on stark divisions between wealth and poverty. The Qur’an consistently opposes such unjust disparities and emphasizes a more balanced and humane social order. A society in which a small minority lives in extreme luxury—immersed in comfort, excess, and often moral corruption—while the majority lacks even the basic necessities of life cannot represent a just or healthy human community. Such a system is inherently unstable and incompatible with the ethical vision of Islam. It inevitably becomes a ground for oppression, exploitation, and domination, characterized by injustice, social unrest, and the suppression of fundamental human freedoms. Historically, many violent conflicts and systemic crises have emerged from precisely such unequal structures, and such a society can never achieve lasting peace or equilibrium. The fundamental question arises: why should the blessings of God be concentrated in the hands of a few, while the majority endures deprivation, suffering, hunger, and disease? A system built on such imbalance naturally becomes filled with resentment, hostility, envy, arrogance, injustice, and self‑centeredness. It is precisely for this reason that the great prophets—particularly the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)—persistently and vigorously struggled against such inequitable systems. In such societies, clear divisions emerge between the rich and the poor. Their social circles are separate; their residential areas differ; their places of recreation and gathering are distinct; even their burial spaces may be segregated. This form of social stratification stands in direct opposition to the fundamental principles of human dignity and justice. For a person grounded in divine values, such inequality is neither acceptable nor sustainable. This phenomenon was also evident in earlier historical contexts. During the time of Noah (عليه السلام), the elites objected that only the “lowly” followed him: “مَا نَرَاكَ اتَّبَعَكَ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ هُمْ أَرَاذِلُنَا”. Such attitudes reflect a deeply flawed معیار of human worth, reducing dignity to material wealth and social status. The history of Islam demonstrates how the Prophet (peace be upon him) actively reversed this pattern. He marginalized the influence of self‑centered elites and elevated marginalized and deprived individuals, creating a society grounded in توحید and justice. In this transformed order, true معیار of human worth was redefined in terms of تقویٰ, knowledge, faith, struggle in the path of truth, and righteous action. The necessity of establishing such a just society remains urgent. This requires adopting the model of the Prophet (peace be upon him), implementing sound systems of education and moral training, and eliminating class‑based attitudes. It also requires the establishment and enforcement of just and equitable social laws. Even in the face of resistance from dominant powers or global systems of inequality, the pursuit of such a transformation is essential. Without this effort, the realization of a genuinely just and balanced human society is not possible.

These verses express, in a highly vivid and instructive manner, the doctrine of the manifestation of deeds (تجسّمِ اعمال), which constitutes a central concept related to the Day of Judgment. Everything that exists in this world will appear in the Hereafter as an expanded and elevated manifestation of its reality. Human actions, thoughts, patterns of conduct, and moral dispositions will take on concrete form in that realm and will remain inseparably associated with individuals. The verses under consideration present a living depiction of this reality. The self‑centered and oppressive wealthy individuals who, in this world, reclined in luxury and indulgence, striving to separate themselves from the poor believers, will find corresponding manifestations in the Hereafter. There, too, they will possess elevated dwellings, but these will consist of tents made of consuming fire. For oppression itself is, in its essence, a burning fire that destroys the lives and hopes of the oppressed; in the Hereafter, this inner reality becomes outwardly visible. Likewise, they will be provided with drinks, as they were in the worldly life. However, these drinks will no longer be sources of pleasure; rather, they will burn and consume their bodies. When they approach them, their faces will be scorched, and the substance will resemble molten metal, reflecting the reality of their former indulgences. In contrast, those who preserved their purity, upheld the principles of justice, rejected oppression and excess, and were content with a simple life for the sake of establishing equity will encounter a completely different reality. For them will be the gardens of Paradise, with rivers flowing beneath them. They will be adorned with garments of dignity and beauty, and they will experience environments of joy and serenity. This is the embodied form of their intentions and actions. Just as they desired goodness and well‑being for all servants of God in this world, so too in the Hereafter they will partake in everlasting blessings. Their inner sincerity and moral commitment will be reflected outwardly as eternal نعمت and felicity.

God is either encompassed within the soul of a person or it is the desires of the self; these two cannot coexist together. Self-indulgence is essentially the source of negligence towards God. Following one’s desires leads to estrangement from all moral principles. In short, indulgence in desires makes a person self-centered and distances him from all realities of the world. A person given to self-indulgence thinks of nothing other than fulfilling his desires. Knowledge, awareness, selflessness, sacrifice, and spirituality hold no meaning for him. In the above-mentioned verses, the connection between indulgence in desires and negligence towards God is clearly established. It is stated: وَلَاتُطِعْ مَنْ اَغْفَلْنَا قَلْبَہُ عَنْ ذِکْرِنَا وَاتَّبَعَ ھَوَاہُ وَکَانَ اَمْرُہُ فُرُطًا First, negligence of God is mentioned, and then following of desires comes next. It is notable that their consequence is described as transgression and excess, expressed in an absolute sense. A person given to self-indulgence is always involved in excess. Perhaps the reason is that human nature is such that when immersed in material pleasures, the craving for more and more arises. Yesterday, a certain amount of an intoxicating substance was sufficient to intoxicate a person; today, that amount no longer intoxicates him, and gradually he increases its quantity. Yesterday, a relatively small mansion with one’s belongings seemed sufficient; today, it is considered inadequate. Such is the state of all human desires, to the extent that one destroys himself in this very cycle.

It is possible that many minds may raise the question that Allah Almighty has condemned the adornments and beautifications of this world in the Quran, yet He has promised the believers such adornments in the Hereafter—golden jewelry, fine and thick silk garments, beautiful thrones, etc. In response to this question, we first find it necessary to draw attention to the point that we have learned from the Quran itself that the Hereafter and Resurrection have one aspect that is spiritual and another aspect that is physical. Therefore, the pleasures of this world are also of both kinds. However, there is no doubt that the spiritual pleasures of the Hereafter cannot be compared to physical pleasures. Nevertheless, this reality cannot be concealed that the blessings of this world are like a projection or image that we see from a distance. The matters of the Hereafter are like a mere indication for us, because that world for us is just as this world is for a child in the mother's womb. If a mother could tell her child in the womb something about this world, she could only give hints about its beauty, the shining sun, the moon, flowing streams, gardens, colorful flowers, and similar things. Since in the realm of the fetus there are not sufficient or appropriate words to explain, similarly, in the womb of this world our vision is limited. Here, a full comprehension of the material and spiritual blessings of the Resurrection is not possible. After this preliminary clarification, we now turn to the answer to the question. Allah Almighty condemns the adornments and beautifications of this world because this world is limited. If someone immerses themselves in adornments here, to provide such a life, he will commit various oppressions and injustices, and after obtaining such a life, he will fall into heedlessness. In this way, distinctions and classes arise which give rise to envy, jealousy, hostility, and ultimately to bloodshed. But everything in that world (the Hereafter) is abundant. There will be no problem in acquiring such adornments there, nor will obtaining these things cause division or deprivation; there, neither resentment nor hatred arises from them, nor does a person become heedless of God in an environment saturated with meaning and spirituality. There is neither the issue of guarding things nor the jealousy of enemies there. Such things do not cause arrogance or pride, nor do they distance one from God or the creation of God. Therefore, why should the inhabitants of Paradise be deprived of this physical pleasure along with the great spiritual blessings when it has no undesirable consequence?

These verses convey an additional important lesson: that one should not abandon the guidance and admonition of a group simply because they are wealthy or live in comfort and prosperity. Such people should not be treated as beyond reach or marked off with a figurative boundary of exclusion. What is blameworthy, however, is to approach them with the intention of benefiting from their material wealth—thus becoming among those described by the Qur’an as: “تُرِيدُ زِينَةَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا” — seeking the adornment of worldly life. On the contrary, if the purpose of engagement is their guidance and moral instruction, or even the constructive and positive utilization of their resources for broader social and collective benefit, then maintaining such relationships is not only permissible but necessary.

See ayat 36 for tafseer.

See ayat 36 for tafseer.

See ayat 36 for tafseer.

See ayat 36 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, it was shown how those attached to worldly life attempt to distance themselves from the poor and the people of truth, and the eventual outcome awaiting them in the Hereafter was also described. In the verses under discussion, however, the Qur’an presents, by way of example, the account of two individuals—either as companions or as brothers—each representing a model of the arrogant (mustakbirīn) and the oppressed (mustad‘afīn). Their intellectual orientation, speech, and conduct embody the respective positions of these two groups. It is first stated: “وَاضْرِبْ لَهُمْ مَثَلًا رَّجُلَيْنِ جَعَلْنَا لِأَحَدِهِمَا جَنَّتَيْنِ مِنْ أَعْنَابٍ وَحَفَفْنَاهُمَا بِنَخْلٍ وَجَعَلْنَا بَيْنَهُمَا زَرْعًا” — present to them the example of two men. To one of them We gave two gardens of grapevines, surrounded by date palms, with cultivated fields between them. These gardens were complete in every respect: they contained abundant grapes and dates, fruit-laden trees, and flourishing crops. Nothing was lacking: “كِلْتَا الْجَنَّتَيْنِ آتَتْ أُكُلَهَا وَلَمْ تَظْلِمْ مِنْهُ شَيْئًا”. Most importantly, they were sustained by a constant water supply: “وَفَجَّرْنَا خِلَالَهُمَا نَهَرًا” — a flowing river coursed between them, providing the essential source of life. Thus, the owner of these gardens enjoyed abundant produce and material prosperity. Yet human nature, when limited in depth and perspective, often transforms such blessings into a source of arrogance and rebellion. Gradually, the individual begins to regard himself as superior to others. The صاحبِ باغ said to his companion in a spirit of arrogance: “أَنَا أَكْثَرُ مِنكَ مَالًا وَأَعَزُّ نَفَرًا” — I have more wealth than you and greater social standing and support. He took pride not only in his material resources but also in his social influence and numerical strength. This mindset intensified to the point where he began to consider worldly life as permanent, wealth as enduring, and status as unassailable. In this state of غرور, he entered his garden: “وَدَخَلَ جَنَّتَهُ وَهُوَ ظَالِمٌ لِّنَفْسِهِ” — he entered his garden while wronging himself. Observing the laden branches, the flowing water, and the abundance surrounding him, he declared: “مَا أَظُنُّ أَن تَبِيدَ هَٰذِهِ أَبَدًا” — I do not think that this will ever perish. His arrogance escalated further as he began to deny the possibility of the Hereafter: “وَمَا أَظُنُّ السَّاعَةَ قَائِمَةً” — I do not think that the Hour will ever be established. He dismissed the notion of the Resurrection as mere illusion. Yet, even in his hypothetical consideration, he remained engulfed in self‑assurance: “وَلَئِن رُّدِدتُّ إِلَىٰ رَبِّي لَأَجِدَنَّ خَيْرًا مِّنْهَا مُنقَلَبًا” — even if I were to be returned to my Lord, I would find something better than this as a return. Thus, he continued to immerse himself in baseless assumptions and prideful claims, advancing from one error to another. At this point, his believing companion responded, the details of which are presented in the subsequent verses.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

In these verses, the arrogant, faithless, selfish wealthy man's baseless statements are answered through the voice of his believing companion. First, he listens quietly to the thoughtless man's words so that whatever is inside him comes out, and then he replies all at once: "He said to him, while conversing: Have you disbelieved in the One who created you from dust, then from a sperm-drop, then fashioned you as a man?" (قَالَ لَہُ صَاحِبُہُ وَھُوَ یُحَاوِرُہُ أَکَفَرْتَ بِالَّذِی خَلَقَکَ مِنْ تُرَابٍ ثُمَّ مِنْ نُطْفَةٍ ثُمَّ سَوَّاکَ رَجُلًا). Here a question arises: In the previous verses, the arrogant person’s statements did not explicitly deny the existence of God, yet the monotheistic person replying apparently first reprimands him for denying God and draws his attention to the Almighty Creator in the matter of human creation. This is because the creation of man is one of the clearest proofs of the Oneness of God. The God who initially created man from dust. The roots of trees and plants draw nourishment from the earth. Then plants become food for animals. Man obtains food from plants and animals, and by the force of this food, the human sperm is formed. It undergoes developmental stages in the mother's womb. He comes into this world. Finally, he transforms into a complete human being—the human who is superior to all beings on earth, who thinks, reflects, wills, and subjugates all things to his will. Yes, indeed, the fact that insignificant dust is transformed into such a strange and complex entity, whose machinery consists of the intricate devices of body and soul, is a major argument for monotheism. Exegetes have presented various interpretations in response to the above question, for example: 1. Some say that this arrogant person explicitly denied the Resurrection and the Hereafter or viewed it with doubt, which necessarily results in denial of God because those who deny physical resurrection actually deny God's power. They do not believe that dust scattered can once again clothe itself with the garment of life. Therefore, the faithful person draws his attention to God's boundless power by referencing the first creation of man from dust, then from sperm, and then subsequent stages, so that he realizes that scenes of resurrection are continuously witnessed in our very life. 2. Some say that the reason for his polytheism and disbelief was that he thought this ownership was by his own doing. That is, he believed in ownership over himself and imagined that his ownership was eternal. 3. The third possibility, which also does not seem unlikely, is that he had denied God in some of his statements, but Allah did not mention all his words. From the believer’s remarks, this can be inferred. Thus, we see that in the next verse, the faithful person says, if you deny Allah and choose the path of polytheism, then I certainly will not. In any case, these three possibilities are not mutually exclusive, and it is possible that the monotheistic person’s reference is toward all of them. Then this faithful person breaks his disbelief and arrogance by saying: But as for me, Allah is my Lord and I take pride in this belief (لَكِنَّا ھُوَ اللهُ رَبِّی). (Explanatory note: The word "lakinna" was originally "lākinn anā," which later merged together in pronunciation.) He boasts that you possess gardens, fields, fruits, and abundant water, but I take pride that my Lord is Allah, my Creator and Provider. You take pride in your worldly possessions, and I take pride in my belief in monotheism and faith. "And I do not associate anyone as a partner with my Lord" (وَلَا أُشْرِکُ بِرَبِّي أَحَدًا). The issue of monotheism and polytheism plays the most crucial role in a person's destiny. The conversation continues: "When you entered your garden, why did you not say, ‘What Allah has willed [has happened]’?" Why did you not recognize it as from Allah and express gratitude for it? (وَلَوْلَا إِذْ دَخَلْتَ جَنَّتَكَ قُلْتَ مَا شَاءَ اللهُ). (Explanatory note: In "Mā shāʾallāh" something is omitted. Its full form is either "Hādhā mā shāʾallāh"—this is what Allah has willed—or "Mā shāʾallāh kā'in"—what God wills happens.) Why did you not say that no one has power except Allah? (لَا قُوَّةَ إِلَّا بِاللَّهِ). If you have plowed the earth, sown seeds, planted trees, and irrigated them, and have had all opportunities and resources available to you until you have reached this position, it is all by Allah’s power and grace. Allah has bestowed upon you all these means and improvements. From your own side, you have nothing, and without Him, you have nothing. Then he further says: "This thing which you see—that I am less than you in wealth and children—is of no importance" (إِنْ تُرَنِی أَنَا أَقَلَّ مِنْکَ مَالًا وَوَلَدًا). Allah can grant me better than your garden (فَعَسَىٰ رَبِّي أَنْ يُؤْتِينِ خَيْرًا مِنْ جَنَّتِكَ). Moreover, it might also be that God sends down lightning from the sky upon your garden...It may be destroyed, and suddenly this lush and verdant land turns into a barren plain where feet slip (وَيُرْسِلَ عَلَيْهَا حُسْبَانًا مِنَ السَّمَاءِ فَتُصْبِحَ صَعِيدًا زَلَقًا). Or the earth may be commanded to shake, and "its springs and rivers may flow underground such that you cannot find them" (أَوْ يُصْبِحَ مَاؤُهَا غَوْرًا فَلَنْ تَسْتَطِيعَ لَهُ طَلَبًا). The word "حُسبان" (as used in Surah Luqman) is originally derived from the root "حساب" (accounting). Subsequently, this word came to mean arrows that are counted as they are shot. It also means a punishment that is delivered according to a reckoning. Here in the above verse, it carries this latter meaning. The term "صعید" is originally taken from "صعود," referring to the surface or upper layer of the earth. "زلق" means a barren plain on which there is no grass or vegetation, and on which a person’s feet constantly slip. (It is noteworthy that in present times, efforts are made to prevent sand from drifting and to save populated areas from being engulfed by sandstorms by planting vegetation and trees in such regions—that is, attempts are made to control the slippery and barren nature of such places.) Indeed, the faithful and monotheistic person warns his arrogant companion not to cling to these blessings, for none of them is even fit to be fodder. In fact, he says: You have seen with your own eyes, or at least heard, that there come moments when heavenly lightning turns gardens, homes, and fields into mounds of dust or barren land in an instant. Also, you have heard or seen that sometimes such an earthquake strikes the earth that springs dry up and rivers sink underground so deeply that they cannot be retrieved or reclaimed. Since you know these things, then on what basis is this pride of heedlessness? You have witnessed these scenes, so why this attachment? You say you do not believe these blessings will ever perish, and you think they will last forever. What kind of ignorance and foolishness is this?

See ayat 44 for tafseer.

See ayat 44 for tafseer.

In the continuation of this account, the dialogue between the two individuals concludes. The words of the God‑conscious person had no effect upon the heart of the arrogant and unbelieving صاحبِ wealth. He returned home with the same mindset and attitudes, unaware that the divine decree for the destruction of his gardens and flourishing fields had already been issued. He did not realize that the consequence of his arrogance and شرک would manifest even in this world, rendering his fate a lesson for others. It is possible that, during the darkness of the night, the punishment of God descended—whether in the form of a devastating thunderbolt, a violent storm, or a powerful earthquake. In any case, it brought complete destruction upon his thriving باغات, towering trees, and abundant fields within a short time: “وَأُحِيطَ بِثَمَرِهِ” — his fruits were encompassed and destroyed. The next morning, the owner of the garden approached his property. His mind was still filled with thoughts of acquisition and بهره‑برداری. However, upon arrival, he was confronted by a terrifying sight. He stood motionless in astonishment, unable to comprehend whether what he saw was reality or illusion. The trees lay overturned, the fields were ruined, and no signs of life remained. It was as though those flourishing gardens had never existed. His heart began to tremble, his complexion faded, and his arrogance vanished. It was as if he had awakened from a long and profound slumber. He repeatedly clasped his hands in regret, recalling the wealth and effort he had invested throughout his life, now entirely lost: “فَأَصْبَحَ يُقَلِّبُ كَفَّيْهِ عَلَىٰ مَا أَنفَقَ فِيهَا وَهِيَ خَاوِيَةٌ عَلَىٰ عُرُوشِهَا”. At that moment, he repented of his former thoughts and declared: “يَا لَيْتَنِي لَمْ أُشْرِكْ بِرَبِّي أَحَدًا” — would that I had not associated partners with my Lord. Yet the most distressing aspect was that, in the face of such calamity, he stood entirely alone: “وَلَمْ تَكُنْ لَهُ فِئَةٌ يَنصُرُونَهُ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ” — he had no supporters other than God. And: “وَمَا كَانَ مُنتَصِرًا” — nor was he able to help himself. Thus, all his arrogant assumptions were shattered. Whereas previously he had believed his wealth to be enduring, he now witnessed its annihilation. He had once boasted of strength and numerous supporters, yet now found himself without any assistance. This episode demonstrates that those who gather around wealth resemble flies attracted to sweetness; once the wealth disappears, they vanish as well. Such associations are not based on genuine loyalty, but on material interest, and they dissolve when their foundation is removed. However, repentance at this stage was of no benefit. Awareness arising from sudden calamity is often involuntary and temporary; it does not indicate a deep transformation. Although he declared: “لم أُشْرِكْ بِرَبِّي أَحَدًا”, this statement emerged under compulsion, unlike the sincere conviction of his believing companion. The verses then conclude: “هُنَالِكَ الْوَلَايَةُ لِلَّهِ الْحَقِّ” — there, authority belongs solely to God, the Truth. At that moment, it became evident that all power and blessing originate from Him alone, and that reliance upon anything else is illusory. Finally: “هُوَ خَيْرٌ ثَوَابًا وَخَيْرٌ عُقْبًا” — He is best in reward and best in outcome. Thus, if a human being must place trust, hope, and attachment somewhere, it is most appropriate that such reliance be directed toward God alone, who alone grants enduring reward and ultimate success.

In this narrative, we have seen a vivid picture of the arrogance of wealth. Through it, we have understood what the outcome of arrogance is—arrogance whose extreme is polytheism and disbelief. When narrow-minded people reach a certain position and gain some superiority over others in terms of status and wealth, they often fall victim to the disease of arrogance. Empowered by these resources, they behave arrogantly before others. When people who buzz around them like flies gather near them, they begin to believe that they have established influence over the hearts of people. This is what the Qur'an describes in "انا اکثر منک مالاً و اعز نفراً". Gradually, the love of the world instills in them the thought that this world is eternal, and then they start saying: "ما اظن ان تبید ہٰذہ ابداً" "I do not think this will ever perish." If a person comes to believe in the eternity of the material world, it negates faith in the Resurrection Day; therefore, such people say: "وما اظن الساعة قائمة" "I do not think the Hour will ever come." The result of their self-conceit is that they begin to consider themselves close to Allah’s presence and think that they have a very high status and rank before God. They say that even if they have to return to Allah and the existence of the Hereafter and Resurrection is affirmed, their position there will be better than here: "ولئن رددت الیٰ ربّی لاجدنّ خیراً منھا منقلباً" These four stages, with slight variations, are found in almost all worldly minded people of power and authority across the world. Their deviation begins with worldliness and ends in polytheism, idol worship, and denial of the Resurrection because they worship material power as an idol and forget everything else.

This brief yet instructive narrative contains, beyond its major lesson, several additional important teachings: a. The impermanence of material blessings: No matter how abundant worldly resources may be, they cannot be relied upon, for they are inherently unstable. A sudden flash of lightning may, within moments, reduce gardens and cultivated lands—developed over many years—to ashes, leaving behind nothing but barren earth and eroded terrain. Likewise, even a slight earthquake may swallow the water sources and springs upon which life depends, to the extent that restoration becomes impossible. b. The unreliability of material alliances: Those companions who gather around an individual for material gain are often unreliable and faithless. At the very moment when worldly blessings depart, such associates disperse just as quickly, as though they had always been prepared to leave: “وَلَمْ تَكُنْ لَهُ فِئَةٌ يَنصُرُونَهُ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ”. Experience repeatedly demonstrates that one should not place ultimate reliance upon anyone other than God. True and enduring companionship arises from spiritual and moral bonds. Such companions remain steadfast in all circumstances—wealth and poverty, youth and old age, health and illness, honor and humiliation—and their connection even extends beyond death. c. The limited value of awareness born of crisis: Awakening that arises only in the face of crisis is often ineffective. Such awareness does not reflect a genuine inner transformation or a sincere change in conduct, nor does it signify true remorse for past actions. Rather, when confronted by imminent danger—whether the execution scaffold or the turbulence of a storm—an individual may briefly resolve to reform. However, since this resolve does not emerge from a deep internal conviction, it quickly dissipates once the crisis passes, and the individual reverts to former behavior. This explains why repentance at the moment of death is not accepted, as indicated in the Qur’an. Similarly, in the account of Pharaoh, when he faced drowning and declared belief, his repentance was not accepted, because it was compelled rather than voluntary. d. Wealth and poverty are not measures of dignity: These verses also teach that neither poverty implies humiliation nor wealth implies honor. In materialistic societies, however, such distinctions are often made, leading to distorted judgments. This mindset was evident among the pre‑Islamic مشرکین, who were surprised that the Qur’an was not revealed to a wealthy individual, as expressed in: “لَوْلَا نُزِّلَ هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنُ عَلَىٰ رَجُلٍ مِّنَ الْقَرْيَتَيْنِ عَظِيمٍ”. e. Reflection on human origin and end removes arrogance: When individuals become bound by arrogance through status and wealth, reflection upon their own origin can dissolve such illusions. A person who recalls that they were once insignificant dust, then a weak drop, and later brought forth in a fragile state will recognize the irrationality of pride. f. A lesson from the natural world: The verses also draw attention to a profound lesson from nature. Describing flourishing gardens, it is said: “وَلَمْ تَظْلِمْ مِنْهُ شَيْئًا”, indicating that these gardens withheld nothing in their productivity. In contrast, the صاحبِ باغ is described as: “وَدَخَلَ جَنَّتَهُ وَهُوَ ظَالِمٌ لِّنَفْسِهِ”, — he entered his garden while wronging himself. This contrast highlights that all elements of creation operate with generosity and giving. The earth offers its resources abundantly; plants provide nourishment to humans and animals; the sun continually radiates energy; clouds release rain; and winds distribute life‑giving elements. The entire نظامِ آفرینش is based upon giving and balance. Yet the human being, endowed with intellect and awareness, may attempt to violate these principles—seeking to monopolize blessings, deprive others, and act contrary to the harmony of creation. This divergence from the natural order constitutes a fundamental ethical failure.

See ayat 46 for tafseer.

These verses return once again to the theme of the instability of material blessings, presenting it through a vivid and illustrative example. Since the comprehension of this reality is often not easy for ordinary individuals—even over a lifetime—the Qur’an conveys it through a dynamic and tangible analogy drawn from everyday experience. The purpose of this example is to awaken those who are heedless and غرور‑stricken. It is stated: “وَاضْرِبْ لَهُمْ مَثَلَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا كَمَاءٍ أَنزَلْنَاهُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ” — present to them the example of worldly life as water sent down from the sky. These life‑giving drops of rain fall upon mountains, deserts, and plains. Seeds hidden within the earth—possessing the potential for growth—are revived by this water and begin their process of development. Although the seeds are hard and protected by a firm outer layer, they are softened by the gentle influence of moisture. Plants emerge, branches break through the soil, and, aided by sunlight, gentle breezes, and the nutrients of the earth, they continue their progression toward full growth. Gradually, vegetation becomes dense and intertwined: “فَاخْتَلَطَ بِهِ نَبَاتُ الْأَرْضِ” — the plants of the earth grow together and interweave. Life spreads across mountains and plains; flowers and fruits adorn the branches, and the landscape is filled with beauty and vitality. Yet this captivating scene is not enduring. The winds of autumn begin to blow, and the signs of decline appear. The air grows cold, water diminishes, and soon the once vibrant greenery transforms: “فَأَصْبَحَ هَشِيمًا” — it becomes dry and broken vegetation. Leaves that once clung firmly to their branches are now so fragile that: “تَذْرُوهُ الرِّيَاحُ” — the winds scatter them in all directions. Thus, what once appeared stable and flourishing becomes dispersed and lifeless. The verse concludes: “وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ مُقْتَدِرًا” — God is fully capable over all things. The following verse identifies the principal elements of worldly life: “الْمَالُ وَالْبَنُونَ زِينَةُ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا” — wealth and children are the adornment of worldly life. These are likened to the blossoms on the branches of this transient tree—pleasing but short‑lived. Unless they acquire permanence through association with divine purpose, they remain unreliable and impermanent. The verse then contrasts these transient adornments with enduring values: “وَالْبَاقِيَاتُ الصَّالِحَاتُ خَيْرٌ عِندَ رَبِّكَ ثَوَابًا وَخَيْرٌ أَمَلًا” — enduring righteous deeds are better in reward and more hopeful in outcome before your Lord. The expression “الباقيات الصالحات” possesses a broad meaning, encompassing all forms of lasting good—sound belief, virtuous intentions, beneficial speech, and righteous action whose effects endure and benefit individuals and society. Although some narrations mention specific examples, such as certain acts of remembrance, these serve only as illustrations rather than limitations. Even wealth and offspring—though inherently transient—can partake in this enduring quality if they are directed toward the path of God. For whatever is associated with the divine acquires permanence, since the divine itself is eternal. Thus, the passage presents a profound contrast between the fleeting nature of material existence and the enduring value of righteous action, encouraging a reorientation of human priorities from the transient to the lasting.

These verses once again present abstract meanings in the form of a vivid illustrative example. The intellectual truths that may not be easily comprehended by many people are brought closer to sensory perception through a clear and living analogy in the Qur’an. The Qur’an addresses human beings, reminding them that they witness in their own lives, year after year, the beginning and the end of existence. If a person lives for sixty years, they will have observed this cycle sixty times. Each spring, barren land transforms into delightful and vibrant scenery, and signs of life appear in every corner. Yet in autumn, those green valleys turn once again into desolation, and in every aspect, the signs of decline and decay become evident. Similarly, human beings themselves undergo this process: once they were children, like tender buds; then they become youthful, fresh, and flourishing like blooming flowers; eventually, the force of death cuts them down, and after some time, their decayed remains scatter under the influence of natural forces. At times, however, this process is interrupted prematurely. A sudden حادثہ—such as a storm or lightning—may bring an end to life midway, as indicated in: “إِنَّمَا مَثَلُ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا كَمَاءٍ أَنزَلْنَاهُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ فَاخْتَلَطَ بِهِ نَبَاتُ الْأَرْضِ مِمَّا يَأْكُلُ النَّاسُ وَالْأَنْعَامُ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا أَخَذَتِ الْأَرْضُ زُخْرُفَهَا وَازَّيَّنَتْ وَظَنَّ أَهْلُهَا أَنَّهُمْ قَادِرُونَ عَلَيْهَا أَتَاهَا أَمْرُنَا لَيْلًا أَوْ نَهَارًا فَجَعَلْنَاهَا حَصِيدًا كَأَن لَّمْ تَغْنَ بِالْأَمْسِ” — the example of worldly life is like rain sent down from the sky, producing vegetation from which humans and animals derive sustenance; until the earth adorns itself and its inhabitants believe they have control over it, then Our command arrives suddenly, by night or by day, and We reduce it to stubble as though it had not existed before. In many cases, natural processes are allowed to reach completion, yet their ultimate end remains decay, dispersion, and فنا, as indicated in the verse under discussion. Thus, whether worldly life completes its natural course or is cut short prematurely, it inevitably ends. The lesson conveyed is that just as the cycles of nature demonstrate both flourishing and decline, so too human life is governed by the same reality. Consequently, attachment to transient existence, and the illusion of permanence within it, is fundamentally misguided.

These verses emphasize that many human beings, when empowered with material blessings, become arrogant, and such arrogance constitutes one of the greatest obstacles to human felicity. As has been observed in the preceding verses, arrogance leads to shirk and disbelief. For this reason, the Qur’an—being a profoundly pedagogical and formative text—employs a variety of methods to break the power of arrogance. At times, it reminds human beings that everything in this world is transient. At other times, it illustrates the impermanence of material possessions through vivid examples. It warns that the very resources and wealth in which people take pride may themselves become the cause of their downfall, as indicated in Surah al‑Tawbah. It recounts the fate of arrogant figures such as Qārūn and Pharaoh, presenting historical exempla as cautionary lessons. It also directs human attention to its own origin as an insignificant drop and to its ultimate end, thereby demonstrating that between such a humble beginning and an equally fragile conclusion, pride and self‑exaltation are fundamentally irrational. Moreover, throughout history, satanic influences have played a central role in human deviation and wrongdoing. The Qur’an, therefore, employs all these strategies to neutralize such influences and to redirect human consciousness toward humility and truth. It is evident that individuals who possess true faith, inner capacity, and awareness of reality do not succumb to arrogance when they attain status or wealth. Not only do they remain free from pride, but their conduct remains unchanged. They regard wealth and status as fleeting and unstable, liable to vanish with the slightest disturbance, and therefore do not allow such transient qualities to affect their character or moral orientation.

See ayat 49 for tafseer.

See ayat 49 for tafseer.

These verses provide a detailed continuation of the description of the Day of Resurrection, elaborating upon the theme introduced in the preceding discussion of a self‑conceited and arrogant individual who, due to his pride, denied the Hereafter. The present passage outlines three stages: The first stage precedes the resurrection of humanity from their graves. The second stage pertains to the events of the Day of Judgment itself. The third stage concerns what follows thereafter. It is stated: “وَيَوْمَ نُسَيِّرُ الْجِبَالَ وَتَرَى الْأَرْضَ بَارِزَةً” — and consider the Day when the mountains will be set in motion, and you will see the earth fully exposed and leveled. These verses refer to the cataclysmic events marking the onset of the Day of Judgment. Numerous such descriptions appear in the Qur’an, especially in the shorter surahs at the end, where they are often designated as ashrāṭ al‑sā‘ah (signs of the Hour). These signs indicate that the present order of the world will undergo a complete transformation: mountains will move and ultimately disappear; trees and structures will collapse; the earth will become flat and open; earthquakes will disrupt its stability; the light of the sun will fade; the moon will lose its brightness; the stars will be extinguished. Thereafter, within this desolation, a new order of existence will emerge, with new heavens and a new earth, and humanity will begin life anew. It is then stated: “وَحَشَرْنَاهُمْ فَلَمْ نُغَادِرْ مِنْهُمْ أَحَدًا” — and We shall gather them all together, leaving none of them behind. The term “نُغَادِرْ” signifies leaving something aside; thus, the verse emphasizes that all human beings will be included in the gathering without exception. The next verse describes the state of presentation before the divine court: “وَعُرِضُوا عَلَىٰ رَبِّكَ صَفًّا” — and they will be presented before your Lord in rows. This may indicate that individuals will be arranged according to their beliefs and actions, or that all humanity will stand together without distinction in a unified formation. It will be said to them: “لَقَدْ جِئْتُمُونَا كَمَا خَلَقْنَاكُمْ أَوَّلَ مَرَّةٍ” — you have come to Us just as We created you the first time. All worldly distinctions—wealth, status, adornment, and support—will have vanished. Humanity will stand in its original, unadorned state. Yet they had assumed that no appointed meeting would exist: “بَلْ زَعَمْتُمْ أَلَّنْ نَجْعَلَ لَكُم مَّوْعِدًا”. The passage then proceeds to the second stage of the Resurrection: “وَوُضِعَ الْكِتَابُ” — and the record will be set forth. When the wrongdoers witness its contents, they will be filled with fear: “فَتَرَى الْمُجْرِمِينَ مُشْفِقِينَ مِمَّا فِيهِ”. They will exclaim: “يَا وَيْلَتَنَا مَالِ هَٰذَا الْكِتَابِ لَا يُغَادِرُ صَغِيرَةً وَلَا كَبِيرَةً إِلَّا أَحْصَاهَا” — woe to us, what sort of record is this that leaves nothing small or great uncounted? Nothing will be omitted; even the most minor acts will be recorded. Individuals will realize that deeds they had forgotten are fully preserved, and they will perceive the weight of their accountability and the gravity of their outcome. In addition to this recorded account: “وَوَجَدُوا مَا عَمِلُوا حَاضِرًا” — they will find their deeds present before them. Good and evil actions, acts of justice and ظلم, trivial utterances and betrayals—all will appear in manifest form. In reality, individuals will be confronted with their own actions, and thus it is declared: “وَلَا يَظْلِمُ رَبُّكَ أَحَدًا” — your Lord does not wrong anyone. Reward and punishment are simply the consequences of one’s own deeds. Therefore, any complaint can only be directed toward oneself.

We have already stated that at the onset of the Day of Judgment, the system of the material world will be utterly disrupted. The mountains will be reduced to fragments. However, various expressions appear in the Qur'an regarding this matter. In the verses under discussion, there is: "نُسِیرُ الْجِبَالَ" which means: "We will set the mountains in motion and cause them to walk." This expression is also seen in Surah An-Naba, verse 20, and Surah At-Takwir, verse 3. But in Surah Al-Mursalat, verse 10, it is stated: وَإِذَا الْجِبَالُ نُسِفَتْ meaning, "Due to severe storms, the mountains will be uprooted from their place and separated." Whereas in Surah Al-Haqqah, verse 14, it is said: وَحُمِلَتِ الْأَرْضُ وَالْجِبَالُ فَدُكَّتَا دَكَّةً وَاحِدَةً meaning, "The earth and the mountains will be lifted from their places and will collide with one another." In Surah Al-Muzzammil, verse 14, it is: يَوْمَ تَرْجُفُ الْأَرْضُ وَالْجِبَالُ وَكَانَتِ الْجِبَالُ كَثِيبًا مَّهِيلًا "On the Day when the earth and the mountains will tremble, and the mountains will become like loose sand mounds." Surah Al-Waqi'ah, verses 5 and 6, states: وَبُسَّتِ الْجِبَالُ بَسًّا فَكَانَتْ هَبَاءً مُنْبَثًّا "The mountains will be crushed into dust and scattered like dust in the air." Finally, Surah Al-Qari'ah, verse 5, says: وَتَكُونُ الْجِبَالُ كَالْعِهْنِ الْمَنْفُوشِ "And the mountains will be like wool that has been fluffed up (and scattered here and there)." It is clear that there is no discrepancy in these verses; rather, they point to different stages of the mountains being shattered. Mountains are the firmest and strongest part of this earth. The process will begin with their movement and walking. Until they disintegrate into dust and scatter in such a manner that only their color will be visible in the atmosphere. How such a tremendous movement will occur is certainly not known to us. It may be that the Earth's gravitational pull is temporarily lifted, and due to the Earth's orbital motion, the mountains collapse and scatter into the skies. Or it may be that due to great atomic explosions, a massive and dreadful upheaval arises within the Earth's core. In any case, all these matters are evidence that the Day of Judgment is an immense revolution. A revolution will take place even in the lifeless matter of the universe, as well as in human life. All humans will begin a higher life in the new world. The soul and body will exist there too, but their structure will be broader and more perfect in every respect. The Qur'anic expressions also indirectly draw a person's attention to this reality: gardens and water are trivial things, and even massive mountains will be shattered into dust. Thus, all beings of this world, even those of great magnitude, are destined for annihilation.

In the commentary of al‑Mīzān under these verses, it is stated that the Qur’anic verses as a whole indicate that, in the realm of the Hereafter, there will be three types of records of deeds for human beings. The first type is a single comprehensive record in which the deeds of all human beings are recorded. In reality, it contains the actions of all earlier and later generations. This is indicated in the verse: “وَوُضِعَ الْكِتَابُ” whose apparent meaning suggests that there will be one universal book for the reckoning of all humanity. The second type consists of records assigned to each community. Every الأمة will have its own record in which its collective deeds are inscribed, as stated in Surah al‑Jāthiyah: “كُلُّ أُمَّةٍ تُدْعَىٰ إِلَىٰ كِتَابِهَا” — every community will be called toward its own record. The third type is the individual record for each person. Each human being will have a separate record, as indicated in Surah Banī Isrā’īl: “وَكُلَّ إِنسَانٍ أَلْزَمْنَاهُ طَائِرَهُ فِي عُنُقِهِ وَنُخْرِجُ لَهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ كِتَابًا” — every person’s record of deeds is bound to him, and on the Day of Judgment a book will be brought forth for him. These verses are not contradictory, for there is no impediment to the deeds of a person being recorded in multiple registers. Even in the present age, analogous examples exist: an individual may have a personal file, while also being included in departmental and institutional records. However, it must be emphasized that the records of deeds in the Hereafter are not comparable to ordinary documents of this world. Rather, they constitute a living and undeniable manifestation of one’s actions, perhaps reflecting the very reality and consequences of those deeds themselves. The verses also indicate that, in addition to being recorded in specific books, actions themselves will appear in a manifest form: “وَوَجَدُوا مَا عَمِلُوا حَاضِرًا” — they will find what they did present before them. Actions that appear to vanish in this world are not destroyed; rather, they persist in another form. Good deeds will appear in beautiful and attractive forms, while evil deeds will manifest in repulsive and ugly forms. These manifestations will accompany individuals, and thus it is stated: “وَلَا يَظْلِمُ رَبُّكَ أَحَدًا” — your Lord does not ظلم anyone. For reward and punishment are nothing but the outcome of one’s own actions. Some commentators have interpreted “وَوَجَدُوا مَا عَمِلُوا حَاضِرًا” as referring to the record of deeds, meaning that people will find all their actions written therein. Others suggest that the implied meaning is that they will find the recompense of their deeds present before them. Nevertheless, the first interpretation—indicating the direct presence and manifestation of actions—accords more closely with the apparent meaning of the verses. The concept of the manifestation of deeds (تجسّم اعمال) has been discussed in detail elsewhere, and it remains a central theological theme, reflecting the intimate connection between human action and its ultimate outcome.

Indeed, the Qur’an is a remarkable work of moral instruction. When it presents before humanity the scene of the Day of Judgment—that Day when all people will be brought in orderly ranks before the court of divine justice—its portrayal is profoundly compelling. Their ranks will be arranged according to the harmony of their beliefs and actions. Their hands will be empty, and all worldly attachments will have come to an end. Despite the vast assembly, each individual will stand isolated, and even amidst gathering, a sense of utter solitude will prevail. The records of deeds will be opened; everything will speak, and every minor and major action of human beings will be revealed. Beyond this, deeds and thoughts themselves will take on life and appear in corporeal form. Each person will find their actions surrounding them in tangible manifestation. Individuals will be so absorbed in their own states that neither mother will be aware of her son nor son of his mother. The divine court of justice will be established. A tremendous punishment will await the wrongdoers. People will be struck with intense fear; their breaths will be suspended in their chests, and their eyes will be fixed in terror. In such a condition, faith becomes extraordinarily effective for the moral development of human beings. It serves as a powerful means of controlling desires, instills deep awareness, and cultivates a sense of responsibility. In a narration reported from Imam Ja‘far al‑Ṣādiq (عليه السلام), it is stated: When the Day of Judgment arrives, a person will be given his record of deeds and told: read. The narrator says that he asked the Imam whether the person would recognize what is written therein. The Imam replied that everything will come back to his memory—every blink of the eye, every word uttered, every step taken, and every action performed. It will be as though he had performed those deeds at that very moment. For this reason, people will cry out: “يا ويلتنا ما لهذا الكتاب لا يغادر صغيرة ولا كبيرة إلا أحصاها” — woe to us, what is this record that leaves nothing small or great but that it has enumerated it. The transformative effect of faith in such a reality is self‑evident. Can it truly be imagined that a person who possesses firm conviction in such a state would still commit wrongdoing?

See ayat 53 for tafseer.

See ayat 53 for tafseer.

See ayat 53 for tafseer.

These verses revisit the account of the creation of Adam (عليه السلام), which is mentioned in several places in the Qur’an. In each instance, the angels are commanded to prostrate before Adam, and all comply except Iblīs, who disobeys. As has been noted, such repetition in the Qur’an always serves a specific purpose, and each occurrence highlights a distinct aspect of the same event. In the preceding discussions, an example was given concerning arrogant and wealthy individuals, describing their attitudes toward the deprived and their eventual fate. In reality, pride and arrogance have, from the very beginning, been the foundation of deviation, disbelief, and rebellion. For this reason, the present verses refer to Iblīs, who refused to prostrate before Adam (عليه السلام), in order to illustrate that arrogance has always been the root cause of defiance against divine command. Furthermore, the narrative demonstrates that misguidance originates from satanic whisperings, and that yielding to such influences—especially from one who has been an enemy of humanity from the outset—is fundamentally irrational. It is stated: “وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ” — when We said to the angels: prostrate to Adam, they all prostrated except Iblīs. To remove any misconception arising from this exception, it is clarified: “كَانَ مِنَ الْجِنِّ فَفَسَقَ عَنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّهِ” — he was from the jinn, and thus deviated from the command of his Lord. Although Iblīs was not an angel by nature, his عبادت and proximity had elevated him to the ranks of the angels. However, a moment of arrogance and pride caused his سقوط, stripping him of all spiritual rank and leading to his rejection. The verse then states: “أَفَتَتَّخِذُونَهُ وَذُرِّيَّتَهُ أَوْلِيَاءَ مِن دُونِي وَهُمْ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ” — will you then take him and his progeny as protectors instead of Me, while they are your enemies? This question highlights the irrationality of abandoning God for one whose enmity toward humanity has been evident from the beginning. The verse concludes: “بِئْسَ لِلظَّالِمِينَ بَدَلًا” — how evil is this exchange for the wrongdoers. A further argument is then presented: “مَا أَشْهَدْتُهُمْ خَلْقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَلَا خَلْقَ أَنفُسِهِمْ” — I did not make them witnesses to the creation of the heavens and the earth, nor to their own creation. Since they had no role in the act of creation, they cannot possess authority or legitimacy as objects of devotion or guidance. A being devoid of knowledge of creation cannot guide others or provide deliverance. Thus it is declared: “وَمَا كُنتُ مُتَّخِذَ الْمُضِلِّينَ عَضُدًا” — I do not take the misguided as helpers. The final verse then depicts the fate of such people on the Day of Judgment: “وَيَوْمَ يَقُولُ نَادُوا شُرَكَائِيَ الَّذِينَ زَعَمْتُمْ” — and the Day when He will say: call upon those whom you claimed to be My partners. They will call upon them, but: “فَلَمْ يَسْتَجِيبُوا لَهُمْ” — they will not respond. Between them, a place of destruction will be established: “وَجَعَلْنَا بَيْنَهُم مَّوْبِقًا”. Finally, it is stated: “وَرَأَى الْمُجْرِمُونَ النَّارَ فَظَنُّوا أَنَّهُمْ مُوَاقِعُوهَا وَلَمْ يَجِدُوا عَنْهَا مَصْرِفًا” — the wrongdoers will see the Fire and realize with certainty that they will fall into it, and they will find no way to escape. The term “ظنوا” here conveys certainty rather than mere supposition. The imagery suggests complete immersion: they will enter the Fire, and the Fire will surround them. Thus, these verses emphasize the consequences of arrogance, the rejection of divine guidance, and the folly of reliance upon false authorities. They also highlight the inevitability of accountability and the ultimate failure of all false supports.

We know that the angels are infallible. The Qur’an explicitly affirms their purity and عصمت. It states: “بَلْ عِبَادٌ مُّكْرَمُونَ، لَا يَسْبِقُونَهُ بِالْقَوْلِ وَهُمْ بِأَمْرِهِ يَعْمَلُونَ” — they are honored servants of God; they do not precede Him in speech and act only upon His command (al‑Anbiyā’ 26–27). By their very nature, they possess intellect without desire; hence there exists within them no inclination toward pride, self‑aggrandizement, or sin. However, the verses under discussion state that all the angels prostrated except Iblīs. Similar expressions occur elsewhere in the Qur’an. This exception gives rise to the impression that Iblīs was among the angels. Yet, considering his rebellion and disobedience, a question arises: how can it be possible for an angel to commit such a grave act of disobedience? This issue is also highlighted in certain passages of Nahj al‑Balāgha, where it is indicated that God would not admit a human into Paradise for an act due to which a “malak” had been expelled. This is understood as a reference to Iblīs and his arrogance. The present verses resolve this problem by stating explicitly: “كَانَ مِنَ الْجِنِّ” — he was from among the jinn. The jinn are beings concealed from human perception, possessing both intellect and the capacities associated with desire and emotion. The term “jinn” in the Qur’an consistently refers to this category of beings. Some commentators, who maintain that Iblīs was an angel, interpret “كَانَ مِنَ الْجِنِّ” in a purely linguistic sense, suggesting that it merely signifies concealment. However, this interpretation does not align with the apparent meaning of the Qur’anic text. A clear textual argument supports the understanding that Iblīs was from the jinn. The Qur’an states: “وَخَلَقَ الْجَانَّ مِن مَّارِجٍ مِّن نَّارٍ” (al‑Raḥmān 15) — the jinn were created from a smokeless flame of fire. Similarly, when Iblīs refused to prostrate before Adam, he justified his disobedience by saying: “خَلَقْتَنِي مِن نَارٍ وَخَلَقْتَهُ مِن طِينٍ” (al‑A‘rāf 12) — You created me from fire and created him from clay. In addition, the Qur’an refers to the “ذریة” (offspring) of Iblīs, whereas angels do not possess progeny. Taking all these points together—including the essential nature of angels—it becomes evident that Iblīs was not an angel. Rather, he belonged to the jinn but had attained such مقام through worship that he was counted among the angels. Therefore, when the command of prostration was issued, he was included in it, and his disobedience appears as an exception within the narrative. In a report from ‘Uyūn al‑Akhbār, Imam ‘Alī ibn Mūsā al‑Riḍā (عليه السلام) states that all angels are protected from disbelief and sin through divine grace. When asked whether Iblīs was an angel, he replied that he was not, but rather from the jinn, citing the verse: “وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ كَانَ مِنَ الْجِنِّ”. Another narration from Imam Ja‘far al‑Ṣādiq (عليه السلام) explains that although Iblīs was from the jinn, he lived among the angels and was assumed by them to be one of their kind due to his عبادت and قرب. However, God knew his true nature, and when the command of prostration was issued, his reality became manifest. Thus, the conclusion is clear: Iblīs was not an angel in essence, but a jinn who, through rank and association, had attained a position among them. His disobedience does not contradict the principle of angelic infallibility, since he did not belong to their ontological category.

These verses shift the discussion toward الله, affirming that He has no need for any helper or assistant among the misguided. It is self‑evident that God, in principle, is not dependent upon anyone—whether among the misguided or otherwise. However, this teaching provides an important lesson for human beings: in collective endeavors, one should seek assistance only from those who themselves stand upon truth and justice, and whose support is directed toward righteous objectives. Experience repeatedly shows that even well‑intentioned individuals, due to negligence in selecting their associates and helpers, fall into difficulties, failures, and deviations. When misguided individuals or those who mislead others are brought into positions of influence, they ultimately undermine and destroy the very work they appear to support. A notable example is found in the events of Karbala. During the journey, Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) encountered ‘Ubayd Allāh ibn Ḥurr. Although the latter showed outward respect, when invited to support the Imam’s cause, he declined, explaining that he had left Kufa precisely to avoid involvement in the impending conflict. He acknowledged that in such a confrontation, the Imam would be slain, yet offered his sword and horse in assistance. The Imam (عليه السلام) refused this offer, turning away and stating that if one withholds oneself from the cause, there is no need for one’s material contribution. He then recited: “وَمَا كُنتُ مُتَّخِذَ الْمُضِلِّينَ عَضُدًا” — I would not take the misguided as supporters. This response indicated that assistance from those lacking true commitment or alignment with the path of truth is not to be accepted. In such cases, the absence of support is preferable to reliance upon those whose participation could lead to فساد. Thus, the principle emerges clearly: it is better to proceed without assistance than to depend upon those who are themselves misguided or who may divert a righteous cause from its proper course.

See ayat 56 for tafseer.

See ayat 56 for tafseer.

These verses present, in effect, a synthesis of the preceding and subsequent discussions. It is stated: “وَلَقَدْ صَرَّفْنَا فِی هٰذَا الْقُرْآنِ لِلنَّاسِ مِنْ كُلِّ مَثَلٍ” — and indeed We have set forth in this Qur’an every kind of example for mankind. We have presented various instructive patterns from the striking histories of past nations, conveying their painful events and their bitter and pleasant experiences. These matters have been explained at a level accessible to all, so that those inclined toward truth may accept it, and the remainder may have no excuse left, with no room for ambiguity. Yet despite this, the obstinate did not believe, because “وَكَانَ الْإِنسَانُ أَكْثَرَ شَيْءٍ جَدَلًا” — man is, above all things, most prone to disputation. The term “صَرَّفْنَا,” derived from “تصريف,” denotes variation and transformation. In this context, it signifies that the message has been conveyed in diverse forms and expressions, employing every mode that might be effective. The word “جدل” refers to argumentation undertaken with the aim of domination or contention. It implies contentious debate and opposition, rather than sincere inquiry. Thus, it characterizes those individuals whose approach is not guided by the pursuit of truth, but by obstinacy and rivalry. The following verse states that despite the presentation of such diverse examples, compelling arguments, and admonitory narratives, those who received guidance still failed to believe or seek forgiveness. Nothing prevented them except that they awaited the fate of previous peoples: “وَمَا مَنَعَ النَّاسَ أَنْ یُؤْمِنُوا إِذْ جَاءَهُمُ الْهُدَىٰ وَیَسْتَغْفِرُوا رَبَّهُمْ إِلَّا أَنْ تَأْتِیَهُمْ سُنَّةُ الْأَوَّلِینَ” or that they first witness the punishment directly: “أَوْ یَأْتِیَهُمُ الْعَذَابُ قُبُلًا”. This expression indicates that such stubborn individuals will not believe through willing reflection; rather, they would only believe under compulsion—either upon the arrival of punishment or upon directly witnessing it. Such compelled faith, however, holds no value. The verse further implies that their state is as though they are awaiting punishment, even though they do not explicitly express such expectation. This constitutes a figurative depiction of their obstinacy. Following this, the Qur’an consoles the Prophet (peace be upon him), emphasizing that his role is limited to conveying the message: “وَمَا نُرْسِلُ الْمُرْسَلِینَ إِلَّا مُبَشِّرِینَ وَمُنذِرِینَ” — We do not send the messengers except as bearers of glad tidings and warnings. It then adds that such opposition is not new: “وَیُجَادِلُ الَّذِینَ كَفَرُوا بِالْبَاطِلِ لِیُدْحِضُوا بِهِ الْحَقَّ وَاتَّخَذُوا آیَاتِی وَمَا أُنذِرُوا هُزُوًا” — the disbelievers engage in false dispute in order to invalidate the truth, and they treat My signs and warnings with ridicule. This reflects a recurring pattern throughout history: those who adhere to falsehood attempt, through sophistry and mockery, to undermine the truth. Another interpretation of these verses emphasizes that the prophets do not compel belief through coercion; rather, they present guidance and warning, leaving the ultimate decision to human choice. Faith must arise from conscious reflection and free will, not from compulsion under the force of punishment. However, it must be acknowledged that this freedom—intended as a means of human perfection—has often been misused. Throughout history, the adherents of falsehood have opposed truth through argumentation, distortion, and ridicule. Conversely, those whose hearts were receptive have upheld the truth, and thus the struggle between truth and falsehood has continued across all ages.

See ayat 59 for tafseer.

See ayat 59 for tafseer.

In the previous verses, the discussion was about dark-hearted, bigoted disbelievers. The same theme continues in the present verses. It was first stated: Who can be more unjust than those who are reminded of the verses of their Lord but turn away from them and forget what their hands have put forth? (وَمَنْ اَظْلَمُ مِمَّنْ ذُکِّرَ بِآیَاتِ رَبِّہِ فَاَعْرَضَ عَنْھَا وَنَسِیَ مَا قَدَّمَتْ یَدَاہُ). The word “تذُکِّر” (reminder) seems to indicate that the teachings of the Prophets are like recalling latent realities. These teachings exist deep within the human soul, and the role of the Prophets is to remove the veil from these realities. This same concept is present in a sermon of Nahj al-Balagha: لیستادوھم میثاق فطرتہ و یذکروھم منسی نعمتہ و یحتجوا الیھم بالتبلیغ و یثیروا لھم دفائن العقول The purpose of the Prophets’ mission was to urge people to fulfill the covenant of their nature, remind them of God’s forgotten blessings, prove the truth through clear proclamation, and awaken the hidden treasures of the intellect. It is noteworthy that these blind hearts are taught to awaken in three ways: First: These truths are fully familiar to your nature, intuition, and soul. Second: They come from your Lord. Third: Do not forget that you have committed many mistakes, and the purpose of the Prophets’ teachings is to remove the effects of those mistakes. Yet, despite all these things, these people will never believe “because We have set veils upon their hearts so that they do not understand, and heaviness in their ears, and when you call them to guidance, they will never be guided” (إِنَّا جَعَلْنَا عَلیٰ قُلُوبِھِمْ اَکِنَّةً اَنْ یَفْقَھُوہُ وَفِی آذَانِھِمْ وَقْرًا). (Explanatory note: As previously mentioned, “اکنة” is the plural of "کنان" (root of “کتاب”) meaning a veil or something that conceals, and “وقر” means heaviness of the ear or impaired hearing.) This is why “if you call them to guidance, they will never be guided” (وَإِنْ تَدْعُھُمْ إِلَی الْھُدیٰ فَلَنْ یَھْتَدُوا إِذًا اَبَدًا). It may be unnecessary to remind that if Allah has taken away the power of understanding and hearing from them, it is because of “ما قدمت یداہ” (their own deeds that they committed), and this punishment is the direct consequence of their own actions. In other words, their evil and shameful deeds themselves have transformed into veils upon their hearts and burdens on their ears. This is a reality mentioned in many Quranic verses. For example, in Surah An-Nisa, verse 155 it says: بَلْ طَبَعَ اللهُ عَلَیْھَا بِکُفْرِھِمْ فَلَایُؤْمِنُونَ إِلاَّ قَلِیلًا۔ Allah has set a seal upon their hearts because of their disbelief, so only a few will believe. However, some people look for excuses to claim that Islam is a system of compulsion and coercion. They have ignored the latter parts of the verse under discussion and have not considered other verses that interpret it. They try to prove their own view by relying solely on the apparent literal meaning of a portion, whereas, as explained, the answer to this objection is clearly established. God’s educational program does not mete out punishment immediately without giving opportunity and respite, unlike tyrannical kings. His vast mercy demands that sinners be granted maximum chance and opportunity for reform. This is why the next verse states: Your Lord is Forgiving, Full of Mercy (وَرَبُّکَ الْغَفُورُ ذُو الرَّحْمَةِ). If He wished to punish them, He would have sent torment on them immediately for what they earned (لَوْ یُؤَاخِذُھُمْ بِمَا کَسَبُوا لَعَجَّلَ لَھُمَ الْعَذَابَ). But for them is a fixed term, and when it comes, they will not find an escape (بَلْ لَھُمْ مَوْعِدٌ لَنْ یَجِدُوا مِنْ دُونِہِ مَوْئِلًا). (Explanatory note: “موئل” derives from “وئل” (root meaning “cold”) and means shelter or place of refuge and means of salvation.) His forgiveness demands that He pardon those who repent, and His mercy demands that He not hasten the punishment of others so that they may be among those who repent. Yet His justice demands that when transgression reaches its limit, it boldly take their account. Corrupt and wicked individuals whose reformation is no longer possible, in principle, have no significance for the wisdom of creation to continue existing; therefore, their destruction is necessary so that the earth may be cleansed of their impure presence. Finally, as a reminder at the end of this series of verses, the painful end of former oppressors is mentioned: And those cities — We destroyed them when they wronged, and We assigned for their destruction a fixed term (وَتِلْکَ الْقُریٰ اَھْلَکْنَاھُمْ لَمَّا ظَلَمُوا وَجَعَلْنَا لِمَھْلِکِھِمْ مَوْعِدًا).

See ayat 64 for tafseer.

See ayat 64 for tafseer.

See ayat 64 for tafseer.

See ayat 64 for tafseer.

Exegetes have written, regarding the occasion of revelation of these verses, that a number of Quraysh approached the Messenger of God (peace be upon him) and inquired about the learned figure whose companionship had been commanded to Moses. These verses were revealed in response to that inquiry. In principle, Surah al‑Kahf presents three narratives. Although outwardly distinct, these three accounts possess a certain underlying coherence. The first concerns the Companions of the Cave, the second recounts the story of Moses (عليه السلام) and Khidr (عليه السلام), and the third—mentioned later—relates to Dhū al‑Qarnayn. All three narratives remove the reader from the confines of ordinary, habitual existence and indicate that reality is not limited to what is immediately perceived. They demonstrate that the nature of events is not confined to human understanding or surface appearance. The account of the Companions of the Cave presents the story of steadfast youths who renounced everything in order to preserve their faith. The narrative of Moses (عليه السلام) and Khidr (عليه السلام) is equally remarkable. It illustrates that even a great prophet of the rank of ūlū al‑‘azm, such as Moses—who was the most knowledgeable person in his immediate environment—possessed limitations in certain domains of knowledge. The lessons conveyed by Khidr (عليه السلام) are profound, and each of the events in this account carries deeper significance. The first verse states: “وَإِذْ قَالَ مُوسَى لِفَتَاهُ لَا أَبْرَحُ حَتَّىٰ أَبْلُغَ مَجْمَعَ الْبَحْرَيْنِ أَوْ أَمْضِيَ حُقُبًا” — remember when Moses said to his young companion: I will not cease until I reach the junction of the two seas, even if it takes a long time. Here, “Moses” undoubtedly refers to Moses son of ‘Imran (عليه السلام). The expression “فَتَاهُ” is understood, according to many exegetes and narrations, to refer to Joshua son of Nun (Yūsha‘ ibn Nūn), a devoted and faithful young man. The expression “مَجْمَعَ الْبَحْرَيْنِ” denotes the meeting place of two bodies of water. Commentators have proposed various identifications of this location, including the confluence of the Gulf of Aqaba and the Gulf of Suez, or other geographical possibilities. However, the first interpretation appears the most plausible given proximity and contextual indications. The term “حُقُبًا” signifies a long duration, indicating Moses’ firm determination to continue the search regardless of time. This reflects his earnest pursuit of a matter of great importance. He was in search of a learned individual whose knowledge could unveil new dimensions of understanding and reveal deeper truths. When they reached the junction, they forgot their fish: “فَلَمَّا بَلَغَا مَجْمَعَ بَيْنِهِمَا نَسِيَا حُوتَهُمَا فَاتَّخَذَ سَبِيلَهُ فِي الْبَحْرِ سَرَبًا”. There is اختلاف among commentators regarding the nature of this fish—whether it was miraculously revived or simply moved into the water—yet the essential point is that its disappearance served as a sign connected to their quest. After traveling further, they experienced fatigue, and Moses said: “آتِنَا غَدَاءَنَا لَقَدْ لَقِينَا مِن سَفَرِنَا هَٰذَا نَصَبًا” — bring us our meal; we have certainly endured hardship in this journey. At that point, the companion recalled the incident and said: “أَرَأَيْتَ إِذْ أَوَيْنَا إِلَى الصَّخْرَةِ فَإِنِّي نَسِيتُ الْحُوتَ … وَاتَّخَذَ سَبِيلَهُ فِي الْبَحْرِ عَجَبًا”. Moses immediately recognized the significance of the sign and said: “ذَٰلِكَ مَا كُنَّا نَبْغِ”، and they retraced their steps: “فَارْتَدَّا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِمَا قَصَصًا”. A question arises regarding the mention of forgetting. It is possible, in matters unrelated to revelation and divine communication, for such occurrences to take place in ordinary human circumstances. As for attributing forgetfulness to Satan, it may be understood in the sense that distraction or negligence can be influenced by factors that divert attention, especially in matters connected to خیر. Overall, these verses portray a determined quest for knowledge, guided by perseverance, discipline, and the recognition that deeper realities require both patience and humility to comprehend.

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

When حضرت موسیٰ (علیه السلام) and his companion returned to the point where the two seas met, near the rock, they suddenly encountered: “عَبْدًا مِّنْ عِبَادِنَا آتَيْنَاهُ رَحْمَةً مِّنْ عِندِنَا وَعَلَّمْنَاهُ مِن لَّدُنَّا عِلْمًا” — a servant from among Our servants, whom We had granted mercy from Us and whom We had taught knowledge from Our presence. The expression “وَجَدَا” suggests that they were actively seeking this figure and ultimately found him. The description “عَبْدًا مِنْ عِبَادِنَا” indicates that the highest honor for a human being lies in true servanthood to God. It is at this مقامِ عبودیت that divine mercy descends and the doors of deeper knowledge are opened. The phrase “مِن لَّدُنَّا” signifies that this knowledge was not of an ordinary or acquired nature, but rather a special form of knowledge concerning hidden realities, known only through divine grant. The use of the indefinite form “عِلْمًا” conveys magnification, indicating the عظمت and depth of the knowledge bestowed upon him. Regarding “رَحْمَةً مِّنْ عِندِنَا,” commentators have offered various interpretations, including prophethood, long life, or a special spiritual capacity—such as expanded understanding and elevated inner disposition—enabling him to receive this divine knowledge. حضرت موسیٰ (علیه السلام), approaching him with great humility and courtesy, said: “هَلْ أَتَّبِعُكَ عَلَىٰ أَن تُعَلِّمَنِ مِمَّا عُلِّمْتَ رُشْدًا” — may I follow you so that you may teach me from what you have been taught, that which leads to right guidance? The term “رُشْدًا” indicates that knowledge is not an end in itself, but a means toward guidance, اصلاح, and خیر. Only such knowledge holds true value and is worthy of pursuit. However, the response of this learned servant was striking: “إِنَّكَ لَن تَسْتَطِيعَ مَعِي صَبْرًا” — you will not be able to remain patient with me. He explained further: “وَكَيْفَ تَصْبِرُ عَلَىٰ مَا لَمْ تُحِطْ بِهِ خُبْرًا” — how can you be patient regarding that of which you have no comprehensive knowledge? This reflects the difference between outward perception and deeper reality. Events may appear troubling or unjust at the surface, while in their inner essence they may be grounded in wisdom, justice, and divine purpose. The one who perceives only the outward aspect finds it difficult to remain patient, whereas the one who is aware of the inner dimensions proceeds with calm certainty. حضرت موسیٰ (علیه السلام), concerned that he might lose the opportunity to benefit from this companionship, responded respectfully: “سَتَجِدُنِي إِن شَاءَ اللَّهُ صَابِرًا وَلَا أَعْصِي لَكَ أَمْرًا” — you will find me, God willing, patient, and I will not disobey you in any matter. Notably, he did not assert certainty in his own patience, but conditioned it with “إِن شَاءَ اللَّهُ,” expressing humility and reliance upon divine assistance. The learned servant then set a condition: “فَإِنِ اتَّبَعْتَنِي فَلَا تَسْأَلْنِي عَن شَيْءٍ حَتَّىٰ أُحْدِثَ لَكَ مِنْهُ ذِكْرًا” — if you follow me, then do not question me regarding anything until I myself explain it to you. Thus, the journey of learning was framed by discipline, patience, and trust—highlighting that access to deeper realities requires restraint from premature judgment and readiness to await the appropriate moment of understanding.

See ayat 78 for tafseer.

See ayat 78 for tafseer.

See ayat 78 for tafseer.

See ayat 78 for tafseer.

See ayat 78 for tafseer.

See ayat 78 for tafseer.

See ayat 78 for tafseer.

Moses set out with this knowledgeable servant. As they journeyed, they reached a ship and boarded it. (فَانطَلَقَا حَتَّى إِذَا رَكِبَا فِي السَّفِينَةِ). Here we observe that the Quran begins to use the dual pronoun, indicating both Moses (ع) and this venerable servant. This suggests that Joshua’s mission as Moses' companion ended at this point, and he returned from here, or else that he was present but unrelated to this matter, and so was omitted. However, the first possibility seems stronger. In any case, they both boarded the ship, and then the servant made a hole in the ship (خَرَقَهَا). As Raghib explained in his vocabulary, "خَرَق" means to pierce or tear something intentionally to destroy it, and outwardly this seemed to be the servant’s intention. Since Moses (ع) was both a great prophet of Allah and a protector of the people’s lives and property, enjoining good and forbidding evil, his conscience would not permit him to ignore this; hence, he objected and said, “Have you made a hole in it so that you would drown its people? Indeed, you have done a grievous thing” (قَالَ أَقَتَلْتَ نَفْسًا زَكِيَّةً بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ لَقَدْ جِئْتَ شَيْئًا نُّكْرًا). There is no doubt that the servant’s purpose was not to drown the passengers, but the result of this action appeared to be nothing other than drowning. Therefore, Moses (ع) indicated this clearly with the intensifying particle "لَ" which expresses a definite purpose. This is exactly like a person who overeats and is told, “Why do you want to kill yourself?” Certainly, his intention is not to commit suicide, but his actions might lead to that result. The term "أَمْرٌ" (pronounced as “shimar”) is used for something astonishingly important or very bad, and this action was indeed outwardly astonishing and very bad. It is truly astonishing that a ship with many passengers was deliberately perforated. Some narrations mention that the passengers soon noticed and patched the hole by some means, but the ship was no longer safe. At that moment, the servant looked at Moses with great composure and said, “Did I not say to you that you would never be able to have patience with me?” (قَالَ أَلَمْ أَقُل لَّكَ إِنَّكَ لَن تَسْتَطِيعَ مَعِيَ صَبْرًا). Considering the importance of this event, although Moses’ (ع) impatience was natural, he became regretful. He remembered his covenant and, in a tone of apology, said to the teacher, “Do not hold me accountable for what I forgot, and do not be harsh with me in my affair” (قَالَ لاَ تُؤَاخِذْنِي بِمَا نَسِيتُ وَلاَ تُرْهِقْنِي مِنْ أَمْرِي عُسْرًا). That is, it was a misunderstanding which is now past, so by reason of your greatness, kindly forgive it. “لَا تُرْهِقْنِي” derives from "ارْهَاق" meaning to cover something with severity or oppression, and sometimes it means to cause distress. Here, it implies, “Do not be harsh with me and do not put me under distress, and do not withdraw your favor of knowledge from me on account of this.” Their river journey then ended. They disembarked from the ship. The journey continued. On the way, they encountered a boy, but the servant killed him without any preamble (فَانطَلَقَا حَتَّى إِذَا لَقِيَا غُلاَمًا فَقَتَلَهُ). Moses (ع) could no longer restrain himself. This was a horrifying scene. The unjustified and unjust killing of an innocent boy was not something Moses (ع) could remain silent about. He was inflamed with anger. The grief and fury overwhelmed him, and he neglected his agreement to voice an even harsher and clearer objection. This incident was more dreadful than the first. He said, “Have you killed an innocent soul without [it having killed] another soul?” (قَالَ أَقَتَلْتَ نَفْسًا زَكِيَّةً بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ). Indeed, you have done a terrible deed (لَقَدْ جِئْتَ شَيْئًا نُّكْرًا). The word "غُلاَم" means a young man, whether he has reached puberty or not. Regarding whether the youth killed by the servant had reached puberty, exegetes differ. Some argue that "نَفْسًا زَكِيَّةً" (pure and innocent soul) indicates that he was not of age. Others interpret "بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ" (without [any killing]) as evidence that he was of age since retribution (qisas) is only applicable to an adult. However, an overall view of the verse shows that a definitive decision cannot be reached on this matter. نُّكْر is a synonym for repugnant and reprehensible, indicating a worse result than the "أَمْرٌ" used for the hole in the ship incident. The reason is clear because the first act endangered a few people who soon became aware and averted the danger, but the second act—Mōsa (Moses) apparently had committed a fault. The learned elder then repeated, with his special reassurance and gentle tone, the same phrase: "He said, 'Did I not say that you cannot be patient with me?'" (قَالَ أَلَمْ أَقُلْ إِنَّكَ لَن تَسْتَطِيعَ مَعِيَ صَبْرًا). The difference between the previous and this statement is the addition of the word "لَك" which serves as further emphasis, meaning "I myself told you this." Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) remembered his covenant. He felt deep embarrassment because the pledge had been broken twice, even if unintentionally. He thought that perhaps the teacher's words were correct, for he had already clearly stated that in the beginning, his tasks would be intolerable for Moses. Moses then said in a tone of apology that this time also he should be excused and his errors overlooked; and “if after this I ask you about anything concerning your actions (and raise objections), then surely do not keep me with you, for you would be free from any responsibility towards me” (قَالَ إِن سَأَلْتُكَ عَن شَيْءٍ بَعْدَهَا فَلاَ تُصَاحِبْنِي قَدْ بَلَغْتَ مِن لَّدُنِّي عُذْرًا). This phrase reflects Moses’ sense of justice, high-mindedness, and noble character, indicating that he was one to bow before a truth no matter how bitter it might be. In other words, through the trial of thrice, it becomes clear that their missions are distinct and cannot be mutually fulfilled. After this conversation and new agreement, Moses (peace be upon him) set out with his teacher. While traveling, they reached a town. They requested food from its people, but the townsfolk refused to host them as guests (فَانطَلَقَا حَتَّى إِذَا أَتَيَا أَهْلَ قَرْيَةٍ اسْتَطْعَمَا أَهْلَهَا فَأَبَوْا أَن يُضَيِّفُوهُمَا). There is no doubt that Moses (peace be upon him) and Khidr (peace be upon him) were not people seeking to burden the townsfolk. It appears that they had either lost or exhausted their provisions along the way. Therefore, they wished to be guests of the townspeople (there is also a possibility that the sage deliberately asked for food to teach Moses another lesson). It is necessary to recall that "قریة" in the language of the Qur’an carries a general meaning and refers to any kind of city or settlement. However, here it specifically means a city, as a few verses later the word "المدینہ" appears for distinction. Nevertheless, scholars differ regarding which city this was and where it was located. It is reported from Ibn Abbas that this city was "Antioch" (أنطاکیہ). (Explanatory Note: "Antioch" is among the ancient cities of Syria. It is 96 kilometers from Aleppo and 59 kilometers from Iskenderun. This region is famous for grain production. The port of Suwaidiyah is in this area and is 27 kilometers from Antioch. Reference: Encyclopaedia Fareed wa Jadi, Vol. 1, p. 835). Some have said that the city here refers to "Eilah," which is currently the famous port "Eilat" located on the shores of the Red Sea near the Gulf of Aqaba. Others opine that it refers to "Nazareth," which is the birthplace of Jesus (peace be upon him) and is located in northern Palestine. The late Tabarsi has narrated a hadith from Imam Jafar Sadiq (peace be upon him) supporting this latter possibility. Regarding Majma’ al-Bahrain, we have previously stated that it refers to the junction of the Gulf of Aqaba and the Gulf of Suez. This clarifies that the city of Nazareth and the port of Eleah are closer to this junction than Antioch. In any case, what transpired with Moses (peace be upon him) and his teacher in this city shows that the inhabitants were very stingy and narrow-minded people. A hadith narrated from the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) regarding these townspeople says: "They were people of a village who were cruel" ـ کانوا أهل قریة لئام ـ meaning they were mean and narrow-hearted. (Reference: Majma’ al-Bayan, under the discussion of the verse). The Qur'an states: despite this, they found a wall about to collapse, so the learned man began repairing it, setting it upright (فَوَجَدَا فِيهَا جِدَارًا يُرِيدُ أَنْ يَنقَضَّ فَأَقَامَهُ). (Explanatory Note: The intention of the wall “wanting” is metaphorical with certainty; it means the wall was so weak and dilapidated that it seemed as if it intended to fall). Moses (peace be upon him) was weary at this time. He was also hungry and troubled. He felt that these ignorant townspeople had insulted both himself and his teacher. On the other hand, he saw that despite the disrespect, Khidr (peace be upon him) was engaged in rebuilding the collapsing wall as if being compensated for his effort. Moses thought that at least his teacher should be paid wages for this work so that food could be provided. Therefore, he forgot his agreement once again. He had...Then they raised an objection, but now the tone was gentler and softer than before. "They said: 'If you wished, you could have taken a wage for it' (قَالَ لَوْ شِئْتَ لَاتَّخَذْتَ عَلَیْہِ اَجْرًا)." In fact, Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was thinking that it is not just to treat such lowly and narrow-minded people with generosity. In other words, kindness is a good thing, but only when it is appropriate. It is true that repaying evil with good is the way of the men of God, but only where it does not encourage wrongdoing (i.e., so that they do not become "selfish seekers of honor"). At this juncture, this knowledgeable elder said the last words to Prophet Musa (peace be upon him), because based on all previous events, he was certain that Musa (peace be upon him) could not tolerate his actions; therefore, he said: "Now the time of separation between you and me has come. I will inform you of the meaning of what you could not endure with patience" (قَالَ هَذَا فِرَاقُ بَيْنِي وَبَيْنِكَ سَأُنَبِّئُكَ بِتَأْوِيلِ مَا لَمْ تَسْتَطِع عَّلَيْهِ صَبْرًا). Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) did not object to this, because in a previous incident he himself had suggested this very thing; thus it had become a reality for him that he could not endure further. Nevertheless, the news of separation struck Musa (peace be upon him)’s heart like a hammer blow. Separation from such a teacher, whose chest is a treasure of secrets, whose companionship brings blessings, whose every word is a lesson, whose conduct is inspiring, whose forehead radiates the light of God, and whose heart is a repository of divine knowledge—such separation was a cause of grief and sorrow. Yet, it was a bitter reality that Musa (peace be upon him) had to accept. The well-known commentator Abu al-Futuh al-Razi says there is a tradition: People asked Prophet Musa (peace be upon him): What was the greatest difficulty in your life? Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) replied: I endured many hardships (referring to the difficulties during Pharaoh’s time and then among the Children of Israel), but no difficulty or sorrow wounded my heart as deeply as the news of separation from Hazrat Khidr (peace be upon him) (reference: Tafseer Abu al-Futuh al-Razi, under the verse under discussion). The word "تَاْوِیلِ" comes from the root "اول" (and in older form "قول"), meaning to return something to its origin. Therefore, the returning of any matter or statement to its original purpose is called ta’wil, and the interpretation of a dream is also called ta’wil for this reason (as in Surah Yusuf, verse 100): ھٰذَا تَاْوِیلُ رُؤْیَای۔ (Explanatory note: For further explanation, refer to Volume 2 of Tafseer Namunah under Surah Al-Imran, verse 7.)

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

When the separation between حضرت موسیٰ (علیه السلام) and حضرت خضر (علیه السلام) was determined, it became necessary for this divinely guided teacher to reveal the underlying wisdom of those actions which حضرت موسیٰ (علیہ السلام) had been unable to accept. In reality, the purpose of their companionship was precisely this: that حضرت موسیٰ (علیہ السلام) might understand the deeper meanings behind those three extraordinary events. These hidden aspects constitute a key to understanding many profound مسائل and answer numerous questions. حضرت خضر (علیہ السلام) began with the incident of the boat, saying: “أَمَّا السَّفِينَةُ فَكَانَتْ لِمَسَاكِينَ يَعْمَلُونَ فِي الْبَحْرِ فَأَرَدْتُ أَنْ أَعِيبَهَا وَكَانَ وَرَاءَهُمْ مَلِكٌ يَأْخُذُ كُلَّ سَفِينَةٍ غَصْبًا” — as for the boat, it belonged to poor people who worked at sea, and I intended to damage it because there was a king behind them who seized every sound boat by force. Thus, although damaging the boat appeared outwardly unjustified, it contained an important deeper purpose: protecting the livelihood of its poor owners from confiscation by an oppressive ruler. The expression “وَرَاءَهُمْ” is not spatial in the literal sense, but indicates that danger was impending and unavoidable, even if not immediately visible. He then turned to the second event, saying: “وَأَمَّا الْغُلَامُ فَكَانَ أَبَوَاهُ مُؤْمِنَيْنِ فَخَشِينَا أَنْ يُرْهِقَهُمَا طُغْيَانًا وَكُفْرًا” — as for the boy, his parents were believers, and it was feared that he would burden them with rebellion and disbelief. The action of killing the boy was thus explained in terms of preserving the faith and well‑being of the parents from severe future harm. The expression “فَخَشِينَا” here carries a deeper meaning, indicating concern grounded in knowledge rather than fear in the ordinary sense. He further added: “فَأَرَدْنَا أَنْ يُبْدِلَهُمَا رَبُّهُمَا خَيْرًا مِنْهُ زَكَاةً وَأَقْرَبَ رُحْمًا” — we intended that their Lord would replace him with one better in purity and closer in affection. The term “زكاة” here encompasses a broad sense of purity, including moral and spiritual excellence. Some narrations indicate that the substitution would result in a child whose lineage would be a source of great خير. Finally, حضرت خضر (علیہ السلام) explained the third event: “وَأَمَّا الْجِدَارُ فَكَانَ لِغُلَامَيْنِ يَتِيمَيْنِ … وَكَانَ أَبُوهُمَا صَالِحًا” — as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys, and beneath it was a treasure belonging to them, and their father was a righteous man. The repair of the wall ensured that the hidden treasure remained protected until the orphans reached maturity and could retrieve it safely. This act was described as: “رَحْمَةً مِنْ رَبِّكَ” — a mercy from your Lord. حضرت خضر (علیہ السلام) concluded by clarifying the fundamental principle underlying all these actions: “وَمَا فَعَلْتُهُ عَنْ أَمْرِي” — I did not act on my own command. Thus, all these actions were carried out by divine instruction, not personal initiative. He ended with: “ذَٰلِكَ تَأْوِيلُ مَا لَمْ تَسْتَطِعْ عَلَيْهِ صَبْرًا” — this is the explanation of that over which you could not be patient. In essence, these events demonstrate that divine wisdom often operates beyond immediate perception. Actions that appear unjust or incomprehensible at the surface may, in reality, be rooted in deeper layers of justice, mercy, and long‑term خیر that lie beyond human understanding.

This is the most important issue that has attracted the attention of the great scholars. Prophet Musa (ع) objected to three incidents that occurred at the hands of this ‘Aalim (scholar) because he was not aware of the inner reality of the matter, but later, when the teacher explained, he became satisfied. The question is: Is it actually permissible to cause damage to someone’s property without their permission on the basis that a usurper might take it away? And can a boy be punished for something he will do in the future? And is it necessary for us to bear inconvenience for free to protect someone’s property? In response to these questions, two approaches are before us: The first is to view these matters in the light of jurisprudential rulings and Shariah laws; some exegetes have adopted this path. They considered the first incident significant and applicable to more important laws and stated that it is agreed that the protection of the entire ship was an important matter, whereas protection from partial damage was not more important. In other words, Hazrat Khidr (ع) prevented greater damage by causing less damage. In jurisprudential terms, "he averted corruption by corruption." Especially since it was evident to them that the ship’s crew’s inner consent was obtained, as had they been aware of the actual situation, they would have agreed to this action. (According to jurisprudential terminology, Hazrat Khidr (ع) had "implicit permission" in this matter.) Regarding this boy, the exegetes insist that he was indeed an adult and was an apostate or morally corrupt, therefore he was liable to be killed because of his current actions. And the reason Hazrat Khidr (ع) used the boy’s future crimes as justification for his action was to indicate that he was not only presently involved in this misdeed but would commit even worse crimes in the future; thus, killing him was lawful according to Shariah laws, and he was lawful to be killed because of his deeds and sins done by himself. As for the third incident, no one can object to why a person sacrifices for another and bears hardship to protect their property. It may be that this sacrifice is not obligatory, but it is certainly a good and praiseworthy deed. In fact, in some circumstances, it may reach the boundary of obligation, for example, if a great amount of an orphan child’s property is being lost and can be saved by bearing a little hardship, then it is not unlikely that in such a case the action would be obligatory. The second approach is based on the fact that although the above explanations may be satisfactory concerning the treasure and the wall, they do not align well with the apparent verse regarding the youth who was killed, for his killing was attributed to his future action, not present action. Even the explanation about the ship is somewhat debatable. Therefore, it is necessary to adopt another approach, and that is: In this world, we are familiar with two systems. One is the system of creation (takwīn) and the other is the system of legislation (tashrī’). Although these two systems generally harmonize in principle, sometimes their details differ from each other. For example, Allah Almighty tests His servants through fear, loss of wealth and fruits, the death and killing of oneself and loved ones, so that it may be known who exhibits patience and forbearance in the face of these trials and calamities. So can any jurist, indeed can any prophet, do such a thing? That is, to destroy people’s wealth, lives, and security to test them? Or sometimes Allah punishes some of His prophets and righteous servants with great calamities for some faults, as Prophet Ya’qub (ع) was afflicted with calamity because he gave less attention to some poor people, or Prophet Yunus (ع) was tested by calamity for a minor fault. So does anyone have the right to punish someone in this way? Or we see that sometimes Allah removes a blessing from a human because of ingratitude, for example, a person who does not thank for wealth loses his wealth in a flood, or a person who does not thank for health loses it. So from the viewpoint of jurisprudential and Shariah rulings, can someone destroy a person’s wealth and transform their safety into illness because of ingratitude? There are many such examples. Together, these examples indicate that the universe, especially the creation of man, is founded on the best system in which Allah has created some laws of creation (takwīnī laws) to perfect humanity. The violation of these laws results in different outcomes, although from the perspective of the law of Shariah, we cannot act according to these laws. For example, a doctor may cut a person’s finger so that poison does not reach the heart, but can any person cut another’s finger to instill patience or because of ingratitude to blessings? (Whereas it is certain that Allah can do this because it is in accordance with the system of the best creation.) Now, having established that we have two systems and that Allah Almighty is sovereign over both systems, there is no obstacle to Allah appointing a group to implement the system of legislation and angels to implement the system of creation…A group or certain individuals (for example, Hazrat Khidr (ʿAlayhis-salām)) may be assigned to implement the system of creation in practice (reflect upon this). There is nothing in Allah’s system of creation to prevent Him from causing even a minor child to encounter an accident that may lead to their death, because it is possible that the existence of that child could pose a great danger in the future, just as sometimes the survival of certain individuals is in itself a wisdom or a trial. Likewise, there is nothing to prevent Allah from afflicting me today with a severe illness that confines me to my home, because He knows that if I go out, a dangerous accident might occur, and He wants to protect me from that accident. In other words, in this world, one group of agents is assigned to the inner (batin) realm, and another group is assigned to the outer (zahir) realm. Those responsible for the inner are governed by their own principles, regulations, and programs, and those responsible for the outer have their own specific principles and regulations. It is correct that the primary and overall purpose of both of these programs is to lead humanity towards perfection; in this respect, they are harmonious. However, at times there are differences in details, as is clear from the examples mentioned above. Nonetheless, there is no doubt that neither of these ways involves any self-will or arbitrary action; rather, it is essential that they be authorized by the true Owner and Sovereign. Therefore, Hazrat Khidr (ʿAlayhis-salām) explicitly stated this reality and said: ما فعلتہ عن امری “I did not do it of my own accord.” This means that he carried out these acts according to the Divine command and in accordance with its rules and procedure. In this way, the apparent contradiction in these actions is resolved. And the fact that we see Hazrat Musa (ʿAlayhis-salām) unable to bear the actions of Hazrat Khidr (ʿAlayhis-salām) was due to the difference in the manner of their respective assignments and responsibilities. Therefore, when he saw Hazrat Khidr’s action apparently contrary to Shariah laws, he objected; but Hazrat Khidr calmly continued his work. Since these two great divine guides, due to their different responsibilities, could not remain together forever, Hazrat Khidr said: ھٰذا فراق بینی و بینک “This is the time for separation between you and me.”

In the Qur’an, the name of حضرت خضر (علیه السلام) is not explicitly mentioned. Rather, the companion and teacher of حضرت موسیٰ (علیه السلام) is introduced with the following description: “عَبْدًا مِّنْ عِبَادِنَا آتَيْنَاهُ رَحْمَةً مِّنْ عِندِنَا وَعَلَّمْنَاهُ مِن لَّدُنَّا عِلْمًا” — a servant from among Our servants, whom We granted mercy from Us and whom We taught knowledge from Our presence. This characterization emphasizes his مقامِ عبودیت and the special nature of his knowledge. For this reason, he is often referred to as a learned figure. However, numerous narrations identify this individual as “خضر.” Some reports indicate that his original name was “بلیا بن ملکان,” while “خضر” was a title attributed to him because wherever he stepped, the زمین became green and fertile. Some have suggested that this figure might be identical with “الیاس,” leading to the view that “الیاس” and “خضر” are two names for the same person. However, the more widely accepted opinion among commentators and narrators is that they are distinct, and that the individual in question is خضر. It is evident that the precise name is of secondary importance. What is essential is that he was a divinely guided scholar (عالم ربانی), favored with special mercy and endowed with knowledge of deeper realities and aspects of the cosmic order. In this regard, he served as a teacher to حضرت موسیٰ (علیه السلام), even though موسیٰ (علیه السلام) held a higher prophetic مقام in other respects. As for whether خضر (علیه السلام) was a prophet, the narrations differ. Some reports indicate that he was not a prophet, but rather a pious servant and a learned figure, similar in status to other individuals granted divine insight. Other narrations, however, suggest that he may have possessed the rank of prophethood, and certain expressions in the narrative—such as “ما فعلتُه عن أمري” and “فأردنا”—may be interpreted in support of that view. It is also reported in some traditions that he lived for a long period of time. With regard to parallels in Jewish and Christian literature, the narrative in its Qur’anic form is not found in the canonical scriptures (Torah and Gospel). However, later Jewish writings contain accounts that bear some resemblance. For example, in certain medieval Jewish sources, a story is narrated involving figures such as “Elias” and “Joshua ben Levi,” which exhibits similarities in theme. In that account, a companion accompanies a wise figure under the condition of not asking questions, witnesses apparently puzzling actions, and later receives explanations revealing hidden wisdom behind those acts. Despite these similarities, the two narratives are not identical. The purpose of mentioning such parallels is not to equate them, but to indicate that analogous motifs existed in earlier traditions, or that elements of the original narrative may have undergone transformation over time. Thus, the Qur’anic account remains the primary and authoritative source, presenting the event with clarity, moral depth, and emphasis on divine wisdom underlying seemingly incomprehensible actions.

The foundation of the narrative of حضرت موسیٰ (علیه السلام) and حضرت خضر (علیه السلام) is only what has been stated in the Qur’an. However, it is regrettable that many fabricated stories have been attached to this account. By mixing such fabrications with the original narrative, its true form becomes distorted. It should be understood that this is not the first authentic account to which such treatment has been applied; many genuine narratives have suffered similar distortions over time. Therefore, in order to arrive at the reality, the twenty‑three Qur’anic verses in which this account is presented must be taken as the primary foundation. Even reports and narrations should only be accepted insofar as they are in harmony with the Qur’an. If any narration appears to contradict it, then it cannot be regarded as acceptable. Fortunately, within the معتبر and reliable narrations, no such contradictory reports are established.

In the above narrative, it has been repeatedly observed that حضرت موسیٰ (علیه السلام) experienced instances of forgetting. First, he forgot about the fish that had been taken as provisions, and on the second and third occasions, he forgot the agreement he had made with his learned companion. This raises the question: is forgetfulness (nisyān) possible for the prophets? Some scholars hold that such forms of forgetfulness are not improbable for prophets, since they are not related to the essential foundation of prophethood or to its primary objectives, nor do they concern the communication of divine revelation. Rather, they pertain to ordinary aspects of daily life. According to this view, what is certain is that a prophet never errs in conveying the divine message or matters pertaining to it, as their station of infallibility protects them from such errors. However, there is no contradiction in supposeing that موسیٰ (علیه السلام), in his eagerness to seek knowledge, forgot about his provisions, or that the extraordinary events he witnessed—such as the damage to the boat, the killing of the youth, and the rebuilding of the wall—created such emotional agitation that he forgot the personal agreement he had made with his companion. According to this interpretation, such forgetfulness neither contradicts prophethood nor compromises infallibility. Some exegetes have also proposed that the term “nisyān” in these verses should be understood metaphorically, in the sense of “abandonment” rather than literal forgetfulness. In this understanding, when a person leaves something aside, it is as though he has forgotten it. Thus, حضرت موسیٰ (علیه السلام) neglected his provisions out of lack of concern, and he did not adhere to the agreement because, based on outward appearances, he could not accept actions such as damaging a boat, killing an innocent person, or rebuilding a wall without compensation. In such circumstances, he considered objection to be his duty, and therefore did not regard the situation as one in which the prior agreement applied. However, it is evident that such interpretations are not entirely consistent with the apparent meaning of the verses. It is generally accepted that where the ظاهر (apparent meaning) of a transmitted text conflicts with established rational principles, reinterpretation becomes necessary. Just as certain Qur’anic expressions—such as those referring metaphorically to divine attributes—are interpreted figuratively due to rational considerations, so too must passages concerning the infallibility of prophets and divinely guided figures be understood in a manner consistent with the principle of their عصمت.

Abi ibn Ka'b, through the mediation of Ibn Abbas, narrated a hadith from the Prophet Muhammad صلی الله علیہ و آلہ وسلّم as follows: One day, Musa (ع) was addressing the Children of Israel. Someone asked him: Who has the most knowledge on the face of the earth? Musa (ع) said: I do not know of anyone more knowledgeable than myself. At that moment, Musa (ع) received a revelation that one of Our servants is among the two seas who is more knowledgeable than you. Musa (ع) then requested that he be shown this scholar. Allah then showed him the way to meet him. (Reference: Majma' al-Bayan, Vol. 6, p. 481) (The narration has been summarized). A similar hadith has also been transmitted from Imam Sadiq (ع) (Reference: Nur al-Thaqalin, Vol. 3, p. 275). This was essentially a warning to Musa (ع) not to consider himself the most superior despite all his knowledge and excellence. However, the question arises here: Should not an Ulul Azm (determined) prophet, a possessor of risalah (messengership) and shariah (law), be the greatest scholar of his time? In response to this question, we say that within the scope of his mission, in the system of legislation, he should be the greatest scholar, and Musa (ع) was indeed such. But as we have previously indicated, the domain of his mission was distinct from that of his learned friend. The mission of his learned friend did not pertain to the domain of legislative knowledge. In other words, that scholar was knowledgeable in secrets that were not the foundation of prophethood’s call. Incidentally, a hadith narrated from Imam Sadiq (ع) clearly states that Musa (ع) was more knowledgeable than Khidr (ع), meaning in the knowledge of shariah. (Reference: Al-Mizan, Vol. 13, p. 383). Perhaps due to not answering this question and also a related question associated with forgetfulness, some have refused to accept that the Musa mentioned in these verses is Musa ibn Imran. A hadith narrated from Imam Ali ibn Musa Reza (ع) also indicates that the scope and domain of these two great personalities were different, and each was more knowledgeable than the other in his own field. (Reference: Majma' al-Bayan, Vol. 6, p. 480). It is also appropriate to mention this point that in a hadith narrated from the Prophet Muhammad صلی الله علیہ و آلہ وسلّم: When Musa (ع) met Khidr (ع), a bird appeared before them. It took a drop of water in its beak. Khidr (ع) then said to Musa (ع): Do you know what the bird says? Musa (ع) replied: What does it say? Khidr (ع) said: It says: ما علمک و علم موسیٰ فی علم الله الا کما اخذ منقاری من الماء Your knowledge and the knowledge of Musa, compared to the knowledge of Allah, is like the drop of water that I took in my beak. (This narration has been recorded in Tafsir al-Mizan with reference to Dur al-Manthur and other books).

There is another question concerning this narrative: what exactly was the treasure that the learned companion of Mūsā (علیه السلام) wished to keep concealed, and why had the righteous father of the orphans hidden it? Some have held that the treasure had a material nature. However, according to many Shi‘i and Sunni narrations, it was a tablet upon which words of wisdom were inscribed. There is some اختلاف among commentators regarding the precise content of these sayings. In al‑Kāfī, it is reported from Imam Ṣādiq (علیه السلام) that he said: It was not a treasure of gold and silver; rather, it was a tablet upon which these statements were written: لا الٰہ الا الله من ایقن بالموت لم یضحک و من ایقن بالحساب لم یفرح قلبہ و من ایقن بالقدر لم یخش الا الله There is no deity except الله. Whoever is certain of death does not indulge in frivolous laughter. Whoever is certain of accountability does not live in heedless joy. Whoever is certain of divine decree fears none except الله. Other narrations indicate that the treasure was a tablet of gold. These reports are not necessarily contradictory, as the point of the first group of narrations is to emphasize that the treasure was not merely a heap of gold and silver coins, which is the common understanding of “treasure.” Even if we were to interpret the term “كنز” in its apparent sense—as a ذخیرہ of wealth—this would not present any difficulty. Such wealth would only be blameworthy if hoarded in large quantities and withheld from social need over an extended period. However, if property is concealed temporarily for its protection—particularly in times of insecurity, as was common in earlier periods—such concealment is not objectionable. It is also possible that the owner passed away unexpectedly before retrieving it, leaving it hidden. In such a case, the concealment of the treasure does not imply any ethical fault.

From this story, we derive many lessons, for example: (a) The search for a knowledgeable guide and benefiting from his knowledge is so important that a determined Prophet like Moses (ع) traveled extensively in pursuit of this. This serves as a model for all people, regardless of their rank, age, or circumstances. (b) The source of all divine knowledge is servitude and worship of Allah. As we have read in the verses under consideration: عَبْدًا مِنْ عِبَادِنَا آتَيْنَاهُ رَحْمَةً مِنْ عِنْدِنَا وَعَلَّمْنَاهُ مِنْ لَدُنَّا عِلْمًا He was one of Our servants whom We gave mercy from Us and taught knowledge from Our presence. (c) Knowledge should always be acquired for the sake of action, as Moses (ع) said to his knowledgeable friend: مِمَّا عَلَّمْتَ رُشْدًا “Teach me knowledge that will be useful for my path.” That is, he did not want knowledge for the sake of knowledge but knowledge to achieve a goal. (d) One should not rush in matters because many affairs require the right opportunity, as it is said: الْأُمُورُ مَرْهُونَةٌ بِأَوْقَاتِهَا “Matters are dependent on their times.” This is especially true for more important issues. For this reason, the scholar revealed the secrets of his deeds to Moses (ع) at the appropriate time. (e) Things and events have both an apparent and an inner aspect. This is an important lesson learned from the story. We are taught not to make hasty judgments about unpleasant events in our lives. Many unpleasant incidents might later be understood as hidden blessings from Allah. The Quran states concerning this matter: عَسَىٰ أَنْ تَكْرَهُوا شَيْئًا وَهُوَ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ وَعَسَىٰ أَنْ تُحِبُّوا شَيْئًا وَهُوَ شَرٌّ لَّكُمْ وَاللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ وَأَنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ “Perhaps you dislike a thing while it is good for you, and perhaps you love a thing while it is bad for you. And Allah knows, while you do not know.” (Al-Baqarah 2:216) Being mindful of this truth prevents a person from becoming immediately despondent over unpleasant events and trials. In this regard, there is a notable hadith transmitted from Imam al-Sadiq (ع). He instructed Zararah’s son (Explanatory note: Zararah was among the senior jurists and hadith transmitters of his time, had great love for the Imam, and the Imam was greatly attached to him) to say to his father: “Convey my greetings to your father and say: Sometimes I speak ill of you in certain gatherings because our enemies observe closely whom we love so that they might harm those we love through that affection. Conversely, if we criticize someone, they praise them. Sometimes, if I speak ill of you in your absence, it is because you have become renowned among people for our Wilaya and love. Therefore, our opponents criticize you. I wish to cast some blame upon you so that their harm would be removed from you.” This is as Allah says through the speech of Moses’ (ع) knowledgeable friend: أَمَّا السَّفِينَةُ فَكَانَتْ لِمَسَاكِينَ يَعْمَلُونَ فِي الْبَحْرِ فَأَرَدْتُ أَنْ أَعِيبَهَا وَكَانَ وَرَاءَهُمْ مَلِكٌ يَأْخُذُ كُلَّ سَفِينَةٍ غَصْبًا… “The matter of the boat was that it belonged to some poor people who worked at sea. I intended to cause some defect in it because behind them was a king who was unjustly seizing every boat.” Understand this example well, but I swear by Allah that you are the most beloved to me among all people, whether living or dead. You are the best ship on this turbulent sea, and the unjust, usurping king follows you closely with deep vigilance to seize the safe and sound ships passing through the sea of guidance. May Allah’s mercy be upon you in life and after death.” (Reference: Ma‘jam Rijal al-Hadith, vol. 7, p. 227) (f) Alongside objection, acknowledgment of the truth. Another lesson from this story is that Moses (ع), despite his deep love, reluctantly violated his covenant with his knowledgeable friend three times, and the separation was extremely painful for him. Yet, in the face of this bitter reality, he did not act stubbornly but accepted his mentor’s actions as rightful. They parted with great love and sincerity, and Moses (ع) engaged in his work, having gathered a great treasure of truth during their brief companionship. A person should not remain afflicted in hardship until old age and make life a laboratory for a future that will never come. When one tests something several times, it is proper to bow before its result. (g) The influence of parents’ faith on their children is also an important lesson of this story. Khidr (ع) assumed the protection of his offspring due to the righteousness and piety of the father to the fullest extent possible. That is, the offspring are favored through their righteous father.Because of his faith and trustworthiness, he can be truly fortunate, and the benefit of his goodness can reach his offspring. Some narrations mention that this righteous man was not literally the father of those orphans, but was counted among their ancestors from earlier times (yes! The effect of righteous deeds is that great). (Reference: Noor al-Thaqalayn, Vol. 3, p. 289). One of the signs of his righteousness is that he left the treasure of meaning and wise admonitions as a memorial for his children. (ح) One lesson from this story is that harming one’s parents shortens one’s lifespan. When such a child deserves death who in the future causes pain to his parents, chooses rebellion and ingratitude towards them, or diverts them from the path of God, then what will be the state of such a child before God if they are presently engaged in sin? It has been narrated in Islamic traditions that there is a close connection between a decrease in lifespan and breaking the ties of kinship, especially causing harm to one’s parents. Some of these narrations have already been mentioned in this volume under verse 23 of Surah Bani Isra’il. (ط) Another lesson from this story is that people are enemies of what they do not know. Often it happens that someone does good to us, but since we are unaware of their inner intentions, we consider them enemies and become angry at them. Especially, we are impatient and intolerant regarding things we do not understand. However, it is natural for a person to be impatient about matters of which only one side or angle is apparent to him. In any case, this story teaches us not to rush to judgment but to study all aspects carefully before deciding. There is also a well-known hadith from Amir al-Mu’minin Ali (peace be upon him), who said: النّاس أعداء ما جهّلوا “People are enemies of what they do not know.” (Reference: Nahj al-Balagha, Wisdom 172) On this basis, the higher people’s level of knowledge and awareness, the more logical their behavior will be in dealing with issues. In other words, the foundation of patience is knowledge and awareness. Nevertheless, Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) had a right to feel some anxiety and distress because he saw that many aspects of Shariah rulings were endangered in these three events. In the first incident, the people’s wealth was not safe; in the second, their lives were unsafe; and in the third, the matters of rights were at risk. In the second event, he noticed apparent illogical behavior concerning people’s rights, and thus it is no surprise that he became so troubled that he forgot the solemn pledge to this great scholar. But when he was made aware of the inner reality, he was relieved and no longer objected, which itself clarifies how distressing it is to remain ignorant of the inner aspects of matters. (ی) From this story, we can also learn the etiquette of teacher and student. The conversation between this scholar and Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) reveals many points about the manners between teacher and disciple, for example: 1. Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) considered himself subordinate to Khidr (peace be upon him): اتبعك (I follow you). 2. For this following and obedience, Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) sought permission from his teacher: هل أتبعك؟ “May I follow you?” 3. Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) acknowledged his need for knowledge and the teacher’s possession of knowledge: عَلِّمْنِي “So that I may learn from you.” 4. Showing humility, Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) described his teacher’s knowledge as vast and indicated that he came only to obtain a portion of this knowledge. The word "ممّا" (from what) proves this. 5. He referred to the teacher’s knowledge as divine knowledge (علمت). 6. He expressed his desire for guidance and instruction (رشداً). 7. Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) privately told his teacher that just as Allah has granted him grace and knowledge, he also wishes that the teacher extend the same favor to him: تعلّمني ممّا علمت “Teach me from what you have been taught.” 8. The phrase “هل أتبعك؟” also demonstrates that the disciple should follow the teacher’s path, not the teacher follow the disciple (except in special situations). 9. Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) held a very high and noble station — he was one of the Ulul Azm Prophets, a Messenger and bearer of a Book — yet he exhibited such humility. His character teaches everyone that regardless of one’s status or rank, one must practice humility and modesty at the time of acquiring knowledge and wisdom. 10. When making a pledge to the teacher, Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) did not use absolute and definite language, but said: سَتَجِدْنِي إِنْ شَاءَ اللهُ صَابِراً “Insha’Allah (God willing) you will find me patient.” This is a mark of respect before Allah as well as before the teacher, so that in case of any lapse, the dignity of the teacher is not violated. 11. It is also necessary to note that this learned scholar exercised great patience and forbearance during teaching. When Musa (peace be upon him) forgot the pledge in his state of agitation and distress and began to object, the teacher calmly and thoughtfully said in a questioning tone only: وَمَا قُلْتُ لَكَ عَلَى عَمَلِي عَسَيْتَ أَنْ لا تَصْبِرَ عَلَيَّ؟ “I did not say to you concerning my actions that you would not be patient with me.”

See ayat 91 for tafseer.

See ayat 91 for tafseer.

See ayat 91 for tafseer.

See ayat 91 for tafseer.

See ayat 91 for tafseer.

See ayat 91 for tafseer.

See ayat 91 for tafseer.

See ayat 91 for tafseer.

After introducing the discussion of the Companions of the Cave, it was mentioned that certain members of Quraysh, in consultation with the Jews of Medina, sought to test the Prophet (صلی الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم) by posing three questions. These concerned the Companions of the Cave, the nature of the rūḥ, and the identity of Dhū al‑Qarnayn. The response to the question of the rūḥ appears in Surah Banī Isrā’īl, while the answers to the other two questions are provided in the present Surah. The narrative of Dhū al‑Qarnayn thus follows. Although the three accounts in this Surah—those of the Companions of the Cave, Mūsā (علیه السلام) and Khiḍr (علیه السلام), and Dhū al‑Qarnayn—appear distinct, they share a fundamental theme: each transcends the ordinary limits of human experience and points to dimensions of reality beyond everyday perception. These narratives demonstrate that existence is not confined to what is immediately seen or habitually understood. The Qur’an introduces the story with the statement: “وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنْ ذِي الْقَرْنَيْنِ قُلْ سَأَتْلُو عَلَيْكُمْ مِنْهُ ذِكْرًا” — they ask you concerning Dhū al‑Qarnayn; say, I will recite to you an account of him. The use of “سأتلوا” indicates imminence and conveys a tone of measured response, suggesting that the account is delivered with deliberation and divine guidance. It also implies that the subject was already known among the people, though surrounded by uncertainty and اختلاف. The Qur’an then states: “إِنَّا مَكَّنَّا لَهُ فِي الْأَرْضِ وَآتَيْنَاهُ مِنْ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ سَبَبًا” — We established him in the earth and gave him means for everything. The term “سبب” denotes any kind of means or instrument, whether intellectual, administrative, military, or material. It encompasses all the capacities necessary for achieving objectives. Dhū al‑Qarnayn utilized these means effectively: “فَأَتْبَعَ سَبَبًا”. He first journeyed toward the west: “حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغَ مَغْرِبَ الشَّمْسِ وَجَدَهَا تَغْرُبُ فِي عَيْنٍ حَمِئَةٍ” — until he reached the place of sunset and perceived it setting in a muddy spring. This description reflects visual perception rather than physical reality, much like a traveler observing the sun setting into the horizon of a body of water. There he encountered a people, and was given the choice: “إِمَّا أَنْ تُعَذِّبَ وَإِمَّا أَنْ تَتَّخِذَ فِيهِمْ حُسْنًا”. His response established a principle of governance: “أَمَّا مَنْ ظَلَمَ فَسَوْفَ نُعَذِّبُهُ… وَأَمَّا مَنْ آمَنَ وَعَمِلَ صَالِحًا فَلَهُ جَزَاءً الْحُسْنَىٰ”. — those who do wrong will be punished, and those who believe and act righteously will be rewarded. This reflects a balanced system of justice based on accountability. He then journeyed eastward: “حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغَ مَطْلِعَ الشَّمْسِ وَجَدَهَا تَطْلُعُ عَلَىٰ قَوْمٍ لَمْ نَجْعَلْ لَهُم مِّن دُونِهَا سِتْرًا”. — he reached a people exposed to the sun without any covering, indicating a simple or undeveloped mode of life lacking shelter or protection from natural elements. Finally, the verse concludes: “كَذَٰلِكَ وَقَدْ أَحَطْنَا بِمَا لَدَيْهِ خُبْرًا” — thus it was, and We fully encompassed knowledge of all that he possessed. Some commentators interpret this statement as indicating divine supervision and guidance over his actions and policies. Overall, these verses present Dhū al‑Qarnayn not merely as a historical figure, but as a model of effective leadership grounded in divine guidance, practical wisdom, justice, and the proper use of means. The narrative emphasizes that human capability must be accompanied by ethical responsibility and recognition of divine authority.

See ayat 98 for tafseer.

See ayat 98 for tafseer.

See ayat 98 for tafseer.

See ayat 98 for tafseer.

See ayat 98 for tafseer.

See ayat 98 for tafseer.

These verses point to another journey of ḏū al‑qarnayn and state: “ثُمَّ أَتْبَعَ سَبَبًا” — then he again made use of the means available to him and continued his journey. He proceeded until he reached a place “بَيْنَ السَّدَّيْنِ” (between two barriers or mountains). There he encountered a group of people different from those he had previously met. These people hardly understood any speech: “لَا يَكَادُونَ يَفْقَهُونَ قَوْلًا”. This indicates that he had entered a mountainous region. The people he met here differed significantly from those of the eastern and western regions, and they were extremely underdeveloped in terms of human civilization, since coherent speech is one of its clearest manifestations. Some have suggested that the phrase does not necessarily mean they were unfamiliar with known languages, but rather that they lacked intellectual capacity to comprehend meaning. These people were suffering from the aggression and فساد of the tribes known as Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj. When ḏū al‑qarnayn, with his vast resources, reached them, they took hold of him and said: “يَا ذَا الْقَرْنَيْنِ إِنَّ يَأْجُوجَ وَمَأْجُوجَ مُفْسِدُونَ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَهَلْ نَجْعَلُ لَكَ خَرْجًا عَلَىٰ أَنْ تَجْعَلَ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَهُمْ سَدًّا”. — O Dhū al‑Qarnayn, Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj are spreading corruption in the land. Shall we assign you a payment so that you may construct a barrier between us and them? Since they did not share his language, it is possible that they communicated through signs, broken speech, interpreters, or by divine understanding. From their request, it is evident that they were economically capable but lacking in planning, technology, and organization. ḏū al‑qarnayn responded: “مَا مَكَّنِّي فِيهِ رَبِّي خَيْرٌ” — what my Lord has granted me is better than what you offer. He declined financial assistance and instead asked for physical cooperation: “فَأَعِينُونِي بِقُوَّةٍ أَجْعَلْ بَيْنَكُمْ وَبَيْنَهُمْ رَدْمًا” — assist me with strength, and I will construct a solid barrier between you and them. The term “رَدْم” originally means filling something with stones, but later came to signify any kind of solid barrier or wall. ḏū al‑qarnayn then commanded: “آتُونِي زُبَرَ الْحَدِيدِ” — bring me large blocks of iron. “زُبَر” is the plural of “زُبْرَة,” meaning large, solid pieces of iron. These were placed between the two mountain sides: “حَتَّىٰ إِذَا سَاوَىٰ بَيْنَ الصَّدَفَيْنِ”. Here, “الصَّدَفَيْنِ” refers to the two mountain slopes, indicating that there was a pass between them through which the hostile tribes entered. Then he ordered them to ignite a fire and blow into it: “قَالَ انفُخُوا حَتَّىٰ إِذَا جَعَلَهُ نَارًا” — until the iron became red‑hot like fire and fused together. Finally, he said: “آتُونِي أُفْرِغْ عَلَيْهِ قِطْرًا” — bring molten copper so that I may pour it over the structure. This coating protected the iron from corrosion and strengthened the structure. As a result, the barrier became so strong that: “فَمَا اسْتَطَاعُوا أَن يَظْهَرُوهُ وَمَا اسْتَطَاعُوا لَهُ نَقْبًا” — they were unable to surmount it or pierce it. Despite this عظیم achievement, ḏū al‑qarnayn did not display arrogance. Rather, he declared with humility: “هٰذَا رَحْمَةٌ مِّن رَّبِّي” — this is a mercy from my Lord. He attributed everything—knowledge, strength, and success—to divine grace, emphasizing that he possessed nothing independently. He then added: “فَإِذَا جَاءَ وَعْدُ رَبِّي جَعَلَهُ دَكَّاءَ وَكَانَ وَعْدُ رَبِّي حَقًّا” — when the promise of my Lord comes, it will be reduced to dust, and the promise of my Lord is true. Thus, he pointed out that even this mighty structure is not eternal; it too will be destroyed at the appointed time, particularly at the end of the world and the onset of the final resurrection.

These verses contain numerous instructive and constructive lessons. 1. No action is possible without means: The first lesson conveyed by this narrative is that nothing in the world can be accomplished without employing appropriate means and resources. Accordingly, God granted ذوالقرنين the necessary means for action and success, as indicated by: “وَآتَيْنَاهُ مِنْ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ سَبَبًا” — We provided him with means for everything. And: “فَأَتْبَعَ سَبَبًا” — so he followed those means. This demonstrates that no one can achieve success without utilizing proper وسائل, regardless of مقام. 2. Even great figures may decline: The image of the sun setting in a muddy spring, although a perceptual phenomenon, symbolically suggests that even great and elevated figures may decline due to a major error, causing their stature to diminish from public perception. 3. Both reward and punishment are necessary: A functioning system cannot succeed without recognizing virtue and disciplining wrongdoing. ذوالقرنين explicitly adopted this principle by distinguishing between the just and the unjust. This reflects a fundamental principle of governance. 4. Responsibility should be bearable: Justice requires that obligations imposed on people remain within their capacity. ذوالقرنين emphasized ease in governance, ensuring that responsibilities were neither oppressive nor excessive. 5. Different regions require different approaches: A just administration must take into account the diversity of cultures and conditions. ذوالقرنين adapted his conduct to the needs and circumstances of each community under his authority. 6. Serving all communities is essential: Even those who are less developed or unable to articulate their needs—such as the people described as “لَا يَكَادُونَ يَفْقَهُونَ قَوْلًا”—were not neglected. ذوالقرنين responded constructively by addressing their concerns and providing protection. 7. Security is essential for societal well‑being: Peace and stability are foundational for a healthy society. The construction of the barrier demonstrates the importance of safeguarding communities from corruption and aggression. 8. Collective participation in problem‑solving: Those affected by a problem must actively participate in its resolution. ذوالقرنين involved the local population in constructing the barrier, thereby strengthening their capability and responsibility. 9. Detachment from material gain: A true leader is not driven by worldly gain. When offered wealth, ذوالقرنين declined, stating: “مَا مَكَّنِّي فِيهِ رَبِّي خَيْرٌ” — what my Lord has granted me is better. This reflects sincerity and independence from material motives. 10. Work must be structurally sound: Another important lesson is diligence and technical soundness. The barrier was constructed with durable materials such as iron and reinforced appropriately, demonstrating the importance of quality and sustainability. 11. Avoidance of arrogance: Despite his achievements, ذوالقرنين consistently attributed success to divine favor, stating: “هٰذَا رَحْمَةٌ مِّن رَّبِّي” — this is a mercy from my Lord. This illustrates humility and recognition of divine authority. 12. The transient nature of the world: Finally, the narrative emphasizes that all worldly constructions, no matter how strong, are ultimately temporary. Even the most powerful structures will eventually perish. Thus, the account is not merely historical; it serves as a comprehensive ethical and spiritual framework, illustrating principles of leadership, social justice, humility, responsibility, and awareness of the temporary nature of worldly existence.

There is اختلاف among commentators regarding the historical identity of the figure referred to in the Qur’an as ذوالقرنين, and several opinions have been advanced concerning which known historical personality corresponds to this narrative. Among the numerous views, three are particularly prominent: First, some identify him with Alexander of Macedon (Iskandar), referring to him as “Iskandar Dhū al‑Qarnayn.” According to this view, he extended his rule across vast territories, including Rome, Egypt, Syria, and beyond, undertaking extensive campaigns of conquest. However, this identification faces serious difficulties: the description of ذوالقرنين in the Qur’an does not align fully with the known character and historical record of Alexander, nor is there credible evidence that he built a barrier resembling the one described. Second, some historians have suggested that ذوالقرنين was a Yemeni king from the line of the “Tubba‘” (کنگز of Yemen). This view is reflected in certain early Arabic historical and literary sources. According to this interpretation, the barrier mentioned in the Qur’an is identified with the dam of Ma’rib. Yet this opinion also encounters significant problems, as the Ma’rib dam was constructed for water management and flood control, not for protection against hostile tribes, and it does not match the Qur’anic description of a barrier made of iron and molten copper. Third, and among modern scholars the most widely discussed, is the view that ذوالقرنين corresponds to Cyrus the Great (کورش کبیر), the founder of the Achaemenid Empire. This hypothesis was elaborated in detail by Abū al‑Kalām Āzād and supported by a number of contemporary researchers. Several considerations support this identification: - The title “ذوالقرنين” literally means “the possessor of two horns.” Some interpret this metaphorically as referring to dominion over both the eastern and western regions of the world, while others link it to symbolic representations found in ancient iconography. In certain historical artifacts, Cyrus is depicted with elements resembling horned symbols, possibly connected to royal insignia or symbolic imagery known in ancient Near Eastern traditions. - Qur’anic descriptions portray ذوالقرنين as a just, God‑fearing ruler who acted with compassion toward the oppressed, upheld justice, and resisted wrongdoing. Historical accounts by non‑Persian sources, including Greek historians such as Herodotus and Xenophon, describe Cyrus as a ruler noted for generosity, mercy, and justice—traits that closely correspond to the Qur’anic characterization. - The Qur’an presents ذوالقرنين as undertaking three major journeys: toward the west, toward the east, and toward a northern mountainous region where he constructed a barrier. Historical records of Cyrus indicate campaigns in western Asia Minor (Lydia), eastern regions, and northern areas near the Caucasus. - In the Caucasus region, especially near the Darial Pass, there exist traces of ancient defensive structures associated with controlling northern incursions. These geographical and structural features correspond more closely to the Qur’anic description of the barrier than other proposed locations. - Jewish historical traditions, including passages in the Book of Daniel, describe a figure symbolized by a ram with two horns representing the combined power of the Medes and Persians. Jewish sources also portray Cyrus as a liberator who ended their captivity and allowed their return to their homeland. This aligns with the context in which Jewish audiences are understood to have asked the Prophet (صلی الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم) about ذوالقرنين. Taken together, these considerations have led many modern scholars to consider the identification of ذوالقرنين with Cyrus the Great to be the most plausible among the available hypotheses, even though certain aspects remain open to further تحقیق. In addition, Qur’anic evidence portrays ذوالقرنين as a righteous servant of God rather than a prophet, though he was guided and supported by divine inspiration. This understanding is supported by a number of narrations from the Prophet (صلی الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم) and the Imams. Thus, while absolute certainty remains elusive, the third interpretation offers the most coherent correspondence between the Qur’anic narrative, historical evidence, and textual traditions, making it the strongest candidate among the three.

Some have attempted to identify this barrier with the well‑known Great Wall of China, which still exists today and extends for hundreds of kilometers. However, it is evident that the Great Wall is not constructed of iron and copper, nor is it situated within a narrow mountain pass. Rather, it is built from ordinary materials and stretches over a vast distance, which does not correspond to the description given in the verses. Others have insisted that it refers to the wall of Ma’rib in Yemen. Although it is true that the Ma’rib dam was built within a mountainous region, its purpose was to control floods and store water. Moreover, it was not made of iron and copper, and thus does not match the Qur’anic description. According to the testimony of many scholars and researchers, there exists in the Caucasus region, between the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea, a mountain range that acts like a natural barrier separating the north from the south. Within this range, there is a single narrow pass—known as the pass of Darial—where traces of an ancient iron barrier can still be observed. For this reason, many have concluded that this is the barrier attributed to Dhū al‑Qarnayn. It is also noteworthy that in the same region there exists a canal or locality historically associated with the name “Cyrus,” which corresponds to “کوروش” (Kyros/Kurosh). In ancient Armenian sources, this barrier is referred to as “Bhāg‑Gurāyī,” meaning “the pass of Cyrus.” This serves as an indication that its construction may be attributed to Cyrus himself. For further elaboration, reference is often made to historical studies and works dealing with the identity of Dhū al‑Qarnayn and the historical accounts associated with his construction projects.

The Qur’an refers to Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj in two places: in the verses under discussion and in Surah al‑Anbiyā’ (21:96). The Qur’anic descriptions clearly indicate that these were the names of two savage and destructive tribes who committed ظلم and aggression against neighboring peoples. In the Book of Ezekiel (chapters 38–39) and in the Book of Revelation (chapter 20), they are mentioned as “Gog” and “Magog,” which correspond linguistically to the Arabic forms “Ya’jūj” and “Ma’jūj.” According to major exegetical analyses—such as that of ‘Allāmah Ṭabāṭabā’ī in al‑Mīzān—the available scriptural and historical evidence suggests that they comprised one or more large tribes inhabiting distant regions of northern Asia. They are described as warlike, raiding, and destructive groups. Some scholars have proposed that the terms originate from Hebrew, while others suggest a transmission from Greek into Hebrew and then into other languages. Historically, similar names appear across multiple linguistic traditions. Historical data also points to the northeastern regions of Asia—particularly around Mongolia—as areas from which large, rapidly expanding populations emerged in earlier periods. These groups often migrated outward in waves, spreading across regions like floods, sometimes settling in conquered territories. Several major historical movements resemble the characteristics attributed to Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj. For example: - In the 4th century CE, under leaders such as Attila, destructive invasions severely damaged the Roman world. - In the 13th century CE, under Genghis Khan, vast territories—including parts of the Muslim world—were devastated. There are also indications that earlier incursions occurred around the 6th century BCE, during which time the rising powers of Media and Persia eventually stabilized regions of Western Asia. Based on such evidence, it appears most plausible that Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj correspond to these historically attested waves of aggressive northern tribes. It is further reported that when Cyrus (identified by some with Dhū al‑Qarnayn) reached these regions, local populations requested protection from such incursions. In response, a barrier was constructed—referred to in the Qur’an as the wall of Dhū al‑Qarnayn—to restrain these tribes. Thus, the Qur’anic account integrates both historical reality and theological meaning, presenting Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj as examples of forces of فساد that are temporarily restrained but ultimately re‑emerge as part of the unfolding events leading to the final phase of human history.

See ayat 102 for tafseer.

See ayat 102 for tafseer.

See ayat 102 for tafseer.

These verses continue the discussion related to the story of Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj and the barrier constructed to restrain them, which will ultimately collapse at the approach of the Day of Judgment. In that context, the present verses turn to the events of the Resurrection. It is stated: “وَتَرَكْنَا بَعْضَهُمْ يَوْمَئِذٍ يَمُوجُ فِي بَعْضٍ” — on that Day, We shall leave them surging over one another in waves. The term “يَمُوجُ” here conveys the idea of كثرت and tumult, as when a large crowd is described metaphorically as a surging sea. It may also point to unrest, trembling, and agitation, suggesting that people will be overcome by fear, their bodies shaking like waves. These two interpretations are not mutually exclusive and may both be intended. The verse continues: “وَنُفِخَ فِي الصُّورِ فَجَمَعْنَاهُمْ جَمْعًا” — and the trumpet will be blown, and We shall gather them all together. This indicates that all human beings will be assembled without exception. The Qur’anic expression “جمعناهم جمعًا” emphasizes the universality of this gathering. From the Qur’anic perspective, the transition between this world and the Hereafter involves two major transformations. The first is the annihilation of the present world and all its beings, and the second is the resurrection of the dead. Both stages are alluded to in the expression “نُفِخَ فِي الصُّور.” The verse then describes the condition of the disbelievers: “وَعَرَضْنَا جَهَنَّمَ يَوْمَئِذٍ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَرْضًا” — Hell will be presented before the disbelievers in full manifestation. Merely witnessing it will be a source of intense suffering, even before entering it. The identity of these disbelievers is clarified: “الَّذِينَ كَانَتْ أَعْيُنُهُمْ فِي غِطَاءٍ عَنْ ذِكْرِي وَكَانُوا لَا يَسْتَطِيعُونَ سَمْعًا” — those whose eyes were veiled from My remembrance and who could not bear to hear. This figurative language indicates that they had effectively rendered their faculties of perception—sight and hearing—ineffective in perceiving truth. Due to arrogance, prejudice, and moral corruption, they failed to recognize divine signs, despite their очевидность. The underlying cause of their deviation is further explained: “أَفَحَسِبَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَنْ يَتَّخِذُوا عِبَادِي مِن دُونِي أَوْلِيَاءَ” — did the disbelievers suppose that they could take My servants as protectors instead of Me? Even the most exalted created beings—such as prophets or angels—possess nothing independently, for all that they have is derived from God. The verse concludes decisively: “إِنَّا أَعْتَدْنَا جَهَنَّمَ لِلْكَافِرِينَ نُزُلًا” — We have prepared Hell as their abode. The term “نُزُل” can refer to both a lodging and what is prepared for a guest upon arrival. In this context, it conveys the inevitability of their punishment, presented as the final “reception” for those who have rejected truth. Thus, the verses present a coherent sequence: the upheaval of the final hour, the universal gathering, the unveiling of Hell, the diagnosis of disbelief, and the ultimate consequence—forming a comprehensive depiction of accountability in the Hereafter.”

See ayat 108 for tafseer.

See ayat 108 for tafseer.

See ayat 108 for tafseer.

See ayat 108 for tafseer.

See ayat 108 for tafseer.

These verses form part of a continuous and integrated discussion, closely connected to the broader themes of the Surah. In them, the various discussions that have appeared throughout the Surah—especially those related to the accounts of the Companions of the Cave, Mūsā (علیه السلام) and Khiḍr (علیه السلام), and Dhū al‑Qarnayn, along with their struggles and their conduct in the face of opposition—are brought together in a summarized form. The verses begin by referring to those who are the greatest losers and the most wretched among humanity. However, in order to awaken the listener’s curiosity and engage attention, this important matter is introduced in an interrogative form. The Prophet is commanded: “قُلْ هَلْ نُنَبِّئُكُم بِالْأَخْسَرِينَ أَعْمَالًا” — Say: shall I inform you of those who are the greatest losers in their deeds? The answer is then immediately provided so that the listener is not left in suspense: “الَّذِينَ ضَلَّ سَعْيُهُمْ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَهُمْ يَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُمْ يُحْسِنُونَ صُنْعًا” — those whose efforts in the life of this world have gone astray, while they imagine that they are performing good works. Loss is not merely that a person forfeits material gain; the true loss is that one wastes one’s fundamental capital. What capital is greater than intellect, human faculties, time, youth, and health? It is through these that human actions take form, and one’s deeds are essentially a manifestation of these inner capacities. When these capacities are expended in vain or misguided actions, they are effectively lost, like a person who sets out to a marketplace with great wealth but loses it along the way and returns empty‑handed. However, if one realizes this loss, it may serve as a lesson, sometimes even more valuable than the lost wealth itself. The real and multiplied loss occurs when a person expends both material and spiritual capital along an erroneous path while believing it to be correct, deriving neither benefit nor lesson, and continuing in that error. The expression “بِالْأَخْسَرِينَ أَعْمَالًا” is particularly noteworthy. Instead of the expected singular form, the plural emphasizes that their loss is not confined to a single domain but extends across all aspects of their lives and actions. Similarly, the term “ضل” (to go astray) indicates that actions do not simply cease to exist; rather, they lose their benefit and effectiveness, becoming like lost capital—present in essence but deprived of value and utility. The subsequent verses describe the characteristics of this group and the roots of their deviation: “أُولَٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِآيَاتِ رَبِّهِمْ وَلِقَائِهِ” — they are those who denied the signs of their Lord and the meeting with Him. Once belief in God’s signs and in accountability is lost, the foundation for ethical evaluation collapses. Without belief in accountability, a person does not properly assess or correct his actions. Therefore, it is stated: “فَحَبِطَتْ أَعْمَالُهُمْ” — their deeds have become null and void, like ashes scattered by a violent wind. Consequently, “فَلَا نُقِيمُ لَهُمْ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ وَزْنًا” — no weight or measure will be established for them on the Day of Judgment, because they possess nothing of real value to be weighed. Their ultimate fate is then declared: “ذٰلِكَ جَزَاؤُهُمْ جَهَنَّمُ بِمَا كَفَرُوا وَاتَّخَذُوا آيَاتِي وَرُسُلِي هُزُوًا” — their recompense is Hell, because of their disbelief and their mockery of divine signs and messengers. Thus, they not only rejected the fundamental principles of توحيد, نبوت, and معاد, but also treated them with ridicule. In contrast, the verses then present the state of the believers, allowing for a clear comparison: “إِنَّ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ كَانَتْ لَهُمْ جَنَّاتُ الْفِرْدَوْسِ نُزُلًا” — those who believe and perform righteous deeds shall have the gardens of Firdaws as their abode. “Firdaws” represents the most complete and excellent form of Paradise, gathering within it all forms of divine نعمت. Therefore: “خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا” — they will abide therein eternally. Although human nature tends toward variety and change, the inhabitants of Firdaws will not desire any transformation or relocation: “لَا يَبْغُونَ عَنْهَا حِوَلًا” This is because everything they desire will be present therein, including the means of renewal and development. Their state will not be one of stagnation, but of fulfilled and continuous spiritual satisfaction, encompassing both permanence and dynamic completeness.

We frequently observe, in our own lives and in the lives of others, that a person may engage in erroneous actions while believing that he is performing something good and significant. This condition—referred to as compound ignorance (جهل مرکب)—may arise momentarily, persist for years, or even endure throughout an entire lifetime. Indeed, it is difficult to تصور a greater misfortune than this. This explains why the Qur’an describes such individuals as “اخسرین اعمالاً” — those who suffer the greatest loss in terms of their deeds. Those who commit wrong actions while recognizing them as wrong often set limits upon themselves; at times, they may even return to the truth, repent, and strive to make amends through righteous conduct. In contrast, the person who regards sin as worship, evil deeds as righteous acts, and deviation as correctness does not attempt repentance or reform. Rather, he persists more intensely in his actions, even dedicating his entire being to them. Such individuals are truly the greatest losers in terms of their deeds. Islamic narrations provide various interpretations of “اخسرین اعمالاً,” each pointing to a particular manifestation of this broad concept without restricting its full scope. In one narration reported from امیرالمؤمنین علی (علیه السلام), their referents include the Jews and Christians who were once upon the truth but later introduced innovations into their religion, leading themselves astray while assuming they were performing virtuous acts. Another narration extends this description to groups such as the Khawārij, whose rigid mentality led them to grave errors while imagining themselves to be upholding righteousness. Other reports refer to ascetic groups who withdrew entirely from worldly life, assuming deprivation itself to be a path to divine قرب, as well as to innovators within the Muslim community. The underlying psychological and moral causes of this dangerous 상태 include intense تعصب (prejudice), غرور (pride), stubbornness, self‑centeredness, and unchecked حب الذات (self‑love). In some cases, isolation, lack of consultation, and misguided imitation of others contribute to this condition. Under such circumstances, a person’s corrupted thoughts and actions appear attractive to him, and instead of remorse, he experiences a sense of pride. The Qur’an highlights this phenomenon elsewhere: “أفمن زُيِّنَ له سوء عمله فرآه حسناً” — is one whose evil deed has been made to appear beautiful to him, so that he considers it good (فاطر: 8). In other verses, this embellishment is attributed to Satan: he adorns evil actions in the eyes of people and convinces them of their correctness. Thus, the essence of the matter is that the greatest loss does not lie merely in committing error, but in being deprived of the awareness that one has erred. When the faculty of discernment is obscured and falsehood appears as truth, the possibility of correction becomes minimal. Accordingly, the Qur’anic description “اخسرین اعمالاً” encapsulates a profound ethical and spiritual reality: the gravest failure is not simply wrongdoing, but the inability to recognize it as such, and the persistence in it under the illusion of righteousness.

Some pseudo-scholars have drawn from such verses the conclusion that Allah can be seen in the Hereafter. These people have interpreted "the meeting with Allah" here as a sensory encounter. However, it is clear that a sensory encounter requires a body, and a body necessitates being limited, dependent, and mortal; and every rational person knows that Allah Almighty cannot possess these attributes. Therefore, there is no doubt that wherever in the Qur’an the terms "meeting" and "seeing" are attributed to Allah, it does not mean a sensory meeting but refers to inner witnessing. This means that on the Day of Judgment, a person will be able to perceive the traces of Divinity better than at any other time, seeing with the eye of the heart, and there their faith in Allah will be of the witnessing kind. This is why, according to the verses of the Qur’an, even the most obstinate deniers of Allah will acknowledge Him on the Day of Judgment, because they will find no way left to deny. (Explanatory note: Refer to verse 106 of Surah Al-Mu’minūn.) Some commentators have understood this expression to mean that there a person will see the blessings and rewards, and likewise will witness Allah’s punishment and chastisement. In fact, they have considered blessings, rewards, and recompense as predetermined occurrences. Although these two interpretations are not mutually exclusive, the first one appears to be clearer.

There is no necessity to interpret the concept of “weighing” (وزن) of deeds on the Day of Judgment in terms of the embodiment of actions (تجسّم اعمال), such that human deeds assume a physical, weight‑bearing form. This is because “weighing” possesses a broader conceptual meaning, encompassing any form of evaluation or assessment. For example, when individuals are described as “weightless” or “light,” this refers not to their physical weight but to the insignificance or lack of value of their status and worth. It is noteworthy that in the verses under discussion, concerning “اخسرین اعمالاً,” it is stated that no scale or balance will be established for them on the Day of Judgment. Yet there are other verses which declare: “وَالْوَزْنُ يَوْمَئِذٍ الْحَقُّ” — on that Day, the weighing is true (اعراف: 8). Are these verses contradictory? Certainly not. Weighing applies to those whose deeds possess evaluative value and measure. However, for one whose entire being—thoughts, actions, and character—lack even the weight of a gnat’s wing, what need is there for weighing? For this reason, a well‑known narration from the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہ وسلم) states that on the Day of Judgment certain individuals, though appearing large and corpulent, will carry no more weight than a gnat’s wing. This reflects the emptiness and hollowness of their deeds and realities. From this, it becomes clear that humanity on that Day may be divided into three categories: First, those whose good deeds are so profound and weighty that formal weighing is unnecessary; such individuals will enter Paradise without reckoning. Second, those whose deeds are entirely nullified or devoid of any good; for them, too, no weighing is required, and they will enter Hell without reckoning. Third, those who possess a mixture of good and bad deeds. It is for this group that weighing and evaluation become necessary, and it is likely that the majority of people will fall into this category.

The term “حِوَل” (in the pattern of “مِلل”) conveys a verbal (maṣdar) meaning, signifying transformation or relocation. As discussed in the interpretation of the verses, “فردوس” refers to a garden of Paradise that encompasses all divine blessings; thus, it represents the highest and most excellent domain of Paradise. Consequently, its inhabitants will have no desire to transfer or migrate from it. It may be asked, however, whether such a state would lead to monotony or stagnation in existence, which would itself be a نقص. In response, it can be said that there is no contradiction in the continuation of transformation and development within that very مقامِ دائمی. In other words, the means of growth and spiritual progression will exist there, and the actions that a person has performed in this world, along with the blessings granted by God, will remain in a state of continuous perfection and unfolding. Further, in the relevant verses, a more detailed discussion will, God willing, clarify the concept of human development and the ongoing process of تکامل within Paradise itself.

Firdaws,” as has been noted, is regarded as the most excellent and exalted مقام in Paradise. The verses under discussion state that Firdaws is the abode of those who possess ایمان and perform righteous deeds. This raises a question: if that is the case, will no one reside in other regions of Paradise, since non‑believers do not enter Paradise at all? In response, it may be said that these verses are not referring to every individual who merely believes and performs some righteous acts. Rather, only those who attain a high and ممتاز degree of ایمان and عمل صالح will enter Firdaws. Although the wording of the verse appears general, attention to the specific meaning of “Firdaws” restricts and qualifies its implication. For this reason, in Surah al‑Mu’minūn, where the heirs of Firdaws are described, the Qur’an mentions the highest qualities of the believers—qualities that are not found in all. This itself serves as an indicator that entry into Firdaws is reserved for those who, in addition to faith and righteous deeds, possess exceptional spiritual attributes. A narration from the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہ وسلم) also supports this understanding. He states that when asking God for Paradise, one should specifically seek Firdaws, for it is among the most comprehensive and highest درجات of Paradise. This indicates that the aspiration of the believer should always be elevated, even in matters pertaining to the Hereafter. One should not be content with lower درجات, even though they too are filled with divine blessings. It is evident that one who makes such a request must also prepare himself accordingly—by cultivating the finest moral qualities and performing the most virtuous actions. Thus, those who merely express the wish, “may we attain Paradise, even if it be at the lowest level,” have not fully embodied the lofty aspiration that characterizes a true مومن.

See ayat 110 for tafseer.

It is reported from Ibn ‘Abbās concerning the occasion of revelation of this verse that: When the Jews heard the statement addressed to the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہ وسلم): “ما اوتیتم من العلم الا قلیلاً” — you have been given only a little knowledge, they objected, saying: how can this be correct when we have been given the Torah, and whoever has been given the Torah has indeed been granted abundant good? At that point, this (first of the aforementioned) verse was revealed, clarifying that whatever knowledge humans possess is insignificant in comparison with the infinite knowledge of God. It has also been reported that the Jews said to the Prophet: God has granted you wisdom, and “و من یوت الحکمة فقد اوتی خیراً کثیراً” — whoever is given wisdom is indeed given abundant good. Yet when we ask you about the rūḥ, you respond in an ambiguous manner. In response, this verse was revealed, indicating that however extensive human knowledge may appear, it remains negligible when compared with the boundless and inexhaustible knowledge of God (بحوالہ: تفسیر قرطبی، جلد ۶، ص 4107–4108؛ تفسیر صافی، ذیل آیہ سورہ بنی اسرائیل، آیہ 85).

These verses form part of an interconnected and continuous discourse, closely related to the broader themes of this Surah. The three major narratives mentioned in it—those of the Companions of the Cave, Mūsā and Khiḍr, and Dhū al‑Qarnayn—each unveil remarkable and profound realities. In this context, the Qur’an emphasizes that knowledge of such events, though significant, is negligible when compared to the infinite knowledge of God, for the entirety of existence—past, present, and future—lies within His encompassing علم. Thus, in the first verse under discussion, the Qur’an instructs the Prophet (صلی الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم): “قُلْ لَوْ كَانَ الْبَحْرُ مِدَادًا لِكَلِمَاتِ رَبِّي لَنَفِدَ الْبَحْرُ قَبْلَ أَنْ تَنفَدَ كَلِمَاتُ رَبِّي وَلَوْ جِئْنَا بِمِثْلِهِ مَدَدًا” — Say: if the sea were ink for the words of my Lord, the sea would be exhausted before the words of my Lord were exhausted, even if We were to bring the like of it as additional supply. The term “مداد” refers to ink or a substance used for writing; it is derived from “مدّ,” meaning extension or drawing forth, as writing brings forth meanings into visible form. The word “كلمات” (plural of “كلمة”) literally signifies expressions that convey meaning. In the Qur’anic sense, it often extends beyond linguistic utterances to denote the manifestations of divine knowledge and power—namely, the realities of existence themselves. Since every created entity reflects aspects of divine attributes, each can be regarded, metaphorically, as a “word” of God. Thus, the verse points not merely to spoken words, but to the entirety of creation and its underlying realities. Accordingly, the verse conveys that one should not assume that the universe is limited to what is perceived or known. Rather, the domain of existence is so vast that even if all the seas were converted into ink, they would be insufficient to record and encompass its realities. It is also important to note that “البحر” (the sea) here signifies a generic category, not a single body of water, just as “مثل” in “ولو جئنا بمثله مددًا” indicates addition without limit. Thus, even if countless seas were added, the divine “words” would remain inexhaustible. This meaning aligns fully with a similar statement in Surah Luqmān: “وَلَوْ أَنَّمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ مِنْ شَجَرَةٍ أَقْلَامٌ وَالْبَحْرُ يَمُدُّهُ مِن بَعْدِهِ سَبْعَةُ أَبْحُرٍ مَّا نَفِدَتْ كَلِمَاتُ اللَّهِ” (Luqmān: 27). Thus, even if all trees were turned into pens and all seas into ink, the expression of divine realities would not be exhausted. This imagery conveys both the vastness of creation and the boundlessness of divine knowledge. Since God’s knowledge encompasses all that exists—indeed, it is inseparable from existence itself—no finite means can fully express or contain it. In other words, even if all material resources were utilized as tools of expression, they would fail to encompass what lies within divine علم. This demonstrates that the knowledge of God is infinite, all‑embracing, and beyond all conceivable limits.

At this point, the Qur’an adopts an especially eloquent and powerful style in order to bring the concept of infinity, the boundlessness of divine knowledge, and the vastness of existence closer to human understanding. It does so by using vivid and dynamic numerical imagery. But can numbers themselves be described as living or lifeless? Yes. The numbers used in mathematics, such as those formed by placing many zeros to the right of an integer, are in reality lifeless numbers. They do not convey the true sense of grandeur or magnitude. Those familiar with mathematics know that if one were to place zeros extending for a kilometer to the right of a number, it would form an immense and complex figure—yet this magnitude is truly grasped only by mathematicians. For ordinary people, it does not evoke a living sense of greatness. A “living number,” by contrast, is one that carries human thought along with it, vividly presenting reality before the mind’s eye. Such a number possesses depth, meaning, and expressive power; it conveys a sense of magnitude that is universally perceptible. The Qur’an does not state that the vastness of existence exceeds a number consisting of countless zeros. Instead, it says that if all the trees on the earth were pens, and all the seas were ink—indeed, even if the seas were multiplied further—the pens would wear out and the ink would be exhausted, yet the realities of existence, the created beings, and the knowledge of God would not come to an end. Reflect carefully: how much can one pen write? How many pens can be made from a small branch of a tree? Then consider a large tree, from which thousands or millions of pens might be produced. Extend this reflection to all the trees on earth, in forests and gardens, and imagine the number of pens that could be formed. Then consider ink: how many words can be written with a single drop? Multiply this by the drops in a pond, then by those in a river, then in a sea, and finally by all the seas of the earth. The resulting number is astonishing. Moreover, the expression “سبع” (seven) in such contexts is not literal but signifies multiplicity—indicating that even if many more seas were added, the divine words would not be exhausted. Thus, this is a “living number,” one that carries the human mind forward toward the idea of infinity. It is a representation that can be grasped not only by scholars but by all people, illustrating the limitless nature of divine knowledge. Indeed, the knowledge of God transcends even this vast imagery. It is infinite, all‑encompassing, and extends over the entire realm of existence—past, present, and future—embracing all realities and secrets. The second verse under discussion is the final verse of Surah al‑Kahf. This verse presents a comprehensive summary of fundamental theological principles: توحید, رسالت, and معاد. The Surah begins with these themes and concludes with them, making this final verse a summary of its essential message. Regarding prophethood, human history has often witnessed exaggeration and distortion. Therefore, the Qur’an declares: “قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِّثْلُكُمْ يُوحَىٰ إِلَيَّ” — Say: I am only a human being like you; the distinction is that revelation comes to me. This statement rejects all tendencies that elevate prophets from the level of humanity to divinity. The verse then emphasizes توحید: “إِنَّمَا إِلَٰهُكُمْ إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ” — your God is One. This focus highlights that توحید is the essence and foundation of all beliefs and the basis of all individual and social programs that lead to human success. Tawḥīd is not merely one principle among others; it is the spirit of all religious teachings. If the teachings of religion are likened to a string of pearls, then توحید is the thread that binds them together. The verse then links this to the concept of the Hereafter: “فَمَنْ كَانَ يَرْجُو لِقَاءَ رَبِّهِ فَلْيَعْمَلْ عَمَلًا صَالِحًا”. Whoever hopes for the لقاء of his Lord must perform righteous deeds. This hope necessitates preparation; a genuine expectation must be reflected in action. Finally, the verse defines righteous action concisely: “وَلَا يُشْرِكْ بِعِبَادَةِ رَبِّهِ أَحَدًا” — one must not associate anything in the worship of the Lord. In other words, without sincerity (اخلاص), action cannot truly be righteous. Sincerity gives depth, direction, and نور to human actions. Without it, deeds become superficial and self‑centered, losing their spiritual quality. Thus, righteous action rooted in sincerity and directed toward divine pleasure becomes the means of attaining لقاء الله.”

In Islamic traditions, "intention" is given great importance. The fundamental principle of Islam is that it accepts every action according to its intention and purpose. The famous Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny is: "لا عمل الّا بالنیّة" There is no deed except with intention. This Hadith is a reflection of this reality. After intention comes sincerity. If sincerity is present, then the action holds great significance and value; otherwise, it will have no worth or value. Sincerity is that the motivation of a person is free from every kind of non-divine trace, and this is called the "Oneness of Intention" (توحید نیت), meaning that in every action only the pleasure of Allah is considered. It is noteworthy that regarding the occasion of the revelation of the verse under discussion, it is narrated: A man came to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) and said: O Messenger of Allah! I spend in the way of Allah, I maintain ties of kinship, and I perform these deeds solely for Allah’s sake, but when people talk about my deeds and praise them, I feel happy. How are my deeds? The Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) remained silent and said nothing until this verse was revealed which answered this person's question (that only that deed will be accepted by Allah which is performed with complete sincerity). (Reference: Majma’ al-Bayan, under the above-mentioned verse, also Tafsir al-Qurtubi, under the same verse) There is no doubt that this tradition does not negate involuntary happiness, but it requires that praise from people should not be the reason for a deed. In Islam, sincerity and pure action have such importance that in a Hadith the Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny said: "من اخلص للّٰہ اربعین یوماً فجر اللّٰہ ینابیع الحکمة من قلبہ علیٰ لسانہ" Whoever purifies his deeds for Allah for forty days, Allah will cause the springs of wisdom to flow from his heart onto his tongue. (Reference: Safinat al-Bihar, Vol. 1, p. 408) O Lord! Purify our intention in all our actions in such a way that we do not think of anyone other than You and do not take a step for anyone other than You. And if we love anyone other than You, let it be for Your pleasure and because of their relationship with You. Ameen, O Lord of the worlds. Tafseer of Surah Al-Kahf Has come to an end.