An-Nur

See ayat 3 for tafseer.

See ayat 3 for tafseer.

As has already been explained, the apparent meaning of the verses under discussion is that marriage between an adulterous man or woman and a chaste person is prohibited. However, Islamic traditions clarify that this ruling specifically concerns those men and women who are publicly known for such conduct and have not repented. Thus, if a person is not known for such actions, or has withdrawn from past wrongdoing and has resolved to live a pure and chaste life—with clear evidence of sincere repentance—then no legal impediment remains for marriage. In such a case, the individual is no longer considered a zānī or zāniyah, since that condition has ceased; whereas in the first case, the prohibition remains, and the reported occasions of revelation also support this interpretation. In a reliable narration, the well‑known jurist Zurārah asked Imām al‑Ṣādiq (peace be upon him) about the verse: الزَّانِي لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً…. The Imām replied that it refers to women and men who were known for adultery and had become identified with that conduct. He further explained that the same principle applies generally: anyone upon whom the legal penalty for adultery has been carried out, or whose immorality has become publicly known, is not suitable for marriage until clear evidence of repentance is established. (Reported in Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah.) This same meaning is also supported by other narrations. We are aware that this chapter of the Qur’an is named Sūrat al‑Nūr (“The Chapter of Light”), and this title itself is highly expressive. Beyond the specific verse, the contents of the sūrah possess a distinctive luminosity: it grants the light of chastity to individuals, families, and both men and women; it illuminates speech with truthfulness and righteousness; it enlightens hearts with faith in God and the Hereafter; and it teaches submission to the guidance of the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny. The opening verse of the sūrah offers a concise summary of its themes: “This is a sūrah which We have sent down and made obligatory, and in it We have revealed clear signs so that you may take heed” (سُورَةٌ أَنزَلْنَاهَا وَفَرَضْنَاهَا وَأَنزَلْنَا فِيهَا آيَاتٍ بَيِّنَاتٍ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَذَكَّرُونَ). The term sūrah originally denotes elevation or height, later coming to signify a distinct section or part; thus a “sūrah” of the Qur’an is a clearly defined segment distinguished from the rest. The phrase فَرَضْنَاهَا (We made it obligatory) underscores the binding nature of its commands, while آيَاتٍ بَيِّنَاتٍ (clear signs) points to both doctrinal truths and practical rulings—addressing matters of belief as well as law. Following this introduction, the sūrah presents the definitive legal ruling: “The adulterous woman and the adulterous man—flog each of them with one hundred lashes” (الزَّانِيَةُ وَالزَّانِي فَاجْلِدُوا كُلَّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا مِائَةَ جَلْدَةٍ). It further emphasizes that no unwarranted leniency should be shown in implementing this divine command: “Let not compassion for them take hold of you in the religion of Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day”. Finally, it instructs that a group of believers should witness the punishment, so that it may serve as a deterrent and a lesson for society. These rulings highlight three key principles: the punishment for adultery, the necessity of firmness in its application without undue emotional weakening, and the public aspect of justice for the sake of societal reform. The purpose is not merely to punish the offender but to preserve the moral order of society, ensuring that wrongdoing is neither trivialized nor normalized. Human societies are such that moral corruption does not remain confined to individuals; it spreads. Therefore, just as wrongdoing may occur openly, corrective measures must also be visibly applied to restore awareness of its seriousness. This explains why, in certain circumstances, public accountability is necessary—not as humiliation for its own sake, but as a means of protecting the community from moral decay and reinforcing ethical boundaries. The discussion then returns to the issue of marriage: whether the verse constitutes a legal injunction or merely describes an observable reality. Some interpret it as a statement of fact—that impure individuals are naturally inclined toward others like themselves, while pure believers avoid such unions. Others understand it as a normative legal command prohibiting such marriages. The latter interpretation is supported by the phrase “وَحُرِّمَ ذَٰلِكَ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ” (“and that has been made unlawful for the believers”), as well as numerous narrations. It is also noteworthy that such rulings are sometimes conveyed in declarative rather than imperative form; this stylistic feature does not diminish their legal force. In addition, the association of adulterers with polytheists in the verse underscores the gravity of the act, as some traditions indicate that a person committing such a deed distances himself from faith at that moment. Thus, the verses combine legal instruction, moral guidance, and social reform, presenting a comprehensive framework aimed at preserving individual dignity, protecting family structure, and maintaining the ethical integrity of society.

In the verses under discussion, a general ruling regarding the punishment for adultery is presented. However, there are also certain exceptional rulings in this regard. For example, if the adultery of a married man or woman is established under the required legal conditions, the prescribed punishment is death. A muḥṣan (married man) is defined as one who has a lawful wife and the opportunity for marital relations is available to him. Likewise, a muḥṣanah (married woman) is one whose husband resides with her and access is available. Thus, when a person has lawful and legitimate means for satisfying sexual needs and nevertheless commits adultery, the punishment is intensified. The detailed conditions, evidentiary standards, and procedural requirements for implementing such rulings are elaborated in works of Islamic jurisprudence. In addition, the legal consequences may differ in various circumstances. For example, in certain cases involving severe violations, such as forced acts or specific prohibited relationships, the ruling is also more severe. In other situations, lesser punishments—such as flogging, exile, or other legal measures—may be prescribed depending on the circumstances. Overall, these laws are framed within a structured legal system that considers multiple factors, and their detailed application is discussed extensively in the classical legal literature.

There is no doubt that indecency and immorality are causes of disgrace and humiliation for every individual; however, when such reprehensible acts are committed by women, they are considered even more degrading, since they are generally associated more strongly with modesty, restraint, and chastity. Thus, when a woman violates these values, it appears as a more serious form of transgression and defiance. Moreover, although the consequences of such an act are grave for both men and women, they tend to be more socially humiliating and admonitory in the case of women. It has also been suggested that, in many instances, the initial impulse behind such conduct may originate from them more frequently, and that they may play a central role in its occurrence; collectively, such considerations are offered as reasons why the verse mentions women before men. Nevertheless, this characterization does not apply to believing and chaste men and women, whose condition is entirely distinct from such cases.

The verse under discussion, which is in the form of a command, makes the presence of some believers mandatory at the time of the implementation of the Hudood (punishments). However, it is clear without being stated that the Qur'an has not made it a condition for the punishment to be carried out in front of the general public. Rather, depending on the circumstances and wisdom, the presence of three or more individuals is sufficient. The important point is that the judge should decide how many people’s presence is necessary while implementing the Hudood. (Explanatory note: According to some jurists, the presence of some believers at the time of administering the Hudood is not obligatory but recommended, although the apparent meaning is obligation, not recommendation). The philosophy behind this ruling is also clear because: Firstly: As we have stated, this punishment serves as a lesson for all and a means of purification for society. Secondly: The humiliation of the criminal will prevent him from repeating the crime. Thirdly: When the Hudood is carried out in front of some individuals, no accusations of conspiracy, bribery, favoritism, or oppression can be made against the judge or those administering the punishment. Fourthly: The presence of some people at the time of implementing the Hudood will prevent excessiveness and injustice. Fifthly: It is possible that after the Hudood is carried out, the criminal may spread false propaganda and make baseless accusations against the judge and those enforcing the punishment. If some people are present at that time, they can clarify the truth and stop his destructive activities. Besides these, there are other benefits as well.

From Surah al‑Nisāʾ (4:15–16) it is understood that, prior to the revelation of the ruling in Surah al‑Nūr concerning adulterous men and women, the punishment prescribed for married women who committed this sin was a form of confinement for life. As it states: “Confine them to the houses until death takes them” (فَأَمْسِكُوهُنَّ فِي الْبُيُوتِ حَتَّىٰ يَتَوَفَّاهُنَّ الْمَوْتُ). In the case of unmarried individuals, however, the punishment consisted of inflicting harm or disciplinary suffering, as indicated by: “Then punish them” (فَآذُوهُمَا), though the extent of such discipline was not specified. In contrast, the verse under discussion establishes a definite punishment of one hundred lashes. Thus, according to this understanding, the ruling in Surah al‑Nūr supersedes the earlier one: the penalty of confinement for married offenders is replaced by the prescribed capital punishment (in the case of established conditions in jurisprudence), while the earlier unspecified form of harm for unmarried offenders is replaced with the fixed punishment of one hundred lashes.

There is no doubt that the demand of humanity is to make every possible effort to ensure that no innocent person is punished, and divine laws should, as far as permissible, be exercised with pardon and forgiveness. However, after proof of the crime, punishment must be implemented decisively, and baseless feelings and emotions, which are harmful to social order, must be avoided. In the verse under discussion, the words "فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ" (in the religion of Allah) are specifically mentioned for this purpose, meaning that when the command is from God, it is not possible that mercy should exceed that of the Most Merciful, the Compassionate. The verse forbids feeling pity, because this is the condition of most people, and at such times the dominance of emotions of compassion is more likely. However, it cannot be denied that there are some people who advocate excessive severity. As we have previously indicated, these people also deviate from the path of divine command, and they too must control their emotions and must not attempt to go beyond God, for there is severe punishment for that as well.

As already noted, the apparent meaning of the verses under discussion is that marriage between an adulterous man or woman and a chaste person is prohibited. However, Islamic traditions clarify that this ruling applies specifically to individuals who are openly known for such behavior and have not repented. Accordingly, if a person is not publicly known for this act, or if they have abandoned their previous conduct and sincerely resolved to live a pure and chaste life—such that clear signs of their repentance are evident—then there is no legal impediment to marriage with them. In such cases, they no longer fall under the category of “zānī” or “zāniyah,” as that condition has effectively ceased. The prohibition, therefore, applies only to the earlier condition, a conclusion also supported by the reported occasion of revelation. In a reliable narration, the well‑known jurist Zurārah asked Imām al‑Ṣādiq (peace be upon him) about the verse: الزَّانِی لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً…. The Imām replied that it refers to women and men who are publicly known for adultery, whose reputation for such conduct is established. He further explained that even in later times the same principle applies: a person upon whom the legal penalty for adultery has been carried out, or whose immorality has become publicly known, is not suitable for marriage until their repentance becomes manifest and verifiable. (Reported in Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, p. 335.) This same meaning is also conveyed in other narrations.

There is little doubt that the harmful and destructive consequences of this reprehensible act—both for the individual and for society—are widely recognized; nevertheless, a brief clarification is appropriate. The existence and spread of such conduct undoubtedly disrupt the structure of the family. It renders the relationship between father and child uncertain and obscured. Experience has shown that children who are deprived of clear lineage and identity are more likely to drift toward serious social and criminal behavior, thereby contributing to an increase in crime within society. This shameful act also gives rise to various conflicts and disputes among those driven by unchecked desires. Additionally, it leads to numerous psychological disorders and complex social and physical problems, the damaging consequences of which are evident. Crimes such as infanticide, abortion, and other related offenses are among the grave outcomes associated with this behavior. For a more detailed discussion of this subject, reference may be made to the interpretation of Sūrat Banī Isrāʾīl (17:32) in volume 6 of Tafsīr Namūnah.

See ayat 5 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, severe punishment was prescribed for the adulterous man and woman. It is possible that self‑interested and unscrupulous individuals might seek to misuse such rulings by making false accusations against chaste people. For this reason, alongside the strict punishment for adulterers, the Qur’an also establishes a severe penalty for those who exploit these rulings by levying false accusations, so that the dignity and honor of pure individuals and families may be preserved and no one would dare to violate another’s reputation. Thus it is stated: Those who accuse chaste women and then fail to bring four (just) witnesses—flog them with eighty lashes (وَالَّذِينَ يَرْمُونَ الْمُحْصَنَاتِ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَأْتُوا بِأَرْبَعَةِ شُهَدَاءَ فَاجْلِدُوهُمْ ثَمَانِينَ جَلْدَةً). After mentioning this severe punishment, the Qur’an adds two further rulings: first, never accept their testimony (وَلَا تَقْبَلُوا لَهُمْ شَهَادَةً أَبَدًا), and second, they are indeed the defiantly disobedient (وَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ). In this way, such individuals are not only subjected to a harsh physical penalty, but their credibility as witnesses is also entirely invalidated, and they are branded with the mark of moral deviation, thereby being socially disgraced. This ensures that they cannot undermine the dignity of upright individuals. The protection of personal honor is not limited to this ruling alone; it is strongly reinforced throughout various Islamic teachings, which demonstrate the high value placed on the dignity of believing men and women. For example, a narration from Imām al‑Ṣādiq (peace be upon him) states: “When a believer falsely accuses another believer of something he has not done, faith melts away from his heart as salt dissolves in water.” (al‑Kāfī, vol. 2, p. 269). At the same time, Islam does not close the door of repentance. Rather, it consistently encourages sinners to purify themselves and make amends. Accordingly, the following verse states: Except those who repent thereafter and reform, for indeed Allah is Forgiving, Merciful (إِلَّا الَّذِينَ تَابُوا مِن بَعْدِ ذَٰلِكَ وَأَصْلَحُوا فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ). Scholars have differed regarding whether this exception applies only to the declaration “they are the defiantly disobedient” or also extends to the ruling that their testimony is never accepted. If it applies to both, then repentance removes both the label of fisq (moral corruption) and restores the validity of their testimony. If it applies only to the latter statement, then although they would no longer be considered sinful, their testimony would remain rejected for life. However, according to established principles of jurisprudence, while an exception following multiple clauses normally refers to the last clause, contextual evidence may extend it to earlier clauses as well. In this case, such contextual support exists, since the rejection of testimony is based on the individual’s moral corruption. Once repentance removes that condition and the person regains integrity, there is no reason for his testimony to remain invalid. Numerous narrations from the Ahl al‑Bayt (peace be upon them) affirm this interpretation. For instance, Imām al‑Ṣādiq (peace be upon him) explicitly stated that once a person repents and no longer exhibits wrongdoing but only good conduct, his testimony becomes acceptable. This indicates that sincere repentance accompanied by moral reform restores both personal standing and legal credibility.

The word “ramy” originally means to throw an arrow, a stone, or any similar object. Naturally, such an act often causes harm. Subsequently, the term came to be used metaphorically for making accusations, uttering abusive speech, and attributing false allegations, because such expressions also wound others like arrows. Perhaps for this reason, in the verses under discussion—as well as in the subsequent verses—the word is used in an absolute sense. For example, it does not say: “والذین یرمون المحصنات بالزنا” (those who accuse chaste women of adultery), because the word “يرمون”, particularly in light of contextual indications, already implies such an accusation. Moreover, in a context where the honor of chaste women is being discussed, the omission of explicit wording is itself a form of respect and propriety.

We know that in Islam, generally two just witnesses are sufficient to establish rights and crimes; even to prove the crime of murder, two just witnesses suffice. However, to prove the charge of zina (adultery), it has been specifically prescribed that four witnesses are necessary. It may be that at this point, more witnesses are required because many people indiscriminately level such accusations and damage the honor and dignity of others through suspicion or even without it. Islam discourages this behavior. This strictness in Islam is for the protection of people's honor and chastity, whereas in other matters, even regarding someone's murderer, people do not make such baseless allegations. Apart from this, the actual perpetrator of murder is one person, while in the case of zina, the guilt pertains to two individuals; thus, if two witnesses are required for each individual, a total of four witnesses become necessary. This issue is also mentioned in a hadith narrated from Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him). The famous Sunni jurist Abu Hanifa said: I asked Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him), “Is zina a graver sin or murder?” The Imam (peace be upon him) replied: “Murder.” I said: “If that is so, then why are two witnesses sufficient for murder but four witnesses necessary to prove zina?” The Imam (peace be upon him) said: “What is your opinion on this matter?” Abu Hanifa had no clear answer. The Imam (peace be upon him) said: “This is because zina involves two hudud (punishments), one applied to the man and the other to the woman, hence four witnesses are required, whereas murder has only one hudud that applies to the killer.” (Reference: Nur al-Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 574). However, there are exceptional cases in which only one hudud is applied regarding zina (for example, zina by compulsion, etc.). But this matter is exceptional. The usual circumstance is that zina occurs with the consent of both parties, and we know that generally the philosophy of legal rulings is based on the majority.

As we have repeatedly stated, repentance (tawbah) is not limited to seeking forgiveness for past sins or merely feeling remorse. Nor is it sufficient simply to resolve firmly not to commit the sin again. Rather, true repentance includes all of these elements and, in addition, requires that the sinner make amends for the wrongdoing committed. If someone has unjustly tarnished the honor and dignity of a chaste person through false accusation, then for his repentance to be accepted, he must publicly retract his statement before all those who heard it from him. In other words, he is required to restore the person’s reputation and dignity. The conjunction of the words “تابوا” (they repented) and “وأصلحوا” (and they reformed) in the verse indicates precisely this point: that such individuals must not only repent of their sin but also rectify the harm they have caused. It is therefore not correct for a person to publicly accuse someone falsely—whether verbally or through media and communication platforms—and then privately seek forgiveness from God without addressing the damage done. Such a form of repentance is not acceptable in the sight of God. For this reason, a number of narrations report that when the Imams (peace be upon them) were asked whether the testimony of one who had falsely accused another becomes acceptable again after the prescribed punishment is carried out and repentance is made, they answered in the affirmative. When asked how such a person should repent, it was said that he should come before the authority (or the judge) and declare: “I falsely accused such‑and‑such a person, and I now repent of what I said.” (Reported in Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, Book of Testimonies, Chapter 36, Hadith 4).

Within Islamic jurisprudence, there is a specific chapter entitled “Ḥadd al‑Qadhf” (the legal punishment for false accusation). The term qadhf (on the pattern of ḥadhf) originally means, in its lexical sense, to throw or cast something to a distant place. However, in this context, ramy (casting) is used metaphorically to mean accusing someone of violating their honor and dignity—namely, making a false allegation of immorality—or, more broadly, using obscene or abusive language. If qadhf is expressed explicitly—regardless of the language or form in which it is conveyed—the prescribed punishment is eighty lashes. If, however, it is not stated explicitly, then the matter falls under taʿzīr, which refers to discretionary punishment. In such cases, the judge determines an appropriate penalty based on the characteristics of the offender, the nature of the crime, and other relevant circumstances. If a person accuses multiple individuals separately and attributes such a violation to each one individually, the punishment for qadhf is applied for each accusation. However, if the accusation is made collectively against them as a group, and they jointly demand justice, then a single punishment is applied; but if each of them brings a separate claim, then the punishment is applied individually in each case. This matter is considered so serious that if a person is accused and subsequently passes away, his heirs retain the right to pursue the claim and demand the application of the punishment. However, since this ruling pertains to the right of an individual, the punishment may be waived if the aggrieved party grants forgiveness. Nevertheless, if such offenses become widespread and threaten the dignity and moral fabric of society, then the situation takes on a different dimension. If two individuals accuse each other of immoral conduct, the fixed punishment (ḥadd) is not applied to either of them; however, both may be subject to discretionary punishment (taʿzīr) at the discretion of the judge. Consequently, it is not permissible for a Muslim to respond to insult with insult; rather, justice must be sought through proper legal channels. In essence, the primary objectives of this Islamic ruling are, first, the protection of human dignity and honor, and second, the prevention of numerous social and moral harms that emerge from such accusations. If corrupt individuals were allowed to insult and falsely accuse others without consequence, people’s honor and reputation would constantly be at risk. Such behavior could destroy trust within families—eroding the relationship between spouses and even casting doubt upon lineage itself. In short, it would endanger the institution of the family and create a society steeped in suspicion and distrust. The spread of false allegations and malicious propaganda would become widespread, tarnishing pure minds and upright moral awareness. This is precisely the point at which firm and decisive measures become necessary—the kind of decisive action that Islam prescribes for those who engage in slander and defamation. Such individuals must face strict consequences, so that they do not toy with the honor and dignity of others.

See ayat 10 for tafseer.

See ayat 10 for tafseer.

See ayat 10 for tafseer.

See ayat 10 for tafseer.

Regarding the occasion of revelation of these verses, it is narrated from Ibn Abbas that: (The chief of the Ansar) Saad bin Ubadah was in the presence of the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny. Some other companions were also sitting there when they said: O Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny! The punishment for accusing someone of immoral conduct without proof is eighty lashes, but if I enter my house and with my own eyes see a wicked person engaged in immorality with my wife, then if I leave him in that very act and go to find four witnesses, by the time I return, he will have completed his act. And if I kill him, then without witnesses no one will accept my statement, and I will be subjected to Qisas (retaliation) as a murderer, while if I report what I saw, eighty lashes will be inflicted on my back. The Holy Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny perceived an objection implied in this conversation regarding the Divine command. Turning towards the Ansar, he said in a reproachful tone: Have you heard what your chief said? They replied apologetically: O Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny! Do not rebuke him. He is a zealous man, and what he is saying stems from the intensity of his feelings of honor. Saad bin Ubadah said: O Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny! May my parents be sacrificed for you. By Allah, I know this is the command of Allah and is the truth, but despite that, I am surprised by it (and in my mind, I could not resolve this question). The Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny said: This is the command of Allah. He also said: "صدق الله و رسولہ" (Allah and His Messenger have spoken the truth). After a little while, Saad’s cousin Hilal bin Umayyah entered through the door. He had seen a wicked person with his wife at night. He came to complain to the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny. He clearly stated: I have seen this with my own eyes and heard their voices with my own ears. The Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny became so upset that the signs of anger appeared on his blessed face. Hilal said: I see signs of displeasure on your face, but by Allah, I am telling the truth and have spoken nothing false. I hope that Allah will Himself resolve this difficulty. In any case, the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny intended to impose the hadd punishment of qadhf (false accusation) on Hilal because he had no witnesses to support his claim. At this moment, the Ansar were saying among themselves, “See! The statement of Saad bin Ubadah has come true. Will the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny really lash Hilal and reject his testimony?” At this time, revelation was sent down to the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny, and the signs of it appeared on his face. All were silent, waiting to see what new message had come from Allah. At that moment, the above-mentioned verse(s) were revealed. (Reference: Tafseer Majma' al-Bayan fi Zilal, Nur al-Thaqalayn, and Al-Mizan (with some variations)). In these verses, Allah Almighty provided the Muslims with a precise solution for this matter, the details of which you will read below.

As indicated by the occasion of revelation, the verses under discussion present an exceptional ruling as a commentary on the law of qadhf (false accusation). If a husband accuses his wife of committing an act contrary to chastity and claims that he has seen her engaged in such a deed with another man, he is not subject to the eighty lashes prescribed for qadhf. However, his claim will not be accepted without evidence, since the possibility of both truth and falsehood exists in such a matter. The Qur’an offers a solution to this issue that is both optimal and just. It requires that the husband, in order to substantiate his claim, testify four times in the name of God that he is truthful. Thus it states: And those who accuse their wives and have no witnesses except themselves, then the testimony of one of them shall be four testimonies by Allah that he is indeed among the truthful (وَالَّذِينَ يَرْمُونَ أَزْوَاجَهُمْ وَلَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُمْ شُهَدَاءُ إِلَّا أَنفُسُهُمْ فَشَهَادَةُ أَحَدِهِمْ أَرْبَعُ شَهَادَاتٍ بِاللَّهِ إِنَّهُ لَمِنَ الصَّادِقِينَ). Then, on the fifth occasion, he adds further emphasis by declaring that if he is lying, the curse of God be upon him (وَالْخَامِسَةُ أَنَّ لَعْنَةَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ إِن كَانَ مِنَ الْكَاذِبِينَ). In practical terms, he says: “I call God as witness that I am among the truthful in what I have accused her of,” repeated four times, and on the fifth: “The curse of God be upon me if I am among the liars.” At this point, two paths are open to the woman. First, she may accept the accusation, in which case the legal consequence of adultery would be established against her. Second, in order to avert punishment, she may deny the accusation by testifying four times in the name of God that the man is lying (وَيَدْرَأُ عَنْهَا الْعَذَابَ أَن تَشْهَدَ أَرْبَعَ شَهَادَاتٍ بِاللَّهِ إِنَّهُ لَمِنَ الْكَاذِبِينَ). Then, on the fifth occasion, she declares that the wrath of God be upon her if he is truthful (وَالْخَامِسَةَ أَنَّ غَضَبَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهَا إِن كَانَ مِنَ الصَّادِقِينَ). Thus, she states four times: “I call God as witness that he is indeed among the liars in what he has accused me of,” and concludes with: “The wrath of God be upon me if he is truthful.” Because of the use of the term laʿnah (curse) in this context, the entire process is termed liʿān. This procedure leads to four primary consequences: 1. The couple is immediately separated without the need for a formal formula of divorce. 2. They become permanently unlawful for one another; remarriage between them is no longer possible. 3. The prescribed penalties are lifted: the punishment of qadhf is removed from the husband, and the punishment for adultery is removed from the wife—provided each fulfills the required testimonies; otherwise, the respective punishments apply. 4. Any child resulting from the situation is not attributed to the husband but remains affiliated with the mother. Although these details are not fully elaborated within the verses themselves, the concluding statement emphasizes: Had it not been for the grace of Allah upon you and His mercy, and that Allah is Oft‑Returning (to forgiveness), All‑Wise (وَلَوْلَا فَضْلُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَتُهُ وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ تَوَّابٌ حَكِيمٌ). This indicates that the institution of liʿān is itself a manifestation of divine grace, providing a fair resolution to a deeply complex and sensitive issue. On one hand, it does not compel the husband to remain silent in the face of what he believes to be a serious violation; on the other, it does not impose severe punishment on the wife solely on the basis of an accusation, but grants her the right to defend herself. At the same time, it does not require the husband to seek four witnesses in circumstances where doing so would expose a painful and deeply personal matter. Finally, it resolves the marital relationship by separating the two, recognizing that trust has been irreparably damaged, and clarifies the status of any child involved. Thus, this ruling reflects divine wisdom and mercy in establishing a balanced, nuanced, and just solution. Even within this exceptional case, the principle of four witnesses is not entirely abandoned, for the repeated testimonies of both parties symbolically take the place of witnesses, thereby preserving the integrity of the legal framework.

A question that arises in this context is: what special distinction do husband and wife possess such that, in cases of accusation, this exceptional ruling has been prescribed for them? One answer to this question may be derived from the background of the verse itself: if a man were to witness his wife in a compromising situation with another man, it would be extremely difficult for him to remain silent. His sense of honor would not allow him to ignore such a violation within the sphere of his personal dignity. Yet, if he were to bring the matter before a judge, he would immediately be liable to the punishment for slander (ḥadd al‑qadhf), since the judge has no way of knowing whether he is truthful or not. Furthermore, attempting to produce four witnesses would itself involve a form of public exposure and shame, and by the time witnesses were gathered, the situation might well have passed beyond verification. There is also another dimension to this issue: in general, unrelated individuals may hastily accuse one another, whereas spouses rarely levy such serious accusations against each other. For this reason, in cases involving others, the requirement of four witnesses is strictly applied, and failure to produce them entails legal consequences. In the case of husband and wife, however, a specific and exceptional legal provision is established to address their unique situation.

From the explanation given in the interpretation of the verses, it follows that when a man accuses his wife of adultery, he must testify four times, calling God as a witness that he is truthful. In reality, each of these testimonies takes the place of one witness. Then, for further emphasis, on the fifth occasion he declares that if he is lying, the curse of God be upon him. Considering that the implementation of such rulings generally takes place within a religious and Islamic environment, when an individual realizes that he must appear before the Islamic authority and invoke God as a witness in such a decisive manner—while also calling down a curse upon himself—this, in most cases, deters him from making false accusations. Thus, such a procedure becomes a strong barrier against baseless allegations. As for the woman, if she wishes to defend herself, she likewise swears four times, calling upon God as witness. This ensures equality between the man and the woman. However, since the accusation has been made against her, in the fifth stage she defends herself with even stronger wording, invoking the anger (ghaḍab) of God upon herself if she is lying. It is known that laʿnah (curse) signifies being distanced from the mercy of God, whereas ghaḍab (divine wrath) is even more severe, because it entails punishment and chastisement in addition to distance from mercy. For this reason, as explained elsewhere, those who incur divine wrath are considered worse than those who are merely astray, even though both are deprived of divine mercy.

The final verse under discussion is expressed in the form of a conditional sentence whose consequence is not explicitly stated. It merely says: “Had it not been for the grace and mercy of Allah, and that He is Oft‑Returning (in forgiveness) and All‑Wise …”—but it does not explicitly state what would have followed. By considering the contextual indications, the implied result of this condition becomes clear. At times, omission and silence give greater emphasis to a statement and allow multiple possible implications to arise in the mind, each adding a distinct layer of meaning to the discourse. For example, here the implied consequence may be understood in several ways: It may mean that if Allah’s grace and mercy had not been present, He would have exposed your deeds, unveiled your secrets, and you would have been disgraced and humiliated. Or it may mean that without His grace and mercy, He would have punished you immediately and destroyed you. Or it may signify that, without divine grace and mercy, He would not have established such balanced and well‑ordered laws for human life. In reality, this deliberate omission of the consequence directs the listener’s mind toward all of these possibilities, enhancing the depth and impact of the meaning. It is worth noting that in Tafsīr al‑Mīzān, a comprehensive reconstruction of the implied clause has been presented, encompassing many of these interpretations. According to that formulation, the complete meaning would be as follows: Had it not been for the blessings that Allah has bestowed upon you—such as the gift of religion, the acceptance of repentance for those who err, and the legislation of laws to organize your lives—then misery would have inevitably overtaken you, sin and error would have led to your destruction, and your entire system of life would have collapsed due to ignorance. Thus, the verse highlights, through omission, the vastness and indispensability of divine grace in preserving both individual and collective human existence.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

Two occasions of revelation (Shan-e-Nuzul) have been transmitted regarding the above-mentioned verses. The first occasion of revelation, which is more famous, has been narrated in the books of tafseer of Ahl al-Sunnah. In Shia tafseers, it has been transmitted indirectly. This occasion of revelation is reported from the wife of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny, Aisha. She says: When the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny used to prepare to go on a journey, he would draw lots among his wives, and the one whose name was drawn he would take along with him. On the occasion of a battle (explanatory note: the Battle of Banu al-Mustaliq, fifth Hijri), my name was drawn. I accompanied the Messenger PBUH & His Pure Progeny on the journey. At that time, the verse of hijab had already been revealed. Therefore, I was seated in a covered howdah. The battle ended, and we began our return. When we neared Medina, night fell. I went some distance away from the army camp to relieve myself. When I returned, I noticed that my necklace with Yemeni beads was broken and had fallen somewhere. I went out to search for it and got delayed. Upon returning, I found that the army had departed. They had also taken my howdah, placing it on a camel and going. They assumed I was inside it because, in those days, due to scarcity of food, women were thin, and besides, I was young. Anyway, I was left there all alone. I thought that once we reached home and I was not found, they would search for me. I spent that night in that wilderness. By coincidence, a member of the Islamic army named Safwan was also left behind from the camp. He was spending the same night in the wilderness. At dawn, when he saw me from a distance, he approached and recognized me. He said, "Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un." He did not say a single word to me. He guided his camel, and I mounted it. He held the bridle of the she-camel and continued until we reached the army camp. When this scene was witnessed, some people began to spread propaganda against me and brought upon themselves (divine punishment) and destruction. Abdullah bin Ubayy Sullul took a leading part in this slander. We reached Medina, and the propaganda spread in the city, although there was no truth in it. During this time, I fell ill. The Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny came to see me, but he did not show me the kindness he used to. I did not know what the matter was. When I recovered, I went outside, and gradually, from the women close to me, I came to know about the hypocrites’ propaganda. I became very ill. When the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny came to see me, I asked for permission to go to my father’s house. When I reached my father’s house, I asked my mother what people were saying. She said: Do not grieve. Those women who have distinction and others envy them, many talks continue about them. At this occasion, the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny consulted Ali ibn Abi Talib and Usama ibn Zaid about what to do regarding these matters. Usama (may Allah be pleased with him) said: O Messenger of Allah! She is your wife. We have seen nothing but good from her (so do not heed people’s talk). But Ali said: Allah has not imposed any hardship upon you. You have other wives besides her. You should investigate this matter with her maidservant. The Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny called my maidservant and asked her: Have you seen anything in Aisha’s behavior that may cause suspicion? The maidservant replied: By the One Who sent you with the truth, I have seen nothing wrong in her. At that time, the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny decided to make these matters public. He went to the pulpit and addressing the Muslims said: O Muslims! If anyone causes me distress about my wife, concerning whom I saw nothing but purity, then if I punish him, do not hold me accountable. And if someone falsely accuses a person from whom I have seen no evil, then what should I do? Saad ibn Muadh al-Ansari stood up and said: You are right. If that person belongs to the tribe of Aus, I will cut off his neck (Saad ibn Muadh was the leader of the Aus tribe). And if he is from the tribe of Khazraj, our brothers, then command us so that we may act accordingly. Saad ibn Ubadah was the leader of the Khazraj tribe. He was a righteous person, but at this moment, strong prejudice overcame him (Abdullah ibn Ubayy Sullul, who spread this false propaganda, belonged to the Khazraj tribe). Saad ibn Ubadah turned toward Saad ibn Muadh and said: You lie. If he is from our tribe, then you do not possess the power to kill such a person. Asid ibn Khudair was the cousin of Saad ibn Muadh. He turned toward Saad ibn Ubadah and said: You are wrong. By Allah, we will kill such a person. You are a hypocrite and you support hypocrites. Everything was set for a conflict between the Aus and Khazraj tribes, and for a war to break out among them while the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny remained seated on the pulpit. Finally, the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny silenced them. The matter remained as it was. I was very distressed. One month passed without the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny sitting by me. I knew my innocence...And finally, Allah made this matter clear. At last, one day the Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) came to me. He was very happy. As soon as he arrived, he said: "Give you glad tidings that Allah has acquitted you of this allegation." At this moment, the entire passage of إِنَّ الَّذِينَ جَائُوا بِالْإِفْك... was revealed. (And after the revelation of these verses, the punishment of Qadhf was implemented on all those individuals who had spread this falsehood). (Explanatory note: What has been mentioned above is the same narration, with some minor differences, found in most books of Tafseer. We have mentioned it here with some brevity). Another occasion of revelation which is mentioned in some books alongside the first occasion is as follows: The wife of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny), Aisha, accused his wife Maria al-Qibtiyya of a false charge because Maria had a son by the Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny), named Ibrahim. When he passed away, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) was deeply grieved. Aisha said: "Why are you so distressed? He was not truly your son; he was the son of Jareeh al-Qutbi." When the Prophet (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) heard this, he instructed Imam Ali (عليه السلام) to deal with Jareeh for committing such a crime. When Ali (عليه السلام) went out in search of Jareeh, sword drawn, Jareeh noticed the look of anger on his face and fled, climbing a date palm tree. When he sensed that Ali (عليه السلام) might reach him, he jumped down from the tree. During this, his clothing was lifted, and it was discovered that his male organ was missing entirely. Ali (عليه السلام) returned to the presence of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) and asked: "Shall I carry out your command fully, or investigate further?" The Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) said: "Investigate." Then Ali (عليه السلام) reported this incident to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny). Thereupon, the Prophet of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) expressed thanks to Allah and said: "Thanks be to Allah Who has kept impurity and filth away from our garments." At this moment, the above-mentioned verses were revealed, highlighting the importance of this matter. (With reference to: Tafseer Al-Mizan, Noor Al-Thaqalayn, and As-Safi — summarized).

As noted earlier, the first reported occasion of revelation (shaʾn al‑nuzūl) is cited in many sources; however, it contains a number of ambiguities. 1. Despite variations in wording, the narration appears to suggest that the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny was, to some extent, affected by the propaganda. It implies that he consulted his companions, altered his behavior toward ʿĀʾishah, and even distanced himself for a time—details which seem inconsistent with the doctrine of prophetic impeccability (ʿiṣmah). Not only does this appear incompatible with the Prophet’s infallibility, but even an ordinary steadfast believer should not be swayed by baseless rumors. At the very least, even if a person is momentarily influenced mentally, his conduct should not be altered on such grounds. It is even less conceivable in the case of a divinely guided Messenger whose status is firmly established. Moreover, the subsequent verses strongly reproach the believers who accepted such propaganda without demanding four witnesses. It seems implausible that such severe admonition would also be directed toward the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny. This constitutes a serious objection that casts doubt upon the reliability of this particular narrative. 2. The apparent wording of the verses indicates that the ruling concerning false accusation (qadhf) had already been revealed prior to the incident of al‑ifk. If so, the question arises: why was the prescribed legal penalty not immediately applied to individuals such as ʿAbd Allāh ibn Ubayy ibn Salūl and others involved in the accusation? Although some argue that the verses regarding qadhf and ifk were revealed together, the earlier objection remains unresolved. As for the second reported occasion of revelation, it is even more difficult to reconcile. First, according to that account, the accusation originated from a single woman, whereas the verses clearly state that it was the action of a group who collectively orchestrated and spread the slander. The repeated use of plural pronouns in the verses confirms this collective involvement, which does not align with that narrative. Second, if the accusation had indeed been made by a single individual and later disproven, why was the legal penalty for false accusation not applied to that individual? 3. It would be difficult to accept that the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny would issue a severe judgment, such as a capital directive, based on the testimony of a single person—especially in a context where rivalry and jealousy could exist. Such a case would ordinarily require careful verification to eliminate the possibility of error or misunderstanding. In any case, what is of primary importance is not the specific historical report but the overall message conveyed by the verses themselves. The verses clearly indicate that an innocent individual was accused of immorality by certain people, that the accusation spread within society, and that the person targeted held a position of notable dignity within that community. It is also evident that hypocritical elements—outwardly part of the Muslim community—sought to exploit the situation to harm the integrity of the Islamic society. In response, these verses were revealed with remarkable force and clarity, confronting the incident decisively and exposing the deceptive schemes of malicious individuals. They effectively neutralized the efforts of slanderers and hypocrites, providing a lasting lesson for the community. It must be emphasized that, regardless of the specific occasion of revelation, the meanings of these verses are not confined to any particular time or place. Their guidance applies universally to all societies and all generations. The Qur’an here demonstrates, with profound eloquence and precision, how such moral crises are to be addressed—clarifying truth from falsehood and establishing enduring ethical principles.

The first verse under discussion, without detailing the event itself, states: Indeed, those who brought forward this slander were a group from among you (إِنَّ الَّذِينَ جَاءُوا بِالْإِفْكِ عُصْبَةٌ مِنْكُمْ). One of the rhetorical devices of eloquence is to omit unnecessary statements and suffice with expressions that convey the essential meaning. The term ifk (on the pattern of fikr), according to Rāghib, refers to anything whose original and natural state has been altered. For example, winds that deviate from their normal direction are called muʾfakah. Later, this term came to be used for any speech that deviates from the truth—thus encompassing falsehood, slander, and fabrication. In Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, al‑Ṭabarsī explains that not every falsehood is termed ifk, but rather a grave falsehood that completely distorts reality. Thus, the word itself indicates the severity of the accusation. The word ʿuṣbah (on the pattern of ghuṣṣah) derives from ʿaṣb, referring to the sinews or tendons that bind parts of the body together. Consequently, it came to denote a group whose members are closely connected, united in thought and action. Its use here indicates that those responsible for the slander were tightly organized and had woven a coordinated scheme. Some have suggested that the term is typically applied to a group numbering between ten and forty individuals. After this, the Qur’an consoles the believers who were deeply distressed by the accusation leveled against a chaste individual. It says: Do not suppose that this incident is harmful for you; rather, it is good for you (لَا تَحْسَبُوهُ شَرًّا لَّكُمْ بَلْ هُوَ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ). For this event exposed the hidden intentions of defeated enemies and blinded hypocrites, unveiling and disgracing those who harbored corruption beneath an outward appearance of piety. Such a trial brought hidden malice to the surface; had it not occurred, these individuals might have remained undetected and caused greater harm later. This event also taught the believers not to judge matters solely by their outward appearance, for events that seem unpleasant may contain deeper benefits. The use of the pronoun lakum (for you) includes all believers collectively, indicating that they share in each other’s joys and sorrows as members of one social body. The verse further states: For every individual among them is what he has earned of sin (لِكُلِّ امْرِئٍ مِّنْهُم مَّا اكْتَسَبَ مِنَ الْإِثْمِ). This indicates that each participant in the wrongdoing bears responsibility proportionate to his involvement, although those who initiated and orchestrated it bear the greatest burden. Accordingly, it is stated: And he who undertook the greater part of it—for him is a great punishment (وَالَّذِي تَوَلَّىٰ كِبْرَهُ مِنْهُمْ لَهُ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ). The discourse then addresses those believers who were misled by this incident, censuring them in strong terms: why, upon hearing this slander, did the believing men and women not think well of one another (لَوْلَا إِذْ سَمِعْتُمُوهُ ظَنَّ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتُ بِأَنْفُسِهِمْ خَيْرًا)? That is, why did they not exercise حسن الظن toward fellow believers—who are like themselves—and instead respond by spreading the claim? They should have declared: This is a manifest falsehood (هٰذَا إِفْكٌ مُّبِينٌ). Given their knowledge of the accusers’ past conduct, and the known integrity of those accused, as well as awareness of ongoing plots against the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny, their silence and passive acceptance of such propaganda was blameworthy. It is noteworthy that the verse does not say they should have thought well specifically of the accused individuals, but rather of themselves—indicating that believers are interconnected, like a single body. An accusation against one is, in a sense, an accusation against all; therefore, believers should defend one another just as they defend themselves. After this moral admonition, the legal dimension is introduced: Why did they not produce four witnesses? (لَوْلَا جَاءُوا عَلَيْهِ بِأَرْبَعَةِ شُهَدَاءَ). Since they failed to do so, they are, in the sight of Allah, liars (فَإِذْ لَمْ يَأْتُوا بِالشُّهَدَاءِ فَأُولٰئِكَ عِندَ اللَّهِ هُمُ الْكَاذِبُونَ). This indicates that the requirement of four witnesses and the ruling regarding false accusation had already been established prior to this event. The verse concludes: Had it not been for the grace of Allah upon you and His mercy, you would have been touched by a great punishment for what you engaged in (وَلَوْلَا فَضْلُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَتُهُ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ لَمَسَّكُمْ فِيمَا أَفَضْتُمْ فِيهِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ). The term afadتم conveys the idea that the slander had spread so widely that people became immersed in it. The following verse explains how they fell into this grave sin so easily: When you received it with your tongues and spoke from your mouths that of which you had no knowledge, and you considered it insignificant while in the sight of Allah it was عظیم (إِذْ تَلَقَّوْنَهُ بِأَلْسِنَتِكُمْ وَتَقُولُونَ بِأَفْوَاهِكُمْ مَا لَيْسَ لَكُمْ بِهِ عِلْمٌ وَتَحْسَبُونَهُ هَيِّنًا وَهُوَ عِندَ اللَّهِ عَظِيمٌ). Thus, three major errors are highlighted: first, accepting and relaying baseless allegations; second, spreading them without knowledge or verification; and third, trivializing a matter that affected not only individual honor but the dignity of the entire Islamic community. The repeated use of tongues and mouths emphasizes that they spoke without evidence, repeating mere hearsay. Finally, it is stated: Why did you not, when you heard it, say: It is not for us to speak of this; Glory be to You (O God)! This is a great slander (وَلَوْلَا إِذْ سَمِعْتُمُوهُ قُلْتُم مَّا يَكُونُ لَنَا أَن نَّتَكَلَّمَ بِهٰذَا سُبْحَانَكَ هٰذَا بُهْتَانٌ عَظِيمٌ). Not only should they have held a good opinion, but they should have refrained entirely from engaging in such discourse and instead repudiated it immediately. Their failure to do so allowed them—whether knowingly or unknowingly—to become instruments of destructive propaganda. Further discussion on the gravity of false accusation, its causes, and methods for preventing it will, God willing, follow in subsequent verses.

See ayat 20 for tafseer.

See ayat 20 for tafseer.

See ayat 20 for tafseer.

In the verses under discussion, reference is again made to the incident of al‑ifk. They draw attention to the grave and evil consequences of false propaganda and of making dishonorable accusations against upright individuals. The matter is so significant that the Qur’an repeatedly considers it necessary to address it from different angles, employing forceful and effective methods, and speaking with such firmness that a recurrence of such conduct within the Muslim community may be prevented. It is stated: Allah admonishes you never to repeat anything like this, if you are believers (يَعِظُكُمُ ٱللَّهُ أَن تَعُودُوا لِمِثۡلِهِۦٓ أَبَدًا إِن كُنتُم مُّؤۡمِنِينَ). This is in fact a mark of true faith: that a person refrains from committing major sins, and if such a sin is committed, that he resolves firmly never to repeat it. Thus this statement points to an essential component of repentance—namely, that regret over past misdeeds must be accompanied by a firm determination not to return to them. The verse continues for further emphasis: Allah makes the signs clear to you, and Allah is All‑Knowing, All‑Wise (وَيُبَيِّنُ ٱللَّهُ لَكُمُ ٱلۡأٓيَٰتِ وَٱللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ). That is, these are not trivial matters but fundamental realities that determine your fate. God, in His knowledge, is fully aware of all your conditions and needs, and in His wisdom, He legislates rulings in harmony with what is beneficial or harmful for you. The discourse then moves beyond a specific incident to present a universal principle. It states: Indeed, those who love that indecency should spread among the believers—for them is a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter (إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ يُحِبُّونَ أَن تَشِيعَ ٱلۡفَٰحِشَةُ فِی ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا لَهُمۡ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ فِی ٱلدُّنۡيَا وَٱلۡءَاخِرَةِ). It is noteworthy that the verse does not merely condemn those who actually spread indecency, but even those who love or desire its spread—indicating the seriousness of this moral failing. This warning is not confined to accusations against the family of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny; rather, it applies generally to all believers. The propagation of fāḥishah is not limited to slanderous accusations regarding chastity; it extends to every form of promoting wrongdoing, supporting it, or normalizing it. Although the Qur’an often uses the word fāḥishah in connection with sexual immorality, linguistically it refers to any act characterized by extreme indecency and reprehensibility. As for the punishment in this world, it may include legal penalties (ḥudūd and taʿzīrāt), social consequences, loss of credibility, and personal disgrace. The punishment in the Hereafter consists of deprivation from divine mercy, exposure to divine wrath, and the severe consequences of wrongdoing. The verse concludes: Allah knows, and you do not know (وَٱللَّهُ يَعۡلَمُ وَأَنتُمۡ لَا تَعۡلَمُونَ). God is fully aware of the destructive outcomes of spreading immorality, of the motives behind it, and of the identities of those who engage in it—even when others are unaware. He knows how to legislate the appropriate laws to prevent such corruption. Finally, in the concluding statement, it is again emphasized: Had it not been for the فضل and mercy of Allah upon you, and that Allah is Kind and Merciful, you would have been afflicted by a severe punishment for what you engaged in (وَلَوۡلَا فَضۡلُ ٱللَّهِ عَلَيۡكُمۡ وَرَحۡمَتُهُۥ وَأَنَّ ٱللَّهَ رَءُوفࣱ رَّحِيمٌ). This reiterates that it is only through divine mercy that people are protected from the full consequences of their misdeeds.

Human beings, by nature, are social creatures. Society, in a sense, functions for the individual much like a home; its sanctity and dignity resemble the sanctity and dignity of one’s own house. The purity of society contributes to an individual’s own spiritual and moral well‑being, just as the corruption of society affects the individual in a similar way. Based on this principle, Islam strongly opposes any action that leads to the moral pollution or corruption of society. This is why backbiting (ghībah) is so strongly condemned in Islam: it exposes concealed faults and thereby undermines the dignity of society. The command to conceal faults (ʿayb‑pūshī) also aims to prevent the spread of sin within the community. From the perspective of Islamic law, sins committed openly are considered more serious than those committed privately. In this regard, a narration from Imām ʿAlī ibn Mūsā al‑Riḍā (peace be upon him) states: “The one who publicizes a sin is disgraced, while the one who conceals it is deserving of forgiveness.” (reported in al‑Kāfī). Thus, the strong condemnation in the verses under discussion of spreading wrongdoing is fully justified. In principle, sin is like fire: if it ignites in one part of society, efforts must be made to extinguish it—or at the very least to prevent it from spreading. Otherwise, it may engulf everything, eventually becoming uncontrollable. If wrongdoing is regarded as serious in the eyes of the people, this itself acts as a barrier against sin. However, publicizing and normalizing wrongdoing destroys this barrier, leading people to treat sin as trivial. In a well‑known tradition, the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny said: “Whoever spreads an indecency is like one who initiated it.” Another narration relates that a man approached Imām Mūsā al‑Kāẓim (peace be upon him) and said that people were reporting that a fellow believer had committed an act he found objectionable. When he asked the person directly, the latter denied it, although several trustworthy individuals had claimed otherwise. The Imām responded: “Reject what your ears and eyes tell you about your believing brother. Even if fifty people testify against him, and he himself denies it, accept his word and reject theirs. Do not spread anything that would disgrace him or destroy his dignity, lest you become among those of whom Allah says: ‘Indeed, those who love that indecency should spread among the believers will have a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter.’” It should also be noted that there are certain exceptional cases—such as testimony in a court of law or situations where forbidding wrongdoing (nahy ʿan al‑munkar) requires exposing a wrongdoing—where disclosure may be justified. Furthermore, the spreading of wrongdoing can occur in several forms: The propagation of false accusations and slander. The establishment of institutions or environments that promote immorality. Facilitating sinful behavior or encouraging others toward it. Public display of indecency and committing sins openly in a manner that normalizes them. All of these fall under the broader concept of ishāʿat al‑faḥshāʾ (the spread of indecency), a term that carries a wide and comprehensive meaning (reflect carefully).

One of the key methods employed by conspiratorial elements in psychological warfare is the fabrication of false narratives followed by their widespread dissemination. Those who lack the courage for direct confrontation resort to such tactics: they poison public thought, occupy people with misleading propaganda, and divert attention away from vital and sensitive issues. Indeed, propaganda and character assassination serve as destructive weapons for undermining the honor and dignity of righteous individuals and distancing the public from them. According to the well‑known occasion of revelation associated with the verses under discussion, hypocrites adopted precisely this cowardly method to tarnish the image and standing of the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny. Exploiting a particular circumstance, they initiated a false campaign against the chastity of one of his wives. As a result, the minds of the Muslim community remained disturbed for a considerable period, and even steadfast, sincere believers experienced great distress. Eventually, divine revelation intervened, exposing and reprimanding those hypocrites in a manner that became a lasting lesson for all. In societies marked by political pressure or limited openness, propaganda is often regarded as a highly effective tool. It is used to settle scores, damage reputations, erode trust, and distract people from fundamental concerns. However, it is not sufficient merely to recognize the motives behind such campaigns; more important is safeguarding the public from becoming instruments in their spread. Individuals must be protected from contributing, even unintentionally, to their own harm. They should be taught that whenever they hear such claims, they should suppress and not circulate them, for otherwise they may facilitate the success of adversaries and expose themselves to severe consequences—both in this world and in the Hereafter—as indicated in the verses under discussion.

In the verses under discussion, while the sin of spreading immorality is strongly condemned, there is also reproach for treating such sins as trivial. Indeed, considering a sin to be insignificant is itself a sin. A person who commits a wrongdoing and then feels deep remorse, recognizing the gravity of what has been done, is inclined toward repentance. But one who regards sin as unimportant and dismisses it—saying, “What does it matter if I committed this sin?”—has entered a highly dangerous path. By adopting such an attitude, he effectively continues in sin. For this reason, a well‑known saying of the Commander of the Faithful, ʿAlī (peace be upon him), states: “أشدّ الذنوب ما استهان به صاحبه”—“The gravest of sins is that which its perpetrator considers trivial” (Nahj al‑Balāghah, Short Sayings, no. 348).

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

Although these verses are not explicitly about the incident of al‑ifk, they may be regarded as a continuation of that discussion. Here, all believers are warned that satanic thoughts and actions can gradually influence a person in subtle and imperceptible ways. If they are not restrained at the outset, a person may only become aware of them when matters have already slipped beyond control. Therefore, when the initial whispers of sin and immorality arise, they must be resisted so that they do not expand and intensify. In the first verse under discussion, the address is directed to the believers: O you who believe! Do not follow in the footsteps of Satan; whoever follows the footsteps of Satan will surely be drawn toward indecency and wrongdoing, for he commands immorality and evil (يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّبِعُوا خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ وَمَنْ يَتَّبِعْ خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ فَإِنَّهُ يَأْمُرُ بِالْفَحْشَاءِ وَالْمُنْكَرِ). The term “Satan,” in its broader sense, includes every harmful, destructive, and corrupting influence. This renders the warning applicable to all aspects of life. A pure believer does not suddenly fall into wrongdoing; rather, he proceeds step by step: first, associating with corrupt individuals; second, participating in their gatherings; third, beginning to contemplate sin; fourth, engaging in doubtful acts; and finally, committing actual sins—until he is led to destruction. These successive stages are what the Qur’an calls “خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ”. The verse then points to the immense blessing of divine guidance and states: Had it not been for the grace of Allah and His mercy upon you, none of you would ever have become purified; but Allah purifies whom He wills, and Allah is All‑Hearing, All‑Knowing (وَلَوْلَا فَضْلُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَتُهُ مَا زَكَىٰ مِنكُم مِّنْ أَحَدٍ أَبَدًا وَلَٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ يُزَكِّي مَن يَشَاءُ وَاللَّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ). It is evident that divine grace and mercy are the primary means through which human beings are saved from evil, deviation, and sin. God has granted intellect, sent prophets, revealed scriptures, and provided guidance and divine assistance—each playing a vital role in purification (tazkiyah). As repeatedly emphasized, the phrase “مَن يَشَاءُ” does not imply arbitrariness; rather, divine guidance is granted in response to human effort. Those who seek the path of truth, strive for it, and struggle against themselves receive divine support, protection from satanic influences, and assistance toward their ultimate goal. In other words, divine grace operates in two ways: legislatively, through prophets, scriptures, commands, warnings, and glad tidings; and existentially, through spiritual assistance and unseen support bestowed upon those who are worthy. Here, the expression “مَن يَشَاءُ” most likely refers to the latter. The term tazkiyah itself conveys the dual meanings of purification and growth, since true growth is only possible after removing impurities and obstacles. A reported occasion of revelation further clarifies the connection of this verse with the preceding context: after the incident of al‑ifk, some companions vowed to withhold financial support from those who had been involved in spreading the accusation. The verse was revealed to prevent such excessive reactions and to encourage forgiveness and leniency. Thus it states: And let not those among you who possess فضل and abundance swear that they will not give to relatives, the needy, and the emigrants in the path of Allah (وَلَا يَأْتَلِ أُولُوا الْفَضْلِ مِنكُمْ وَالسَّعَةِ أَن يُؤْتُوا أُولِي الْقُرْبَىٰ وَالْمَسَاكِينَ وَالْمُهَاجِرِينَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ). Rather, they are encouraged to forgive and overlook (وَلْيَعْفُوا وَلْيَصْفَحُوا). The verse then appeals to their moral sensibility: Do you not wish that Allah should forgive you? (أَلَا تُحِبُّونَ أَن يَغْفِرَ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ), emphasizing divine forgiveness (وَاللَّهُ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ). These instructions demonstrate a balance between justice and mercy: while severe condemnation is directed toward those who committed false accusations, believers are simultaneously urged not to exceed proper limits in their reactions. This reflects Islam’s equilibrium between the forces of deterrence and attraction—firmness against wrongdoing combined with compassion and forgiveness toward those who err. The discussion then returns to the issue of false accusation. It is emphatically declared: Indeed, those who accuse chaste, unsuspecting, believing women are cursed in this world and the Hereafter, and for them is a great punishment (إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَرْمُونَ الْمُحْصَنَاتِ الْغَافِلَاتِ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ لُعِنُوا فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ). Three attributes are mentioned—محصنات (chaste), غافلات (innocent, unaware), and مؤمنات (believing)—each highlighting the gravity of the injustice committed. On the Day of Judgment, the state of such slanderers will be exposed: their tongues, their hands, and their feet will testify against them concerning what they used to do (يَوْمَ تَشْهَدُ عَلَيْهِمْ أَلْسِنَتُهُمْ وَأَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُمْ بِمَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ). Even if they attempt denial, all their faculties will bear witness, exposing their deeds as though their entire lives had been recorded and replayed before them. Ultimately, Allah will fully recompense them in truth, and they will know that Allah is the Manifest Truth (يَوْمَئِذٍ يُوَفِّيهِمُ اللَّهُ دِينَهُمُ الْحَقَّ وَيَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْحَقُّ الْمُبِينُ). On that Day, even the most obstinate individuals will be compelled to acknowledge the reality of God’s truth.

This verse is, in fact, a continuation of the verses concerning false accusations and the preceding verses, serving as another emphasis on the same meanings. It describes a natural order established in the realm of creation, with which the Shariah is also in harmony. It is stated: "Impure and unclean women are for impure and unclean men just as impure and unclean men are for impure and unclean women (الْخَبِيثَاتُ لِلْخَبِيثِینَ وَالْخَبِيثُونَ لِلْخَبِيثَاتِ)." And in contrast to this, "Pure and chaste women are for pure and chaste men just as pure and chaste men are for pure and chaste women (وَالطَّیِّبَاتُ لِلطَّیِّبِینَ وَالطَّیِّبُونَ لِلطَّیِّبَاتِ)." At the end of the verse, more is said about the second group: They are free from the unjust accusations that are cast upon them (اُوْلٰئِکَ مُبَرَّئُونَ مِمَّا یَقُولُونَ). On this basis, Allah awaits them with forgiveness and likewise with honorable provision (لَھُمْ مَغْفِرَةٌ وَرِزْقٌ کَرِیمٌ).

Exegetes have presented different interpretations regarding the referents of “الخبيثات” and “الخبيثون”, as well as “الطيبات” and “الطيبين”. Among these are the following: 1. it is sometimes stated that these terms refer to impure speech—slander, false accusation, and lies—which are associated with corrupt and base individuals, while pure speech corresponds to pure and God‑fearing people. 2. some maintain that “الخبيثات” signifies evil deeds (i.e., sayyiʾāt), meaning all kinds of reprehensible and undesirable actions performed by impure men, whereas good deeds are attributed to pure individuals. 3. it has been suggested that “الخبيثات” and “الخبيثون” refer to immoral women and men, while “الطيبات” and “الطيبين” refer to chaste women and men. Apparently, this latter interpretation is most consistent with the outward sense of the verse, as several contextual indications support it. a) these verses appear after the verses of al‑ifk, and similarly, the preceding verse states: الزَّانِي لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً وَالزَّانِيَةُ لَا يَنكِحُهَا إِلَّا زَانٍ أَوْ مُشْرِكٌ وَحُرِّمَ ذَٰلِكَ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ, and this aligns with the third interpretation. b) the phrase in this verse, أُولَٰئِكَ مُبَرَّءُونَ مِمَّا يَقُولُونَ, indicating that chaste men and women are free from the accusations directed against them, also supports this interpretation. c) as a general principle, the correspondence of grammatical forms suggests that “الخبيثات” (a feminine plural form) refers specifically to impure women, since it is paired with “الخبيثون”, which is a masculine plural form. d) aside from these indications, a narration from Imām al‑Bāqir (peace be upon him) and Imām al‑Ṣādiq (peace be upon him) states that this verse is similar to “الزَّانِي لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً…”, indicating that some individuals intended to marry immoral women, and God discouraged and disapproved of this action. e) narrations within the literature of marriage also show that when companions of the Imams asked about marrying “الخبيثات”, they were advised against doing so. This further indicates that the term refers to immoral women rather than to impure speech or actions. Another question arises: does being khabīth or ṭayyib refer solely to chastity and sexual purity, or does it encompass all forms of intellectual, ethical, and verbal impurity? Observing the context of the verses and traditions, the meaning of this verse should not be overly restricted. While it clearly refers to the matter of chastity and sexual purity, there are also narrations indicating that the concepts of khabīth and ṭayyib possess a broader scope, not limited to sexual purity alone. On this basis, it is not unlikely that the immediate meaning of the verse is specific, but that its underlying criterion, rationale, and application possess a wider and more general scope. In other words, although the verse addresses a specific issue—namely purity and impurity in the context of sexual conduct—it is framed in such a way that it conveys a general principle (reflect carefully).

There is no doubt that "a light seeks only lights" and "a fire seeks only fires," and similarly, the famous Persian proverb states: ؏ کند ہمجنس باہم جنس پرواز Likewise, the well-known Arabic proverb says: السنخیة علة الانضمام All these idioms point towards the natural law of creation that encompasses every particle of the universe in the heavens and the earth. In any case, everywhere a being of the same kind is drawn towards its own kind, and every group is sincere with those of its own temperament. However, this reality does not prevent the indication of a legal ruling in the verse under discussion, الزَّانِیَةً لَایَنکِحُ إلاَّ زَانِ اَوْ مُشْرِکَةً, which prohibits association with bad women, at least in situations where they are notorious for immorality. Moreover, are not all legal rulings founded upon natural principles, and are not Shariah and the natural order in harmony with each other? Certainly, they are. For further clarification, please refer to the exegesis of the mentioned verse.

In response to this question, exegetes have expressed differing views. It should first be noted that every general principle may possess exceptional cases. In addition, attention must be given to two important points: 1. As previously explained in the interpretation of the verse, the term khabīth (impure) fundamentally refers to moral or spiritual corruption, especially in the sense of baseness of character, while ṭayyib (pure) denotes the opposite. In this light, the matter becomes clear, for at no point were the spouses of the prophets (peace be upon them) morally corrupt in the sense of sexual impropriety. In the cases of Prophet Nūḥ (peace be upon him) and Prophet Lūṭ (peace be upon him), the “treachery” mentioned refers to disloyalty in faith—such as cooperating with disbelievers or conveying information to them—rather than any breach of chastity or honor. Such conduct, although reprehensible, does not relate to personal immorality of the type that would undermine the essential dignity of the prophetic household. Indeed, it is understood that the personal lives of the prophets must be protected from forms of corruption that would provoke public aversion, since the purpose of prophethood—namely, guiding people toward the path of God—would otherwise be compromised. 2. It should also be recognized that the wives of the prophets and the Imams were not necessarily disbelieving or deviant at the outset. In some instances, deviation occurred later, following the advent of prophethood, and naturally, such circumstances would have affected the nature of their relationship thereafter. As for the case of Pharaoh’s wife, her situation is similar in another respect. At the time of her marriage to Pharaoh, she had not yet believed, and indeed this occurred before the mission of Prophet Mūsā (peace be upon him). Later, when Prophet Mūsā was appointed as a messenger, she embraced faith. However, she had no alternative but to remain within Pharaoh’s household. Despite this, she steadfastly supported the truth and continued her struggle until she ultimately attained the rank of martyrdom as a believing and virtuous woman.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

In these verses, certain social etiquettes and regulations of Islam are presented, closely connected with the principles of modesty and chastity. In particular, they outline the proper manners for entering the houses of others and the requirement of seeking permission before doing so. First, it is stated: O you who believe, do not enter houses other than your own without seeking permission and greeting their inhabitants (يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَدْخُلُوا بُيُوتًا غَيْرَ بُيُوتِكُمْ حَتَّى تَسْتَأْنِسُوا وَتُسَلِّمُوا عَلَىٰ أَهْلِهَا). That is, one must notify the occupants of one’s arrival and obtain permission before entering. This is better for you; perhaps you will reflect (ذَٰلِكُمْ خَيْرٌ لَكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَذَكَّرُونَ). It is noteworthy that the term “تَسْتَأْنِسُوا” is used instead of “تَسْتَأْذِنُوا”, since the latter signifies merely seeking permission, whereas the former—derived from the root uns—implies seeking permission in a manner characterized by gentleness, familiarity, and sincerity. Thus, it suggests that permission should be requested politely, without harshness or abruptness. From this phrase, several etiquettes can be inferred: one should not create noise, should not knock loudly, should not use harsh or abrupt language, and, once permission is granted, should not enter without greeting in a manner that conveys peace, goodwill, and respect. The inclusion of the phrases “ذَٰلِكُمْ خَيْرٌ لَكُمْ” and “لَعَلَّكُمْ تَذَكَّرُونَ” further indicates that such commands correspond to innate human sensibilities and rational reflection, and that even brief contemplation reveals that adherence to them is beneficial. In the following verse, the ruling is completed with an additional clarification: if you find that no one is present in the house, then do not enter until permission has been granted (فَإِن لَّمْ تَجِدُوا فِيهَا أَحَدًا فَلَا تَدْخُلُوهَا حَتَّى يُؤْذَنَ لَكُمْ). This may mean that there may be individuals in the house, but no one with the authority to grant permission; in such a case, entry is not permitted. The essential principle remains that one has no right to enter another’s home without permission. It is further stated: if you are told to go back, then you should return; this is purer for you (وَإِن قِيلَ لَكُمُ ارْجِعُوا فَارْجِعُوا هُوَ أَزْكَىٰ لَكُمْ). This indicates that one should not feel offended or disturbed if permission is denied, since the occupants may be in a situation where receiving a visitor would cause inconvenience or difficulty, or they may not be in a suitable state to host a guest. Some individuals, upon being refused entry, attempt to discover the reason—peering through openings, listening at doors, or seeking information about the household. In response, the Qur’an states: And Allah is aware of what you do (وَاللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ عَلِيمٌ), emphasizing that such conduct is known to God. Finally, to allow for practical circumstances, an exception is mentioned: there is no blame upon you to enter houses that are uninhabited and in which you have some belongings (لَّيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ جُنَاحٌ أَن تَدْخُلُوا بُيُوتًا غَيْرَ مَسْكُونَةٍ فِيهَا مَتَاعٌ لَّكُمْ). It is also added: Allah knows what you reveal and what you conceal (وَاللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ مَا تُبْدُونَ وَمَا تَكْتُمُونَ). This may indicate that some individuals might attempt to misuse this concession—entering uninhabited places under pretext or claiming ignorance about the presence of occupants—but God is fully aware of all such intentions and actions.

There is no doubt that the human personality has two dimensions: an individual dimension and a social dimension. For this reason, human beings possess two kinds of life: a private life and a public life. Each of these has its own characteristics, as well as its own norms and regulations. Within the social environment, a person is compelled to accept certain restrictions and to exercise restraint in conduct. It is evident, however, that one cannot remain constantly bound by such restrictions day and night. There is a natural inclination for a person to enjoy periods of personal freedom, to rest, to converse privately with family and children, and to benefit as much as possible from such freedom. For this reason, people desire a home of their own and seek refuge in it, closing its doors to others and temporarily separating their personal life from the public sphere. In this setting, they are freed from many of the constraints that social life imposes upon them. To preserve this sphere of personal freedom, it is clear that a degree of protection and security is necessary. If everyone were free to enter any house at will, the very notion of privacy, comfort, and tranquility in the home would be lost, and it would become indistinguishable from the streets and marketplaces. For this reason, throughout human history, specific norms and regulations have existed governing entry into private dwellings. In fact, all legal systems regard entering someone’s home without permission as a violation, often subject to punishment. Even in cases where entry without permission is necessary for reasons of security or safety, specific procedures and authorized institutions regulate such actions. In Islam as well, strong emphasis is placed upon this matter, and the refined and wise etiquette prescribed in this regard is rarely paralleled. For example, it is reported that one of the companions of the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny once sought permission to enter his house while standing directly in front of the door. The Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny instructed him not to stand directly facing the doorway when seeking permission. In another report, it is stated that the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny himself, when approaching the doors of others, would not stand directly in front but to one side—either right or left—while greeting and seeking permission, because doors at that time were not covered in a manner that ensured privacy. The traditions further emphasize that permission should be sought even when entering the homes of one’s parents or children. In one report, a man asked the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny whether he should seek permission before entering his mother’s house. The Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny replied in the affirmative. When the man remarked that no one else attended to his mother, the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny responded: “Do you wish to see her unclothed?” When the man answered in the negative, the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny instructed him to seek permission before entering. In another narration, the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny approached the house of his daughter Fāṭimah (peace be upon her), greeted and sought permission to enter, and even sought permission for the companion with him to enter, waiting until she had properly covered herself before allowing entry. This demonstrates the degree of care and refinement with which the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny observed these etiquettes, serving as a model for the Muslim community. Some narrations further stipulate that permission should be sought up to three times: first so that the inhabitants may hear, second to allow them to prepare themselves, and third as a final request—after which they may grant or deny permission as they see fit. It has also been suggested that some time should be allowed between these attempts, since the occupants may not be in an appropriate state to receive visitors, their environment may be disordered, or there may be private matters they do not wish to disclose. Accordingly, they should be given sufficient time to prepare themselves, and if permission is not granted, one should depart without any resentment.

Exegetes have differed regarding this question. Some have stated that it refers to buildings of a public nature, such as caravanserais, guesthouses, bathhouses, and similar places. This meaning is explicitly reported in a narration from Imām al‑Ṣādiq (peace be upon him) (e.g., in the cited source). Others have suggested that it refers to ruins and abandoned structures in which no one resides and into which anyone may enter. However, this interpretation appears unlikely, since no one would ordinarily store their belongings in such places. Some other commentators have interpreted it as referring to the storerooms, warehouses, or shops of merchants in which people’s property is kept in trust, and where the owners have the right to enter and retrieve their belongings. This interpretation also does not appear to fully correspond to the apparent meaning of the verse. It has also been suggested that it refers to houses in which no one resides but where an individual has placed property in trust, having obtained general permission from the owner to enter and retrieve it. These interpretations are not necessarily mutually exclusive; however, the first interpretation appears more consistent with the apparent meaning of the verse. From this discussion it is also understood, incidentally, that a person is not permitted to enter someone else’s house without permission merely on the basis that he has some property stored there, even if no one happens to be present at the time.

It is mentioned in the books of Fiqh and Hadith that if a person deliberately peeps into people's homes and looks at the faces of women or their naked bodies, then the members of that household may forbid him the first time. If he does not desist, then they should drive him away by throwing stones. If he still does not leave, then they may protect themselves and their honor using weapons of defense, and if in that conflict the person is killed, then that blood is not unlawful. However, different stages of this matter should be taken into consideration, meaning that if the matter can be resolved by an easier method, a harsher method should not be employed.

See ayat 31 for tafseer.

With regard to the first verse under discussion, a report of its occasion of revelation is narrated in al‑Kāfī from Imām al‑Bāqir (peace be upon him): a young man from among the Anṣār encountered a woman while walking in the street. At that time, women would place their cloaks behind their ears (and naturally some portion of the neck and upper chest would thus be visible). When the young man’s gaze fell upon the woman’s face, he continued to look at her. As she passed by, he kept staring at her, walking along while repeatedly turning his gaze in her direction. Eventually he entered a narrow alley, still looking back at her, when suddenly his face struck against a wall from which a sharp bone or piece of glass protruded, and his face was wounded. By the time the woman had gone far ahead, the young man came to his senses and saw blood flowing from his face onto his clothes and chest. Deeply regretful, he said to himself: “By God, I will go to the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny and inform him of this incident.” When the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny saw him, he asked: “What has happened to you?” The young man related the entire incident. At that moment, Jibrīl descended with the revelation of God and conveyed the verse: قُلْ لِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ يَغُضُّوا مِنْ أَبْصَارِهِمْ… (reported in Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, p. 139; Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn; al‑Mīzān; and Rūḥ al‑Maʿānī, with some variation, under this verse).

We have previously stated that this Surah imparts a lesson in chastity and modesty. It includes measures against sexual licentiousness. In this respect, its discussions are clearly interconnected. The verses under discussion issue commands related to lowering the gaze from non-mahram (those who are not lawful to marry), avoiding lustful looks, and observing hijab (cover). The connection between these verses and the discussion about accusations of immorality is evident to all. The directive first states: Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and protect their private parts (قُلْ لِلْمُؤْمِنِینَ یَغُضُّوا مِنْ أَبْصَارِھِمْ وَیَحْفَظُوا فُرُوجَھُمْ). The word "یَغُضُّوا" originates from "غض" (root "خز"), which essentially means to lessen or reduce. In many contexts, this word is used for lowering or softening sound, and for lowering or limiting the gaze. Therefore, the verse does not say that the believers should completely close their eyes, but rather that they should reduce and lower their gaze. This is a subtle expression. For instance, if a man faces a non-mahram woman, closing his eyes would make it impossible for him to walk or perform other activities. But if he averts his eyes from her face and body and lowers his gaze, it is as if he has reduced his gaze, completely removing from his sight that forbidden scene. It is noteworthy that the Qur’an does not explicitly state from what the eyes should be closed (the verb’s object is omitted for generality), thereby making the command universally applicable—that is, to lower the gaze from all things forbidden to be looked at. However, the context—especially when considering the next verse—makes the matter clear, as the issue of hijab is addressed there. Hence, the command pertains to looking at non-mahram women. The aforementioned occasion of revelation (asbāb al-nuzūl) also supports this interpretation. (Explanatory note: Regarding the phrase "یَغُضُّوا مِنْ أَبْصَارِھِمْ," what is meant by "من"? Exegetes have offered various interpretations. Some say it signifies distinction, others that it expresses excessiveness or initial part. But apparently, the first meaning is correct.) From what has been stated, it becomes clear that this verse does not mean that men should not look at women’s faces at all, implying that looking without intent is permissible. Rather, it means that normally a person’s gaze covers a wide area; if it happens to fall upon a non-mahram woman, one should avoid looking at her and consciously lower the gaze, while paying attention to the path and surroundings. This understanding is consistent with the meaning given to "غض" (consider carefully). The second injunction in the verse is about guarding the private parts. As stated before, "فرج" (farj) literally refers to an opening or the space between two things, but in such contexts it is euphemistically used for the private parts. For its euphemistic meaning, we have chosen the word "دامان" (hemming edge). According to tradition, guarding the private parts (حفظ فرج) means protecting it from the view of others. A hadith narrated from Imam al-Sadiq (peace be upon him) states: “Every verse in the Qur’an that mentions حفظ الفروج (guarding the private parts) refers to protection from fornication except this verse, for here it refers to guarding from looking.” (Reference: Nur al-Thaqalayn, Vol. 3, pp. 587-588; with reference to Usul al-Kafi and Tafseer Ali ibn Ibrahim.) Sometimes a question arises as to why Islam forbids this act when it is a natural desire of the heart. In this context, the end of the verse states: “That is purer for them” (ذٰلِکَ أَزْکَی لَهُمْ). Next, those who intentionally cast lustful glances at non-mahram women but then claim it is involuntary are warned. It is said: Indeed, Allah is Well-Acquainted with what they do (إِنَّ اللهَ خَبِيرٌ بِمَا یَصْنَعُونَ). _______________ (In the next verse responsibilities of women in this matter are explained. First, the duties similar to those of men are mentioned. It is commanded: And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and protect their private parts (وَقُلْ لِلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ یَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَارِهِنَّ وَیَحْفَظْنَ فُرُوجَهُنَّ). Just as it is forbidden for men to look at women with lust, similarly women are forbidden to lustfully look at men. Likewise, just as it is necessary for men to guard their private parts by concealing them from others, so it is obligatory upon women as well. Thereafter, three sentences specially related to the matter of hijab (veil) for women follow. These three sentences are as follows: 1. They should not display their adornment except what naturally appears thereof (وَلَا یُبْدِینَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا). The kind of adornment that women must conceal and the permitted display...)There is a difference of opinion among the exegetes regarding the actual reference of this verse. Some have interpreted "hidden adornment" as the natural beauty of a woman (her beautiful body), whereas the word "adornment" is very rarely used in this sense. Others have understood it to mean the place of adornment because there is no objection to showing the adornments themselves, such as earrings, bracelets, and armlets. The prohibition applies to the place of adornment, namely the ears, neck, hands, and arms. Some exegetes have taken it to mean the adornments worn by the woman, but only when they are on the body. It is clear that if such adornments are revealed, the part of the body on which the adornment is present will also be exposed. The last two interpretations are essentially the same in their conclusion, although the issue has been presented differently. The truth is that we should interpret it according to its apparent meaning without any preconceived decision, and according to this apparent meaning, the third interpretation above is correct. Therefore, women do not have the right to display those adornments and beautifications that are usually hidden, even if the body itself is not exposed. In this regard, it is not permissible to show the decorative clothing worn beneath ordinary outer garments or burqas, because the Quran prohibits the display of such adornments. The Imams of Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), from whom numerous traditions have been transmitted, indicate the same meaning. According to them, internal adornments mean necklaces, armlets, and ankle bracelets. (Explanatory note: Tafsir by Ali ibn Ibrahim, under the discussed verse). Many traditions interpret apparent adornments as rings, kohl, etc. These traditions also indicate that hidden adornments refer to those ornaments and beautifications that are commonly concealed (consider this carefully). 2. The second command given to women in this verse is: "And let them draw their khumur over their juyub" (وَلْیَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِھِنَّ عَلَى جُیُوبِھِنَّ). "Khumur" is the plural of "khimar" (classical plural: "hijab"), fundamentally meaning cover or veil, but generally it refers to the cloth that women use to cover their heads (such as a dupatta or shawl). "Juyub" is the plural of "jayb" (classical plural: "ghayb"), which means the neckline. Sometimes, this word is also used for the upper part of the chest. This phrase indicates that before the revelation of this verse, women used to place their dupattas or shawls on their shoulders or at the back of the head, leaving part of their neck and chest visible. The Quran commands women to draw their shawls over their necklines so that the exposed parts of the neck and chest are covered (this is also apparent from the context of the revelation). 3. The third command specifies those in front of whom women may remove the veil and show the hidden adornments. The matter begins with: Women should not show their adornments (وَلَیْبْدِینَ زِینَتَهُنَّ) except on twelve occasions: 1. To their husbands (اِلَّا لِبُعُولَتِہِنَّ). 2. To their fathers (اَوْ آبَائِہِنَّ). 3. To the husbands’ fathers (اَوْ آبَاءِ بُعُولَتِہِنَّ). 4. To their sons (اَوْ اَبْنَائِہِنَّ). 5. To their husbands’ sons (اَوْ اَبْنَاءِ بُعُولَتِہِنَّ). 6. To their brothers (اَوْ اِخْوَانِہِنَّ). 7. To the brothers’ sons (اَوْ بَنِی اِخْوَانِہِنَّ). 8. To the sisters’ sons (اَوْ بَنِی اَخَوَاتِہِنَّ). 9. To their fellow believing women (اَوْ نِسَآئِہِنَّ). 10. To their female slaves (اَوْ مَا مَلَکَتْ اَیْمَانُہُنَّ). 11. To male servants who have no desire (اَوْ التَّابِعِینَ غَیْرِ أُولِی الْإِرْبَةِ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ). 12. Or to small children who do not discern the private parts of women (اَوْ الطِّفْلِ الَّذِینَ لَمْ یَظْھَرُوا عَلَى عَوْرَاتِ النِّسَآءِ). 4. Finally, the fourth command is stated as follows: They should not strike their feet in order to make known what they conceal of their adornment (وَلَا یَضْرِبْنَ بِأَرْجُلِہِنَّ لِیُعْلَمَ مَا یُخْفِینَ مِنْ زِینَتِہِنَّ). They must protect their chastity and purity and avoid actions that incite men's desires. They must not divert from the path of modesty. Such caution is required that even the sound of the ankle bracelet is not audible to non-mahram men. This command illustrates that Islam exercises extreme precision in its rulings. At the end, all believers, whether men or women, are invited to return to God and repent. It says: O you who believe! Return all of you to God so that you may succeed (وَتُوبُوا إِلَى اللّٰهِ جَمِيعًا أَيُّہَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ). If you have committed any mistakes in the past life, when Islamic laws are now clearly explained to you, repent for your errors and turn to God’s court for salvation and success because...Salvation and success are attained only through His door, and on your path there are many dangerous slips from which deliverance is not possible without His grace. Surrender yourself to Him alone. It is true that before the revelation of these rulings, there was no concept of sin regarding them, but we know that many issues related to sexual matters have rational aspects. In the language of terminology, such rational matters are called "مسلّمات عقلیہ" (axiomatic rational principles), and these are the principles in which the command of reason alone is sufficient for accountability.

There is no doubt that in our time—often described as an age of exposure and sexual freedom—discussion of purdah is unpleasant to some people. These are the same Western‑influenced, unrestrained individuals who regard women as an element of modern “freedom.” At times they dismiss purdah as a relic of the past. However, such unrestrained freedoms have generated countless problems and ever‑increasing social difficulties; for this very reason, voices calling for modesty are gradually gaining attention. Although, in religious and Islamic environments—particularly in Iran after the Islamic Revolution—many issues have been addressed and satisfactory answers to such questions have been provided, the importance of the subject still necessitates a more explicit discussion. With due respect, the central question may be framed as follows: should women be completely free such that, in respect of sight, hearing, and touch (apart from explicit sexual relations), all men may derive benefit from them and they become accessible to everyone? Or should these aspects be restricted exclusively within the marital relationship? The issue at stake is whether women should continually present their bodies in an unending competition, serve as stimuli for sensual desire, and be subjected to the lust of morally unrestrained men; or whether such matters should be removed from the public domain and confined to the private sphere of marital life. Islam supports the latter approach, and purdah constitutes an essential element of this program, whereas Western societies and those influenced by them tend to support the former. Islam maintains that sexual pleasure—whether through hearing, sight, or physical contact—is to be confined to the husband‑wife relationship, and that anything beyond this leads to sin and moral corruption in society. Thus the Qur’anic expression applies: ذٰلِكَ أَزْكَىٰ لَهُمْ—this is purer for you. The rationale behind purdah is not obscure: 1. The lack of modesty—exposure, adornment, and display—stimulates sexual desire among men, especially the youth. If such exposure becomes continuous, the resulting stimulation also becomes constant, leading to strain upon the human nervous system and contributing to psychological and emotional disturbances. It is widely acknowledged that persistent overstimulation can have harmful effects. Given the strength and depth of human sexual instinct—an impulse that has historically contributed to serious conflicts and moral crises—it is not reasonable to inflame it through constant exposure and provocation. Islam seeks to preserve calmness of spirit, soundness of the nerves, and purity of sight and hearing; within this framework, purdah is considered essential. 2. It is frequently observed that greater exposure correlates with instability in marital relationships, as visual attraction continually seeks novelty. When individuals are constantly exposed to new stimuli, emotional attachments may weaken, potentially undermining the stability of family relationships. In contrast, in an environment characterized by modesty, emotional bonds and affections are more likely to remain focused within marriage, fostering stability and mutual commitment. 3. The spread of immorality and the increase of illegitimate relationships are among the serious social consequences often associated with the unchecked promotion of indecency and exposure. Such developments can contribute to broader social challenges and may negatively affect the structure and well‑being of communities. 4. A further consequence of excessive exposure is the diminution of the dignity and social standing of women. When society emphasizes outward display, it may shift focus away from intellectual, moral, and personal qualities, reducing appreciation of deeper human values. In such circumstances, a person may be valued primarily for external appearance rather than for character, knowledge, or insight. This can limit the opportunity to achieve a meaningful and respected position within society. In conclusion, the discussion of purdah is framed within a broader concern for moral integrity, social balance, and the preservation of human dignity. It is presented not as a means of exclusion but as a principle intended to regulate social interaction, protect ethical values, and maintain equilibrium within both individual and collective life.

We now examine some of the objections raised by opponents of purdah: (1) The fundamental objection—on which nearly all critics agree—is that women constitute half of society, yet purdah confines such a large portion of the population to seclusion, thereby pushing them backward in intellectual, civilizational, and cultural terms. Particularly in this age of economic competition, there is an increased need for active human resources, but, it is argued, purdah prevents the effective utilization of women in this economic arena. Similarly, their absence will be felt in cultural and social institutions. In this way, women would become a non‑productive segment of society and a burden upon it. However, those who raise this objection are either unaware of certain important realities or deliberately ignore them. First, who says that Islamic purdah confines women to seclusion and removes them from the social sphere? Perhaps in earlier times it was necessary to argue this point, but today, particularly after major socio‑religious transformations, there is no such need, because one can observe that women, while observing Islamic modesty, are present in various fields: offices, factories, social and political movements, media, healthcare institutions—especially in caring for the wounded—as well as in cultural and educational arenas, and even in fields of conflict and defense. This reality provides a conclusive response to such objections. Previously one might have discussed the “possibility” of such participation, but today its “actual occurrence” is evident, and it is said in philosophy that the best proof of possibility is actual realization. Second, is managing a household, nurturing children, and preparing them to become honorable individuals capable of contributing effectively to society not a form of meaningful work? Those who do not regard this immense contribution of women as productive fail to understand the vital role of the family in building a healthy, dynamic, and flourishing society. Some imagine that the correct path is for men and women to imitate certain modern lifestyles—leaving home early, placing children in institutions or leaving them unattended, and engaging exclusively in external work—without recognizing that such practices can disrupt the formation of a child’s personality. This may result in individuals lacking emotional depth and human sensitivity, who not only become a burden on society but may also pose risks for its future. (2) A second objection is that purdah imposes restrictive clothing that hinders movement and work, especially in the modern mechanized age. It is argued that a woman cannot simultaneously manage such attire, care for her children, and perform her occupational duties. Yet this objection overlooks an important point: purdah does not necessarily mean a particular style such as a cloak or veil; rather, it refers to clothing that adequately covers the body. If a cloak is worn, it is preferable; otherwise, appropriate full dress suffices. Observations of rural women who work in agriculture, performing demanding tasks such as planting and harvesting—even in difficult conditions—demonstrate clearly that they are able to carry out such work while observing modest dress. In many cases, their productivity equals or even surpasses that of men, showing that modest attire does not inherently obstruct activity. (3) Another objection is that purdah, by creating separation between men and women, increases male desire rather than reducing it, based on the notion that what is restricted becomes more desirable. The response to this claim can be observed in social realities: in contexts where modesty is widely practiced, social conduct and moral discipline tend to improve when compared with situations in which modesty is abandoned. Experiences of societies that promoted unrestricted exposure have shown increases in various social problems, including instability in family structures and moral challenges. By contrast, environments that emphasize modesty often display greater social balance and stability. In summary, these objections fail to account for the broader ethical, social, and psychological framework within which the concept of purdah operates. The intended aim is not restriction but the preservation of dignity, moral well‑being, and social balance, alongside enabling constructive participation in various dimensions of life.

With regard to whether the face and the hands below the wrists are also subject to the requirement of purdah, there has been considerable disagreement among jurists, and extensive discussions have taken place on this issue. Many jurists hold that covering the face and hands is exempt from the obligation of purdah, while others maintain that covering them is obligatory, or at least required as a matter of precaution. Even those jurists who do not consider covering them obligatory stipulate that if leaving them uncovered becomes a cause of sin or deviation, then covering them becomes obligatory. Within the verse under discussion, there are indications supporting the first view. First, the verse exempts visible adornment from the general ruling, whether interpreted as the place of adornment or the adornment itself. This clearly suggests that covering the face and the hands is not obligatory. Second, the verse instructs that the veil be drawn over the bosom, which implies that the head, neck, and chest must be covered; there is no mention of covering the face. This further supports the aforementioned interpretation. As explained in the occasion of revelation, Arab women at that time used to wear a covering or shawl, placing its end behind the neck and over the shoulders. In this manner, the back of the head and neck would be covered, but part of the upper chest near the neckline remained exposed. Islam corrected this practice by instructing women to bring the covering forward from behind the head or beneath the ears and draw it over the chest and neckline. As a result, only the face remained uncovered while the rest of the body was covered. Third, many narrations recorded in the books of ḥadīth support this view. Although there are also some narrations that suggest otherwise, they do not possess the same degree of clarity. It is possible to reconcile the two sets of narrations by interpreting those that indicate covering of the face and hands as referring to a recommended (non‑obligatory) practice, or to situations in which there is a risk of sin, impropriety, or deviation. Historical evidence also indicates that, in the early period of Islam, women often covered their faces. For detailed discussions on the narrations and the various juristic dimensions of this issue, reference should be made to the chapters on marriage in works of jurisprudence. It should again be emphasized that the permission for the face and hands to remain uncovered applies only when this does not lead to misuse or moral deviation. Moreover, it must be noted that this exemption does not imply that others are permitted to gaze deliberately; rather, it is intended to facilitate women in the normal affairs of life.

As has been noted in the commentary on the verse, the ninth group before whom a woman is permitted to reveal her adornment is described as “نِسَائِهِنَّ” (“their women”). This expression indicates that Muslim women may uncover themselves only before other Muslim women, whereas in the presence of non‑Muslim women they should observe Islamic modesty. The rationale behind this ruling, as stated in narrations, is that such women might return and describe what they have seen of Muslim women to their husbands, which is not appropriate with respect to the dignity of Muslim women. In the book Man lā yaḥḍuruhu al‑faqīh, a narration is reported from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (peace be upon him), in which he said: لا ينبغي للمرأة أن تنكشف بين يدي اليهودية والنصرانية، فإنهن يصفن ذلك لأزواجهن—it is not appropriate for a Muslim woman to uncover herself before a Jewish or Christian woman, because whatever they observe, they will describe to their husbands (reported in Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 593, citing Man lā yaḥḍuruhu al‑faqīh).

On the basis of the apparent wording, this expression carries a broad meaning, suggesting that a woman may appear without purdah before her slaves or those under her ownership. However, certain traditions explicitly clarify that it refers to appearing without purdah before female servants (kanīzān), even if they are non‑Muslim, and that male slaves are not included within this scope. In one narration, the Commander of the Faithful, ʿAlī (peace be upon him), states: لا ينظر العبد إلى شعر مولاته—a male slave is not permitted to look at the hair of his mistress (reported in Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, book 124 of the مقدمات نکاح, ḥadīth 8). There are also some narrations that suggest a more general interpretation of the term; nevertheless, it is generally accepted that such a broad application is contrary to precaution.

"Arba" fundamentally derives from the root "Arb" (in the Bronze form "عَرَب") which means intense need, signifying that which a person strives to fulfill. Sometimes this word is also used in the sense of an absolute need. And the phrase "أُوْلِي الْإِرْبَةِ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ" here refers to those men who have sexual desire and need a wife. Therefore, "غَيْرُ أُوْلِي الْإِرْبَةِ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ" denotes those men who do not have this inclination or desire. Among the commentators, there is a difference of opinion about who exactly is meant by this. Some interpret this as referring to elderly individuals whose sexual impulses have ceased, similar to "القواعد من النساء" (women who are no longer of marriageable age and are past that phase). Some other commentators say it refers to eunuchs and transgender individuals. Some have said it refers to those who do not possess reproductive organs. However, the meaning on which the majority agree, and which has also been transmitted in several reliable hadiths from Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) and Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام), is that it refers to such senseless men who have no sexual feeling whatsoever and are generally entrusted with easy tasks. The word "التابعين" in the verse also supports this meaning. (Reference: For further elucidation, see Jawahir al-Kalam, vol. 29, p. 94 onwards; likewise, Wasail al-Shi‘a, chapter 111 of the chapters of marriage (vol. 14, p. 148); and Tahdhib, vol. 7, p. 468.) Since this characteristic, i.e., lack of sexual desire, also applies to some elderly individuals, it is therefore not impossible that the meaning of the verse includes such elderly men as well. In one hadith, Imam Kazim (عليه السلام) also identified such elderly men as the referents of this verse. However, this does not mean that such men are like mahrams. It is well established that it is not obligatory to cover parts of the head, hands, or arms, or any such part of the body from them.

We have already noted that the twelfth group from whom purdah is not required consists of children who have not yet attained awareness of sexual matters. The expression “لَمْ يَظْهَرُوا” has sometimes been interpreted as “لَمْ يَطَّلِعُوا” (they are not aware), and at other times as “لَمْ يَقْدِرُوا” (they do not possess the capacity), because the root is used in both senses. The Qur’an itself employs this root with both meanings. For example, in Sūrat al‑Kahf, verse 20, it is stated: إِنْ يَظْهَرُوا عَلَيْكُمْ يَرْجُمُوكُمْ—if the people come to know of you, they will stone you. Likewise, in Sūrat al‑Tawbah, verse 8: كَيْفَ وَإِنْ يَظْهَرُوا عَلَيْكُمْ لَا يَرْقُبُوا فِيكُمْ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً—how is it that, if they gain mastery over you, they will neither observe ties of kinship nor honor any covenant with you. In any case, in the verse under discussion, both meanings lead to the same conclusion: it refers to those children who, due to the absence of sexual awareness, possess neither the capacity nor the understanding of such matters. Therefore, once children reach an age at which such inclination and ability become present, Muslim women are required to observe purdah before them.

One question that arises from this verse is why paternal and maternal uncles are not explicitly included in the list of maḥram relations, even though it is well established that they too are maḥram and that observance of purdah is not required with respect to them. It may be that the reason lies in the Qur’an’s desire to present its meanings with utmost eloquence, avoiding any unnecessary wording. By exempting nephews and nieces, it implicitly indicates that aunts (both paternal and maternal) are also maḥram. From this, it becomes clear that a woman’s paternal and maternal uncles are likewise maḥram. In other words, the concept of maḥram has reciprocal dimensions: if from one perspective nephews and nieces are maḥram, then naturally, from the corresponding perspective, their fathers (that is, the uncles) are also maḥram (reflect upon this).

In connection with the verse under discussion, a final point concerns the statement at the end of the verse that women, while walking, should not stamp their feet in such a way that the sound of their anklets becomes audible. This indicates the extent to which Islam is sensitive in the matter of modesty and chastity, such that it does not permit even actions of this kind. On this basis, it follows a fortiori that Islam prohibits all factors that may arouse the sexual impulses of youth—such as the dissemination of obscene and indecent images, corrupting and vulgar films of a sexual nature, and the publication of such narratives. Islam opposes everything that inclines young men and women toward deviation, immorality, and sin, and seeks to purify marketplaces and centers of trade from such influences.

See ayat 34 for tafseer.

See ayat 34 for tafseer.

From the beginning of this Sūrah up to this point, various carefully measured approaches have been employed to address the avoidance of sexual corruption and moral impurities. Each of these methods and injunctions is effective, in its appropriate context, in preventing such evils. In the verses under discussion, another significant measure has been adopted to eradicate immorality and vice: the simple, accessible, and sincere institution of marriage. It is self‑evident that, in order to eliminate fornication and indecency, it is necessary to fulfil human natural needs through legitimate and lawful means. Thus, in the first verse under consideration it is stated: “وَاَنکِحُوا الْاَیَامَی مِنْکُمْ وَالصَّالِحِینَ مِنْ عِبَادِکُمْ وَإِمَائِکُمْ”. The term “ایامیٰ” is the plural of “ایم” (on the pattern of “قیم”). Originally, it referred to a woman without a husband, but it later came to be applied also to a man without a spouse. Accordingly, all unmarried women and men fall within the scope of this verse, whether they have previously been married or not. Here, the term “انکحوا” (marry them) has been employed, although marriage is a voluntary act dependent upon the inclination and consent of both parties. The intention is to facilitate marriage: to provide financial assistance when necessary, to help in finding suitable matches, and to encourage men and women toward marriage. In summary, it calls for active participation in resolving obstacles and difficulties, since such matters are generally not accomplished without the mediation of others. In brief, the meaning of the verse is sufficiently comprehensive to include all forms of support—financial, physical, and verbal. Undoubtedly, the fundamental principle of cooperation in Islam requires that Muslims assist one another in all matters; however, cooperation in the matter of marriage is accorded particular importance. The significance of this issue is such that in a hadith Amīr al‑Muʾminīn ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām) states: افضل الشفاعات ان تشفع بین اثنین فی نکاح حتی یجمع اللہ بینھما The best form of intercession is that one should bring together two individuals for marriage until the union is completed (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, p. 27, Bāb 12 min Abwāb Muqaddimāt al‑Nikāḥ). In another hadith, it is reported from Imām Mūsā al‑Kāẓim ibn Jaʿfar (ʿalayhimā al‑salām): ثلاثة یستظلون بظل عرش الله یوم القیامة، یوم لاظلّ الّا ظلہ، رجل زوج اخاہ المسلم او اخدمہ، او کتم لہ سرّاً۔ On the Day of Resurrection, when there will be no shade except the shade of the Divine Throne, three groups will be under it: one who facilitates the marriage of his Muslim brother; one who provides him with service when needed; and one who conceals his secret (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, p. 27, Bāb 12 min Abwāb Muqaddimāt al‑Nikāḥ). Another hadith from the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) states: کان لہ بکل خطوة خطاھا، او بکل کلمة تکلم بھا فی ذٰلک، عمل سنة قیام لیلھا وصیام نھارھا۔ For every step taken, and every word spoken, in this cause, one receives the reward of a year’s worship, in which the nights were spent in prayer and the days in fasting (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, p. 27, Bāb 12 min Abwāb Muqaddimāt al‑Nikāḥ). Often, poverty and financial hardship are presented as excuses for avoiding marriage. In response, the Qurʾān states: “إِنْ یَکُونُوا فُقَرَاءَ یُغْنِھِمْ اللهُ مِنْ فَضْلِہِ”. One should not be distressed by poverty but should strive to arrange marriage, for if they are poor, Allah will enrich them through His فضل. “And وَاللهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِیمٌ”: Allah possesses vast bounty and knowledge. His power encompasses the entirety of existence, and His knowledge extends to all intentions. He is fully aware of those who seek marriage in order to preserve chastity, and He will bestow His grace upon them. At times, despite sincere efforts by both individuals and others, marriage does not materialize, and a person is compelled to remain deprived for a period. It must not be imagined that in such circumstances immorality becomes permissible due to necessity. Therefore, the subsequent verse commands chastity: “وَلْیَسْتَعْفِفْ الَّذِینَ لَایَجِدُونَ نِکَاحًا حَتَّی یُغْنِیَھُمْ اللهُ مِنْ فَضْلِہِ”. Those who cannot find the means for marriage must maintain chastity until Allah enriches them through His فضل. No one should prepare themselves for wrongdoing during such trials, nor consider themselves excused; such an excuse is unacceptable. Rather, the strength of faith and taqwā should prevail at this juncture. Whenever slaves and bondwomen are mentioned, Islam—appropriate to the context—draws attention to their emancipation. Thus, here too, alongside discussion of their marriage, mention is made of their freedom through “مکاتبت”. “مکاتبت” refers to a contractual arrangement whereby the slave works and pays the owner in instalments, thereby attaining freedom. It is stated: “وَالَّذِینَ یَبْتَغُونَ الْکِتَابَ مِمَّا مَلَکَتْ اَیْمَانُکُمْ فَکَاتِبُوھُمْ إِنْ عَلِمْتُمْ فِیھِمْ خَیْرًا”. “If you perceive in them خیر”, this means that if they possess sufficient maturity and capability to fulfil the contract and pay the agreed amount, enabling them to live independently, then the agreement should be concluded. Otherwise, if this would be detrimental and render them a burden upon society, the matter should be postponed. Subsequently, to ease their burden in paying instalments, the Qurʾān commands: “وَآتُوھُمْ مِنْ مَالِ اللهِ الَّذِی آتَاکُمْ”. Regarding this مال, exegetes differ. Many interpret it as a portion of zakāt, as indicated in Sūrah al‑Tawbah. Others maintain that the master should remit part of the instalments or return what has already been taken. It is also possible that initial financial support should be provided so that they may begin economic activity and repay their debt. These interpretations are not mutually exclusive; rather, the objective is to assist the oppressed in attaining freedom as swiftly as possible. In a hadith, Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) states: تضع عنہ من نجومہ التی لم تکن ترید ان تنقصہ، ولاتزید فوق ما فی نفسک That reduction should be granted sincerely, without prior manipulation of the agreed amount (Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 601). At the conclusion of the verse, a reprehensible practice is prohibited: “وَلَاتُکْرِھُوا فَتَیَاتِکُمْ عَلَی الْبِغَاءِ إِنْ اَرَدْنَ تَحَصُّنًا لِتَبْتَغُوا عَرَضَ الْحَیَاةِ الدُّنْیَا”. Do not compel your bondwomen to prostitution for the sake of worldly gain, especially when they desire chastity. It is reported that ʿAbd Allāh ibn Ubayy forced his slave girls into such acts; when they complained to the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam), this verse was revealed (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān; Tafsīr al‑Qurṭubī). This verse reflects the moral degradation of the pre‑Islamic period, a condition that continued among some even after the advent of Islam until its prohibition through revelation. The expression “إِنْ اَرَدْنَ تَحَصُّنًا” does not imply permissibility if they themselves incline toward such acts. Rather, coercion inherently presupposes lack of consent; hence, prostitution and its promotion constitute grave sin under all circumstances. The Qurʾān, in its customary manner, keeps the door of repentance open. It states: “وَمَنْ یُکْرِھُّنَّ فَإِنَّ اللهَ مِنْ بَعْدِ إِکْرَاہِھِنَّ غَفُورٌ رَحِیمٌ”. Whoever compelled them and subsequently repents, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. Finally, the concluding verse provides a comprehensive reference to the preceding themes: “وَلَقَدْ اَنزَلْنَا إِلَیْکُمْ آیَاتٍ مُبَیِّنَاتٍ … وَمَوْعِظَةً لِلْمُتَّقِینَ”. Clear verses have been revealed, along with examples from those who passed before you, and these constitute admonition for the متقین.

In the contemporary era, numerous incorrect customs—indeed superstitions—have become incorporated into marriage practices, to such an extent that for young people it has become an अत्यंत complex and difficult matter. However, irrespective of such customs, marriage is a natural requirement, fully aligned with the law of creation. For the preservation of the human species, the tranquillity of body and soul, and the resolution of many of life’s difficulties, marriage in a proper and lawful manner is indispensable. Islam, which consistently acts in harmony with human nature, has presented compelling and effective guidance in this regard. A well‑known hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) states: تناکحوا وتناسلوا تکثروا فانّی اباھی بکم الامم یوم القیامة ولو بالسقط Marry and procreate so that your numbers may increase, for I will take pride in your كثرة before other communities on the Day of Resurrection, even in respect of miscarried infants (Safīnat al‑Biḥār, vol. 1, p. 561, maddah “zawj”). In another hadith, the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) said: من تزوّج فقد احرز نصف دینہ فلیتق الله فی النصف الباقی Whoever marries has secured half of his religion; therefore, he should fear Allah regarding the remaining half (Safīnat al‑Biḥār, vol. 1, p. 561, maddah “zawj”). This is because the sexual impulse in human beings is highly powerful and difficult to restrain; it alone stands in opposition to many other faculties and capacities. In this respect, deviation exposes half of a person’s faith and religion to danger. In another hadith, the Messenger of Allah (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) states: شرارکم عزابکم The worst among you are those who remain unmarried (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, under the verse in question). Accordingly, in the verses under discussion and numerous narrations, Muslims are urged to provide every possible assistance in facilitating the marriage of unmarried individuals. In particular, Islam assigns a serious responsibility to the father regarding his children; fathers who neglect this important matter are considered complicit in the moral deviation of their offspring. Thus, a hadith from the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) states: من ادرک لہ ولد وعندہ ما یزوجہ فلم یزوجہ، فاحدث فالاثم بینھما If a person’s son reaches maturity and he possesses the means to arrange his marriage but fails to do so, and the son consequently commits a sin, then the sin is recorded against both of them (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, under the verse in question). For this reason, there is emphatic instruction that the expenses of marriage should be simple and manageable, whether in the form of mahr or otherwise, so that financial burdens do not become obstacles to marriage. Excessive mahr often prevents economically capable individuals from marrying. In this regard, a hadith from the Messenger of Allah (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) states: شوم المرئة غلاء مھرھا An ill‑omened woman is one whose mahr is excessive (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 15, Bāb 5 min Abwāb al‑Muhūr, p. 10). Another narration states: من شومھا شدّة موٴنتھا Among the signs of her ill‑fortune is the heaviness of her living (or marital) expenses (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 15, Bāb 5 min Abwāb al‑Muhūr, p. 10). Many men and women present financial incapacity as an excuse to avoid this divine and human responsibility. However, the verses under discussion explicitly state that poverty and deprivation should not be regarded as obstacles to marriage; rather, in many cases they become the cause of prosperity. Reflection reveals the reason for this: as long as a person remains single, he does not fully experience a sense of responsibility and does not employ his creative abilities and capacities to their fullest extent. Whatever he earns, he does not necessarily strive to preserve it; thus, unmarried individuals are often financially unstable. After marriage, however, a person’s personality transforms into a social one. A married man keenly feels the responsibility to protect his wife and provide for her sustenance. He develops a sense of family honour and strives to provide for his future children. Consequently, he consciously utilises his capacities, safeguards his income, and adopts moderation, thereby overcoming poverty within a short time. It is not without reason that Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) states in a hadith: الرزق مع النساء والعیال Sustenance is accompanied by wives and children (Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 595). In another narration, a man came to the Messenger of Allah (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) and complained of poverty. The Prophet instructed him: تزوج Marry. فتزوج فوسع لہ He married, and his provision was expanded (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, p. 25, Bāb 11 min Abwāb ʿAqd al‑Nikāḥ). There is no doubt that divine support and unseen spiritual forces assist those who marry in order to fulfil human responsibility and preserve chastity. Every believer can rely upon this divine promise, draw inspiration from it, and have faith in it. Another hadith from the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) states: من ترک التزویج مخافة العیلة فقد ساء ظنہ بالله انّ الله عزوّجل یقول: إِنْ یَکُونُوا فُقَرَاءَ یُغْنِھِمْ اللهُ مِنْ فَضْلِہِ Whoever abandons marriage out of fear of poverty has held سوء ظن about Allah, for Allah the Exalted says: “إِنْ یَکُونُوا فُقَرَاءَ یُغْنِھِمْ اللهُ مِنْ فَضْلِہِ” (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, p. 24, Bāb 10 min Abwāb ʿAqd al‑Nikāḥ). There are numerous narrations on this subject in Islamic literature; to cite them all would exceed the limits of exegetical discussion. Provide your feedback on BizChat

It is noteworthy that in the verses under discussion, while a general command is given concerning the marriage of unmarried men and women, when reference is made to the marriage of slaves and bondwomen, the condition of being “صالح” is specifically mentioned. This raises the question as to the rationale behind such a distinction. The esteemed author of Tafsīr al‑Mīzān and the author of Tafsīr al‑Ṣāfī have suggested that it refers to those who possess the capability for marriage. However, if this were the intended meaning, then such a condition would also be necessary for free men and women. Others have interpreted it as referring to moral and doctrinal soundness, since in this regard “صالحین” hold particular significance. Yet the question remains as to why this condition has not been stipulated for others besides slaves. It appears that the intended meaning is related to a different consideration: in that period, slaves and bondwomen were generally at a very low level in terms of social, cultural, and moral development. They lacked a sense of responsibility regarding shared life. In such a situation, if they were married, they might readily abandon their spouses, leaving them distressed and unsettled. Therefore, it has been ordained that if they possess moral صلاحیّت, then steps should be taken to arrange their marriage, so that they may be capable of sustaining marital life, and only thereafter should their marriage be carried out.

As previously stated, Islam advanced a programme for the gradual transformation of the condition of slaves. Accordingly, it took advantage of every opportunity to promote their emancipation. One such method is that of “مکاتبت”, which is mentioned in the verse under discussion as a legal injunction. The term “مکاتبہ” is derived from the root “کتابت”, and “کتابت” itself originates from the root “کُتب” (on the pattern of “کسب”), which fundamentally means to gather or collect. Writing is referred to as “کتابت” because a person brings together letters and words into a coherent expression. In “مکاتبت”, since a written agreement is concluded between the master and the slave, it is thus designated by this term. An “عقد مکاتبہ” is a type of contractual agreement concluded between two parties. Under it, the slave undertakes to earn wealth through independent labour and to pay it to the master in practicable instalments, thereby securing freedom. In the verse, it is indicated that these instalments, collectively, should correspond to the value of the slave. If, for certain reasons, the slave becomes unable to pay the instalments, then these may be paid from the public treasury (Bayt al‑Māl) or from a portion of zakāt, so that the individual may attain freedom. Some jurists have even specified that if zakāt is due from the master himself, he may offset the instalments owed by the slave against that zakāt. This agreement constitutes a binding contract (ʿaqd lāzim), and neither party has the right to annul it unilaterally. It is evident that under such a programme many slaves could gradually attain freedom, and during the period in which they labour to discharge the instalments, they would become capable of standing on their own feet. At the same time, the masters would not incur significant loss, nor would they exhibit adverse reactions due to any reduction in their slaves. There exist numerous subsidiary rulings related to “مکاتبت”, the detailed discussion of which may be found in the relevant sections of juridical works.

See ayat 38 for tafseer.

See ayat 38 for tafseer.

See ayat 38 for tafseer.

Much has been said regarding the interpretation of the verses under discussion. Muslim exegetes, philosophers, and mystics have each approached them in their own manner. Their connection with the preceding verses is that earlier discussion addressed chastity and purity from various perspectives, and injunctions were given to prevent immorality and corruption. The implementation of all divine commands is ultimately guaranteed by faith; it is faith that can restrain rebellious desires. Among human impulses, sexual desire is the most powerful, and it cannot be controlled without faith. Therefore, in these verses, the discourse ultimately turns toward faith and its profound effects. It is stated: “اَللهُ نُورُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْاَرْضِ”. How beautiful, profound, and compelling is this expression—indeed, Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth: He Himself is light, and the giver of light. Some exegetes have interpreted “نور” here to mean “the Guide”; others have taken it to mean “the Illuminator”; still others have understood it as “the Adorner”. All of these meanings are correct, yet the scope of the verse is broader. The clarification of this is as follows. In the Qurʾān and in numerous narrations, the term “نور” has been applied in various contexts: 1. The Qurʾān: In Sūrah al‑Māʾidah (5:15), the Qurʾān is described as نور: قَدْ جَائَکُمْ مِنَ اللهِ نُورٌ وَکِتَابٌ مُبِینٌ Similarly, in Sūrah al‑Aʿrāf (7:157): وَاتَّبَعُوا النُّورَ الَّذِی اُنزِلَ مَعَہُ اُوْلٰئِکَ ھُمَ الْمُفْلِحُونَ 2. Faith: In some places, “نور” is used for faith, as in Sūrah al‑Baqarah (2:257): اَللهُ وَلِیُّ الَّذِینَ آمَنُوا یُخْرِجُھُمْ مِنَ الظُّلُمَاتِ إِلَی النُّورِ 3. Divine guidance: Guidance and insight are also termed light, as in Sūrah al‑Anʿām (6:122): اَوَمَنْ کَانَ مَیْتًا فَاَحْیَیْنَاہُ وَجَعَلْنَا لَہُ نُورًا یَمْشِی بِہِ فِی النَّاسِ 4. The religion of Islam: In Sūrah al‑Tawbah (9:32): وَیَاْبَی اللهُ إِلاَّ اَنْ یُتِمَّ نُورَہُ 5. The Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny: In Sūrah al‑Aḥzāb (33:46): وَدَاعِیًا إِلَی اللهِ بِإِذْنِہِ وَسِرَاجًا مُنِیرًا 6. The Imāms (ʿalayhim al‑salām): In Ziyārat Jāmiʿah: خلقکم الله انواراً فجعلکم بعرشہ محدقین وانتم نور الاخیار وھداة الابرار 7. Knowledge: In the well‑known hadith: العلم نور یقذفہ الله فی قلب من یشاء On the one hand, these are the manifestations of “نور”; on the other, its distinguishing characteristics require consideration. A brief reflection reveals the following features: 1. In the material world, light is among the most subtle and beautiful entities and the source of all elegance and refinement. 2. It possesses the greatest سرعة in the physical world; its velocity is approximately 300,000 kilometres per second. 3. It is the means by which objects are perceived; without it, nothing can be seen. Thus, it is both manifest and that which makes other things manifest. 4. Sunlight sustains life, enabling growth in plants and supporting all living beings. 5. All colours are derived from light; without it, absolute darkness prevails and no colour can be conceived. 6. Most forms of energy in the world ultimately originate from sunlight. 7. It destroys harmful microbes; without it, the earth would become a vast بیمارستان. In summary, reflection upon this remarkable phenomenon of creation—light—reveals its immense آثار and blessings. With this in mind, it becomes evident that if any sensible reality is to be used as a parable, no expression is more appropriate than “نور”. Allah—who brings all existence into manifestation, illumines creation, sustains all beings, and upon whose grace everything depends—if He were, even for a moment, to withdraw His لطف, all would fall into darkness and annihilation. Accordingly, everything derives its illumination in proportion to its relation with Him. Thus: the Qurʾān is نور; Islam is نور; the Prophets are نور; the Imāms are نور; faith is نور; knowledge is نور. Therefore, “اَللهُ نُورُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْاَرْضِ”. If “نور” is understood in its widest sense, its attribution to Allah is not even metaphorical, for it signifies that which is manifest in itself and makes others manifest—an attribute belonging supremely to Allah. In Kitāb al‑Tawḥīd, it is reported that Imām ʿAlī ibn Mūsā al‑Riḍā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) interpreted the verse as: ھاد لاھل السماوات وھاد لاھل الارض This highlights that guidance is one aspect of Divine نور, though not its entirety. The supplication Duʿāʾ Jawshan Kabīr expresses this comprehensively: یا نور النور، یا منوّر النور، یا خالق النور … یا نوراً لیس کمثلہ نور Thus, all existence converges upon His نور. Subsequently, the Qurʾān presents a precise parable: مَثَلُ نُورِہِ کَمِشْکَاةٍ فِیھَا مِصْبَاحٌ … نُورٌ عَلیٰ نُورٍ This describes a niche, a lamp, a glass enclosure, and pure oil derived from a blessed olive tree—“لَاشَرْقِیَّةٍ وَلَاغَرْبِیَّةٍ”—whose oil nearly glows without fire. From its apparent aspect, four elements contribute to illumination: a protective niche, a transparent enclosure, a flame, and pure oil. From its inner meaning, exegetes have offered various interpretations: the light of guidance, faith in the heart, the Qurʾān, the Prophet, or the روح of obedience and taqwā. In reality, these converge upon a single حقیقت: the نور of guidance originating from revelation and the mission of the Prophets. In this symbolism: - “مصباح” represents the flame of ایمان in the heart of the believer. - “زجاجة” represents the heart that organizes and preserves it. - “مشکوة” represents the chest, knowledge, and awareness that protect it. - “شَجَرَةٍ مُبَارَکَةٍ زَیْتُونِةٍ” represents divine revelation. Thus, this نور manifests as “نُورٌ عَلیٰ نُورٍ”. The continuation states: فِی بُیُوتٍ اَذِنَ اللهُ اَنْ تُرْفَعَ … یُسَبِّحُ لَہُ فِیھَا بِالْغُدُوِّ وَالْآصَالِ These houses are those elevated by divine command, wherein Allah’s name is remembered and His praise declared morning and evening, by: رِجَالٌ لَاتُلْھِیھِمْ تِجَارَةٌ وَلَابَیْعٌ عَنْ ذِکْرِ اللهِ … They are not distracted by commerce from remembrance, prayer, and zakāt, and they fear the Day: یَخَافُونَ یَوْمًا تَتَقَلَّبُ فِیہِ الْقُلُوبُ وَالْاَبْصَارُ These houses are centres of divine remembrance, including mosques and the houses of the Prophets and the awliyāʾ; narrations explicitly include the house of the Prophet and that of ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām). Their characteristics include: divine foundation, structural elevation, remembrance of Allah, and guardianship by devoted believers. Hence, they become centres of guidance and faith. Finally, the concluding verse states: لِیَجْزِیَھُمْ اللهُ اَحْسَنَ مَا عَمِلُوا وَیَزِیدَھُمْ مِنْ فَضْلِہِ … وَاللهُ یَرْزُقُ مَنْ یَشَاءُ بِغَیْرِ حِسَابٍ Allah rewards them according to the best of their deeds and increases them from His فضل. This may signify recompense for all good actions, multiplication of reward, or elevation of all deeds to the standard of their best. Such generosity is not improbable, for divine فضل is beyond limitation.

Certain essential points pertaining to these verses have already been addressed within the exegetical discussion; however, some narrations remain that are necessary for the completion of the discourse. These are presented below: 1. In Rawḍat al‑Kāfī, it is reported that Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām), in the interpretation of the Verse of Light, stated: ان المشکوٰة قلب محمد (ص) والمصباح النور الذی فیہ العلم، والزجاجة قلب علیّ او نفسہ The “مشکوٰة” is the قلب of Muhammad (ṣ), the “مصباح” is the light of knowledge and guidance within it, and the “زجاجة” is ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām) himself or his heart, which, after the departure of the Prophet, became the locus of that “مصباح” (Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 206, with abbreviation). 2. In a hadith reported in Tawḥīd Ṣadūq from Imām Muḥammad al‑Bāqir (ʿalayhi al‑salām), it is stated: ان مشکوٰة نور العلم فی صدر النبی (ص) والزجاجة صدر علی.... ونور علی نور امام موٴید بنور العلم و الحکمة فی اثر الامام من آل محمد، وذلک من لدن آدم الیٰ ان تقوم الساعة، فھٰوٴلاء الاوصیاء الذین جعلھم الله عزوجل خلفاء فی ارضہ وحججہ علی خلقہ، لاتخلوا الارض فی کل عصر من واحد منھم The “مشکوٰة” is the light of knowledge in the صدر of the Prophet (ṣ), the “زجاجة” is the صدر of ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām), and “نُورٌ عَلیٰ نُورٍ” refers to the Imāms of the آلِ محمد, who succeed one another, supported by the light of knowledge and wisdom. This succession has continued from the time of Adam until the قيام الساعة. These are the appointed وصیّ, whom Allah has made His vicegerents on earth and His proofs over creation; the earth has never been devoid of one of them in any عصر (Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 206, with abbreviation). 3. In another narration, Imām al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) identified the “مشکوٰة” with Lady Fāṭimah (salām Allāh ʿalayhā), the “مصباح” with Imām Ḥasan (ʿalayhi al‑salām), and the “زجاجة” with Imām Ḥusayn (ʿalayhi al‑salām) (Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, pp. 602–603, with abbreviation). As previously noted, the verses possess a broad and comprehensive meaning; each of these narrations points to a particular clear instance of that meaning, without restricting the general sense of the verse. Therefore, there is no contradiction among these narrations. 4. In another report, Imām al‑Bāqir (ʿalayhi al‑salām) was conversing with a well‑known jurist of Basrah. During the discussion, the latter expressed astonishment at the atmosphere of awe and solemnity present in the gathering. The Imām responded: Do you know where you are sitting? In the place concerning which Allah has said: فِی بُیُوتٍ اَذِنَ اللهُ اَنْ تُرْفَعَ وَیُذْکَرَ فِیھَا اسْمُہُ یُسَبِّحُ لَہُ فِیھَا بِالْغدو وَالْآصَالِ، رِجَالٌ لَاتُلْھِیھِمْ تِجَارَةٌ وَلَابَیْعٌ عَنْ ذِکْرِ اللهِ وَإِقَامِ الصَّلَاةِ وَإِیتَاءِ الزَّکَاةِ He then stated: “فانت ثم ونحن اولٰئک”—you are what you have described, and we are those referred to in the verse. The jurist replied: صدقت والله، جعلنی الله فداک، والله ما ھی بیوت حجارة ولاطین By Allah, you have spoken the truth; may I be your ransom, these are not houses of stone and clay, but rather houses of revelation, faith, and guidance (Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 609). 5. Concerning those servants of Allah who are the guardians of revelation and guidance, a narration states: ھم التجار الذین لاتلھیھم تجارة ولابیع عن ذکر الله، اذا دخل مواقیت الصلوٰة ادوا الی الله حقہ فیھا They are those traders whom neither commerce nor buying and selling distracts from the remembrance of Allah; when the times of prayer arrive, they fulfil its due (Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 609). This indicates that they engage in constructive and positive economic activities, yet all their actions remain subordinate to the remembrance of Allah, and nothing is permitted to take precedence over it.

In the verses under discussion, the olive tree is described as “شَجَرَةٍ مُبَارَکَةٍ”, that is, a blessed tree. At the time of the revelation of the Qurʾān, the significance of this statement may not have been fully apparent to people; however, today it is clearly understood. According to eminent scientists and specialists who have devoted many years to the study of the properties of plants, the most important product obtained from this blessed tree is olive oil. This oil is highly effective for the health of the body. Ibn ʿAbbās states that all parts of this tree are beneficial and advantageous, even its ash is useful. He further adds that it was the first tree to grow after the flood of Nūḥ, and that the Prophets prayed for blessings upon this tree.

Esteemed exegetes have presented various interpretations of this expression: The late Ṭabrisī, in Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, states that it refers to those Prophets who arise one after another from a single lineage, thereby ensuring the استمرار of the path of guidance. Fakhr al‑Dīn al‑Rāzī, in his tafsīr, interprets it as an indication of the layers of light, the interrelation of luminous rays, and the interaction of beams of illumination. He further likens this to the condition of the believer, who remains in four states: when granted نعمت, he expresses gratitude to Allah; when afflicted by hardship, he is patient and steadfast; when he speaks, he speaks truthfully; and when he judges, he seeks justice. Among the ignorant, he is like a living being among the dead. He moves amidst five forms of نور: his speech is نور, his action is نور, his point of entry is نور, his place of departure is نور, and his ultimate مقصد on the Day of Resurrection is the نور of Allah. It is also possible that, in the Qurʾān, the first نور refers to the light of divine guidance derived through revelation, while the second نور refers to the light of guidance attained through intellect. Alternatively, the first نور may denote the light of تشریعی guidance, while the second نور denotes the light of تکوینی guidance. Accordingly, it is “نور” upon “نور”. Thus, this expression has been interpreted at times as referring to multiple sources of نور (such as the Prophets), at other times to different types of نور, and at yet other times to its various stages. However, it is possible that all of these meanings are encompassed within the verse, whose sense is broad and comprehensive.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, the discussion concerned the Divine نور and the نور of faith and guidance. In the present verses, however, attention is directed toward the darkness of disbelief, ignorance, unbelief, misguidance, and hypocrisy. The lives and thoughts of the believers were characterized by “نُورٌ عَلیٰ نُورٍ”, whereas the existence of the hypocrites and disbelievers is “ظُلُمَاتٌ بَعْضُھَا فَوْقَ بَعْضٍ”. The condition of such people is now described: they are like those who, in a dry, waterless, and scorching desert, pursue a mirage in place of water and ultimately perish from intense thirst, while the believers dwell under the shade of faith and rest by the clear and refreshing springs of guidance. It is stated: the disbelievers are such that their deeds are like a mirage in a barren plain, which the thirsty person supposes to be water (وَالَّذِینَ کَفَرُوا اَعْمَالُھُمْ کَسَرَابٍ بِقِیعَةٍ یَحْسَبُہُ الظَّمْآنُ مَاءً). However, when he approaches it, he finds nothing (حَتَّی إِذَا جَائَہُ لَمْ یَجِدْہُ شَیْئًا). Instead, he finds Allah present with him, and Allah settles his account in full (وَوَجَدَ اللهَ عِنْدَہُ فَوَفَّاہُ حِسَابَہُ), and Allah is swift in reckoning (وَاللهُ سَرِیعُ الْحِسَابِ). The term “سراب” is derived from the root “سرب”, meaning to move upward. By extension, it refers to the shimmering phenomenon seen from a distance in deserts that appears like water, though in reality it is nothing but the reflection of sunlight. The term “قیعہ” is understood by some as the plural of “قاعہ”, denoting a vast, barren expanse where mirages typically appear; however, others consider it a singular noun, its plurals being “قیعان” or “قیعات”. Though this difference is noted, it does not significantly affect the meaning; the context suggests a singular usage since “سراب” is also singular. A second example is then presented: or their deeds are like layers of darkness in a deep sea—covered by waves, above which are further waves, and above them are dark clouds (اَوْ کَظُلُمَاتٍ فِی بَحْرٍ لُجِّیٍّ یَغْشَاہُ مَوْجٌ مِنْ فَوْقِہِ مَوْجٌ مِنْ فَوْقِہِ سَحَابٌ). These are layers of darkness, one above another (ظُلُمَاتٌ بَعْضُھَا فَوْقَ بَعْضٍ). In such a state, if a person extends his hand, he can hardly see it (إِذَا اَخْرَجَ یَدَہُ لَمْ یَکَدْ یَرَاھَا). Thus, the true light in human existence is only the light of faith; without it, the entire sphere of life is enveloped in darkness. This light of faith is granted only by Allah, and whoever is not granted light by Allah has no light at all (وَمَنْ لَمْ یَجْعَلْ اللهُ لَہُ نُورًا فَمَا لَہُ مِنْ نُورٍ). To comprehend the depth of this parable, attention must be paid to the term “لجی”, which signifies a deep and vast sea. The word is derived from a root indicating persistence and continuous movement, and by extension refers to the successive motion of waves in a great ocean. The greater and deeper the sea, the more numerous and intense its waves become; hence, the term came to denote a vast ocean. In such a deep and expansive sea, it is known that even the strongest sunlight penetrates only to a limited depth—its most intense rays dissipate after several hundred meters, beyond which perpetual darkness prevails. Moreover, if the water is turbulent, the reflection of light is scattered, allowing even less light to reach the depths. If dense, dark clouds are also present above, the resulting darkness becomes compounded. Thus, there are multiple layers of darkness: the darkness of the ocean depths, the darkness created by turbulent waves, and the darkness of overlying clouds. In such conditions, even the nearest objects are invisible, and a person would not be able to see his own hand. Those disbelievers who are deprived of the light of faith resemble individuals immersed in such compounded darkness, whereas the believers are exemplified by “نُورٌ عَلیٰ نُورٍ”. Some exegetes have interpreted the three layers of darkness as follows: 1. The darkness of erroneous belief, 2. The darkness of false speech, 3. The darkness of wrongful conduct. Others have understood them as three stages of ignorance: 1. Not knowing, 2. Not knowing that one does not know, 3. Thinking that one knows despite not knowing—this being compounded ignorance. Other interpreters have related them to the three fundamental faculties of knowledge—heart (intellect), sight, and hearing—as indicated in Sūrah al‑Naḥl (16:78): وَاللهُ اَخْرَجَکُمْ مِنْ بُطُونِ اُمَّھَاتِکُمْ لَاتَعْلَمُونَ شَیْئًا وَجَعَلَ لَکُمْ السَّمْعَ وَالْاَبْصَارَ وَالْاَفْئِدَةَ Yet the disbelievers have lost the light of all three faculties and are plunged into darkness. These interpretations are not mutually exclusive and may all be encompassed within the intended meaning of the verse. Ultimately, the two verses present a coherent conclusion: the deeds of the disbelievers are first likened to a false light—a mirage in a scorching desert—which neither quenches thirst nor provides relief, but rather intensifies suffering. Their inner reality is then described as a terrifying darkness in which all human faculties are rendered inactive, and even the nearest realities become concealed. In such overwhelming darkness, a person becomes entirely isolated, enveloped in ignorance and unawareness. He perceives neither the path nor any companion, neither his own position nor any means of escape, for he has not sought light from its source—Allah—and has instead fallen into the veils of self‑centeredness and ignorance. As previously noted, light is the source of beauty, colour, life, and movement, whereas darkness is the source of decay, stagnation, and lifelessness. Thus, those who lose the light of faith and are immersed in disbelief exist within precisely this condition.

See ayat 42 for tafseer.

In the previous verses, the discussion was about the light of God—that is, guidance and faith—and about layers upon layers of darkness representing disbelief and misguidance. In the verses under consideration, arguments for the oneness of God (Tawheed) are presented; these proofs are signs of Divine lights and causes of guidance. First, the discourse refers to the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. It is stated: “Have you not seen that whoever is in the heavens and the earth glorifies Allah?” (اَلَمْ تَریٰ اَنَّ اللهَ یُسَبِّحُ لَہُ مَنْ فِی السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْاَرْضِ). And the birds, when they spread their wings in the sky, are engaged in His glorification (وَالطَّیْرُ صَافَّاتٍ). All of them know their own manner of prayer and glorification (کُلٌّ قَدْ عَلِمَ صَلَاتَہُ وَتَسْبِیحَہُ). And whatever they do, Allah is fully aware of it (وَاللهُ عَلِیمٌ بِمَا یَفْعَلُونَ). _________ This general glorification of the created beings is an evidence of God’s Creator-ship, and His Creator-ship is proof of His ownership over the entire existence. It is also proof that all created beings will return to Him. Therefore, it is further stated: “And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and to Allah is the return” (وَلِلّٰہِ مُلْکُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْاَرْضِ وَإِلَی اللهِ الْمَصِیرُ). The connection of this verse with the previous one may also be that in the last phrase of the previous verse, the deeds of all humans and all who glorify are within the knowledge of God, while in this verse, reference is made to the other world, His justice, His sovereignty over all the heavens and the earth, and His right to judge.

The literal meaning of this expression is “Have you not seen?”; however, according to many exegetes, its intended meaning is “اَلَمْ تَری” (Have you not come to know?), because the universal glorification (tasbīḥ) of all created beings is not something that can be perceived by the physical eye. Rather, in whatever sense it is understood, its apprehension is through the heart and intellect. Nevertheless, the matter is so evident and manifest that it is as though it could be seen with the eye; hence the expression “اَلَمْ تَری” is employed here. It is also noteworthy that although the address in this verse is directed to the Prophet Muhammad (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam), some exegetes maintain that it is intended for people in general, and similar usages are found frequently in the Qurʾān. However, other exegetes hold that this perception is specific to the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam), and therefore the address is directed to him alone, since Allah granted him a form of vision through which he could directly observe the glorification and praise of all beings in existence. Likewise, the special servants of Allah who follow the Prophet’s path may attain the station of direct witnessing (shuhūd ʿaynī). For ordinary people, however, there is only intellectual and rational witnessing, not sensory or direct vision (Tafsīr al‑Ṣāfī, under the verse in question).

In various verses of the Qur’an, the four acts of worship performed by all creatures of this great universe have been mentioned: 1. Tasbeeh (glorification) 2. Hamd (praise) 3. Sajdah (prostration) 4. Namaz (prayer) The verse under discussion speaks about Namaz and Tasbeeh. In Surah Ar-Ra’d, verse 15, general prostration is mentioned: وَلِلّٰهِ یَسْجُدُ مَنْ فِی السَّمٰوَاتِ وَالْاَرْضِ “And to Allah prostrates whoever is within the heavens and the earth.” In Surah Al-Isra (Bani Isra’il), verse 44, the Tasbeeh and Hamd of all creatures of the universe is stated: وَإِن مِّن شَيْءٍ إِلَّا يُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِهِ “And there is not a thing but that it glorifies His praise.” A detailed discussion about the general reality of the glorification of the creatures of the universe and various tafsirs related to Surah Al-Isra, verse 44, has been presented earlier; here, we will discuss it briefly. Two interpretations are noteworthy in this regard: 1) All the particles of this universe, whether we consider them conscious or unconscious, possess a kind of awareness and perception; they glorify and praise Allah in their own manner, although we may not be able to comprehend it. Evidences from Qur’anic verses have also been cited in this context. 2) Tasbeeh and Hamd mean that which we call the “language of the state” (zabān-e-hāl). The system of existence and all creatures, which contain the hidden, astonishing secrets of the universe, in the silent language of their existence, clearly express their Creator’s power, greatness, and infinite knowledge and wisdom; for every entity of the universe is unique, excellent, and astonishing. A delicate painting and a beautifully composed poem both praise and glorify their Maker. That is, on one hand, they describe His excellent attributes (Hamd), and on the other hand, they negate any defect or flaw (Tasbeeh). So then, does this magnificent universe, all these wonders, and these infinitely astonishing things not glorify and praise their Maker? However, if the phrase “يُسَبِّحُ لَهُ مَن فِی السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْاَرْضِ” is taken to mean the glorification by the inhabitants of the heavens and the earth, and the word “مَن” (whoever) is restricted to those having intellect, then still the Tasbeeh will be in the primary sense that is conscious and voluntary; but the necessary consequence of this is that we must also admit such awareness for birds. In the aforementioned verse, “مَن فِی السَّمَاوَاتِ” refers to birds. This, however, is not strange or extraordinary, as in some other verses there are indications of such consciousness in certain birds. (This matter has been discussed in Tafseer Namuna, Volume 3, under Surah Al-An’am, verse 28.)

In the verse under discussion, among all the beings of the universe, specific mention is made of the glorification (tasbīḥ) of birds, particularly in the state in which they spread their wings in the sky. There is an important point embedded in this reference: despite their extraordinary diversity, birds possess numerous remarkable characteristics that attract both the attention of the eye and the reflection of the intellect. Contrary to the law of gravity, birds—despite having relatively heavy bodies—fly through the sky with remarkable speed. This is especially evident when they spread their wings and ride upon currents of air, gliding effortlessly in any direction they choose without apparent exertion, and then advancing forward. Birds exhibit a profound awareness of atmospheric conditions and possess extensive knowledge of geographical environments. They migrate from one continent to another; indeed, some travel from the North Pole to the South Pole. An extraordinary and mysterious system guides them during these long journeys, even when the sky is covered with clouds. Such awareness constitutes one of the most astonishing and evident proofs of توحید. Bats are equipped with a unique form of radar; through it, they are able to perceive obstacles in their path within the darkness of night. They even detect fish beneath the surface of water and seize them with lightning‑like speed. In any case, birds contain numerous wonders, and it is for this reason that the Qurʾān has made specific mention of them.

Some exegetes maintain that the pronoun in “علم” returns to “کل”. According to this view, the meaning of the verse would be that everyone in the heavens and the earth, as well as the birds, is aware of his own prayer and glorification. However, other exegetes hold that the pronoun in “علم” returns to Allah; that is, Allah is aware of the prayer and glorification of each and every one among them. Nonetheless, the first interpretation appears to be more consistent with the apparent meaning of the verse. It suggests that every being engaged in glorification is conscious of the particular nature of its own “تسبیح” and its own “نماز”. If this is understood as glorification performed with awareness, then its meaning is evident. But if it is taken to be through the language of state (lisān al‑ḥāl), then its implication is that every being possesses a distinct system that, in its own unique manner, expresses the greatness of the Sustainer; each is a manifestation of His power and grandeur.

Some exegetes—such as the late Ṭabrisī in Majmaʿ al‑Bayān and Ālūsī in Rūḥ al‑Bayān—have interpreted the term “صلاة” at this point as meaning “supplication (duʿāʾ)”, which is its original lexical sense. On this basis, the meaning of the verse would be that all beings in the heavens and the earth, whether through the language of state (lisān al‑ḥāl) or the language of utterance (lisān al‑maqāl), turn in supplication toward the Divine presence and seek the emanation of grace. Since He is the Absolute Bestower (al‑Fayyāḍ al‑Muṭlaq), He grants to each according to its capacity and does not withhold His bounty. Moreover, each being, in its own way, is aware of its needs, of what it should ask for, and of the nature of its supplication. In addition, according to the verses previously indicated, all beings are in a state of submission (taslīm) before the majesty of the Divine presence and the laws of creation. At the same time, with their entire existence they proclaim the attributes of perfection of Allah and negate every deficiency from Him. In this manner, their acts of devotion—ḥamd (praise), tasbīḥ (glorification), duʿāʾ (supplication), and sujūd (prostration)—are collectively realized.

See ayat 45 for tafseer.

See ayat 45 for tafseer.

In these verses as well, a dimension of the wonders of creation—and the knowledge, wisdom, and grandeur embedded within them—has been presented; and all of these, in turn, constitute proofs of His pure Unity. Once again, the address is directed toward the Prophet Muhammad (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam). It is stated: “اَلَمْ تَرَ أَنَّ اللهَ یُزْجِی سَحَابًا ثُمَّ یُؤَلِّفُ بَیْنَہُ ثُمَّ یَجْعَلُہُ رُکَامًا”. Have you not seen that Allah gently drives the clouds, then joins them together, and then makes them layered? Thereafter, you observe that from within these clouds rain begins to fall, descending upon mountains, plains, gardens, and deserts (فَتَرَی الْوَدْقَ یَخْرُجُ مِنْ خِلَالِہِ). The term “یُزْجِی” is derived from “ازجاء”, meaning to move scattered things gradually and gently and bring them together. This description perfectly corresponds to clouds: their fragments rise from various regions of the oceans, and then the Divine power directs them toward one another, combines them, and forms them into layered masses. “رُکَام” (on the pattern of “غلام”) denotes things accumulated one upon another in layers. The term “وَدْق”, according to many exegetes, refers to raindrops that fall from clouds. According to Mufradāt al‑Rāghib, it may also refer to extremely fine particles of water dispersed in the air during rainfall; however, the first meaning appears more appropriate here, since the life‑giving drops of rain constitute the more significant sign of Divine power. Moreover, wherever the Qurʾān speaks of blessings descending from the sky, it consistently refers to rain. Indeed, it is rain that revives dead زمین, clothes vegetation, and sustains humans and animals. The verse then points to another remarkable phenomenon arising from the sky and clouds: “وَیُنَزِّلُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ مِنْ جِبَالٍ فِیھَا مِنْ بَرَدٍ”. He sends down hail from the sky, from mountain‑like masses within it. “فَیُصِیبُ بِہِ مَنْ یَشَاءُ”—He strikes whomever He wills with it; trees, fruits, crops, and at times even human beings and animals are affected. “وَیَصْرِفُہُ عَنْ مَنْ یَشَاءُ”—and He averts it from whomsoever He wills. Thus, He sometimes sends life‑giving rain from the clouds and at other times transforms it into destructive hail, which can even become fatal. It is as though these opposing potentials are placed within a single system. At the conclusion of the verse, yet another sign of Divine unity manifesting in the heavens is mentioned: “یَکَادُ سَنَا بَرْقِہِ یَذْہَبُ بِالْاَبْصَارِ”. The flash of lightning from these clouds is so intense that it almost takes away sight. These clouds, which are essentially composed of fine particles of water, when charged with electrical energy, produce flashes of fire that dazzle the eyes. Their thunder appears to rend the ears, and at times even causes the earth to tremble. The emergence of such a powerful and striking phenomenon from the aggregation of delicate vapours is indeed astonishing.

The question is: Which mountain in the sky causes hail to fall? In this regard, the mufassirun (exegetes) have expressed various views. For example: 1. Some have said that "جبال" (mountains, plural) is used metaphorically. Just as we say a mountain of grain or a mountain of knowledge, similarly, here the meaning of the verse is that in the sky, a great mass of ice resembling a mountain arises within the clouds. The hailstones can be considered fragments and pebbles of that mountain. Some fall on cities, some fall in deserts, and some cause harm to certain people. 2. Some have said that mountains here refer to the large chunks of clouds which are immense like mountains. 3. The author of the tafseer "Fi Zilal" has made a point which seems most appropriate. He says that indeed, the cloud chunks in the sky resemble mountains. Although from the earth they appear flat, those who have traveled above clouds in airplanes have witnessed with their own eyes that clouds are exactly like mountains, having valleys, heights, and depressions just like mountains on land. In this regard, the application of the term mountain to clouds is entirely fitting. (Reference: Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, vol. 6, p. 109). Along with this discussion, we can add the point that according to the research of scientists, hail is formed when raindrops separate from the cloud. They collide with severe cold waves in the upper layers of the air and turn into balls of ice. Due to the destructive storms and strong winds in this layer, sometimes these hailstones are pushed upward again into the cloud. During this process, a layer of water accumulates on them. When separating from the clouds, they become ice balls again. Sometimes the falling of these balls and their collision with the storm while being pushed upwards into the cloud repeats many times, each time adding a new layer to them until these hailstones become large enough that the storm and wind cannot lift them upward anymore. Therefore, they fall to the ground or, if the storm stops, they come down to earth without obstruction. (Explanatory note: Encyclopedia Farhang Nama, entry "Tugrik"). Paying attention to this makes the scientific point hidden in the word "جبال" clearer. Heavy hail can only form when clouds become layered so that when the storm throws the ice balls inward, they can absorb more water. This is only possible when the pieces at the top are like elevated and high mountains (please observe). (Explanatory note: In the phrase وَيُنَزِّلُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ مِنْ جِبَالٍ فِيهَا مِنْ بَرَدٍ the word "min" appears three times. From the perspective of Arabic literature, the first "min" is "ibtida’iya" (initial), the second also relates to "ibtida’iya". However, there are different opinions about the third "min." One opinion is that it is "bayanīyah" (explanatory), and accordingly, the meaning of the sentence will be that "Allah sends down hail from the mountains in the sky." Based on this view, the object of "yunazzilu" is omitted "al-barad" (hail), which is understood from the context. But the second and third interpretations, which we have chosen, regard this "min" as "zaidah" (excessive), as Zamakhshari wrote in Ruh al-Ma‘ani, or that it is "tabwidhīyah" (distributive) (please observe). Some authors have also made another discussion here, the summary of which we mention below: In the verses under discussion, the high clouds explicitly refer to mountains of ice, or in other words, these are the mountains that contain a particular kind of ice, which is very striking. Because after the advent of airplanes and the possibility of high-altitude flights, human knowledge has greatly expanded. Scientists have discovered such clouds made of ice particles, with hidden layers beneath them. The words "mountains of ice" or "mountains made of ice" are repeatedly used in talking about heavy stormy rains, proving that indeed there are mountains of ice present in the sky. (Reference: Baad-o-Baran dar Qur’an, pp. 140-141) (for further explanation, please consult the cited book). The next verse mentions another sign of the greatness of Allah regarding the creation of night and day and their characteristics. It states: Allah alternates the night and the day. Indeed, in this there is a lesson for those endowed with insight. (يُقَلِّبُ اللهُ اللَّیْلَ وَالنَّھَارَ إِنَّ فِی ذٰلِکَ لَعِبْرَةً لِاُوْلِی الْاَبْصَارِ). This alternation and reversal have been interpreted differently by scholars. For example: - Some have said it means the coming and going of night and day, as night arrives and obliterates the day, and day comes and obliterates the night. - Some say it means that one gradually diminishes while the other increases, thereby producing different seasons. - Some interpret it as the various changes occurring in night and day, such as heat and cold, etc. (Reference: Tafseer Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Tafseer Majma’ al-Bayan).(from Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani) However, without explicitly stating, it is clear that these interpretations do not contradict one another. It is possible that all these meanings are encompassed within the concept of "يقلّب" (to alternate). Certainly, science has proven that the alternation of night and day and their gradual changes are deeply connected with human life and serve as a lesson for "those endowed with insight" and the people of perception. If the sun were to shine continuously in the same intensity and the heat were incessant, the air temperature would rise greatly, living beings would burn, and nerves would become severely fatigued. But if, between this heat and brightness, the dark veil of night intervenes, it keeps these things in moderation. The gradual changes occurring between night and day cause the emergence of the four seasons, which are very effective in making plants fruitful. Thus, these changes play a significant role in the life of living beings, the occurrence of rainfall, and the accumulation of water reserves in the earth. (Explanatory note: On this subject, a detailed discussion has already been presented under Surah Yunus, verse 6, in Tafseer Namona, Volume 8). The final verse under consideration points to another aspect of the creation’s face, which also constitutes a clear evidence of God’s Oneness (Tawhid), and that is the existence of life in various forms. It is stated: "Allah created every moving creature from water" (وَاللهُ خَلَقَ كُلَّ دَابَّةٍ مِنْ مَاءٍ). Although all of them are created from water, yet astonishingly diverse types of living beings are produced. "Some of them crawl on their bellies" (فَمِنْھُمْ مَنْ یَمْشِی عَلیٰ بَطْنِہِ). And some walk on two legs, and some walk on four (livestock) (وَمِنْھُمْ مَنْ یَمْشِی عَلَىٰ رِجْلَیْنِ وَمِنْھُمْ مَنْ یَمْشِی عَلَىٰ أَرْبَعٍ). And not only this, there are other manifestations of life. Among them are those living creatures that dwell in water. Similarly, there are thousands of species of insects on earth. Therefore, at the end of the verse, it is further stated: "Allah creates what He wills" (یَخْلُقُ اللهُ مَا یَشَاءُ), because Allah is capable of everything (إِنَّ اللهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ).

Regarding the term “ماء” (water) in this verse, exegetes have presented differing opinions. These views may be summarized into three principal interpretations: 1. It has been understood as referring to the fluid of reproduction (nuṭfah). Many exegetes have adopted this interpretation, and some narrations also allude to it. However, this explanation encounters a difficulty, namely that not all living beings originate from nuṭfah. There exist numerous organisms that arise from a single cell, and among crawling creatures—also encompassed by the term “دابّة”—many come into existence through cellular division rather than through nuṭfah. It may, however, be argued that the verse speaks in a general rather than universal sense; in that case, this interpretation may be acceptable. 2. It has also been interpreted as referring to the primordial creation. According to certain narrations, Allah first created water, and thereafter brought human beings into existence from it. In line with some modern scientific conjectures, the earliest forms of life emerged in waters—within seas or along their margins—and these initial living entities gradually developed thereafter. Nevertheless, the power that first brought life into existence with all its complexities, and subsequently guided its development, is a metaphysical force—namely, the Divine will. 3. A third interpretation holds that the reference is to the present condition of living beings, whose survival depends upon water, and whose structure consists largely of it. No living being can continue to exist without water. These interpretations are not mutually exclusive; however, the first and second appear to be more plausible. (It should be noted that some proponents of the theory of evolution have attempted to employ this verse in support of their hypothesis. However, it has already been discussed elsewhere that such hypotheses are not conclusively established. Moreover, it is essential, in principle, not to force Qurʾānic verses to conform to speculative theories, since the verses of the Qurʾān convey enduring realities, whereas hypotheses are subject to change.)

Here a question arises as to why the animals are divided into only these three categories: 1. Those that crawl on their bellies. 2. Those that have two legs. 3. Livestock. Whereas there are many walking creatures that have more than four legs. The answer to this question is hidden in the verse itself, because after this phrase Allah Almighty says: یَخْلُقُ اللهُ مَا یَشَاءُ "Allah creates whatever He wills." Moreover, the most important animals with which humans have contact mostly belong to these three groups. Some also hold the view that animals with more than four legs fundamentally rely on four legs, and the additional legs are considered auxiliary.

There is no doubt that the most astonishing phenomenon to appear in the universe is life itself. Life remains a mystery that scholars and scientists have not yet been able to resolve. It is commonly stated that living beings emerge from the inanimate matter of this universe; however, no one knows with certainty under what precise conditions and circumstances life comes into existence. This is because it has not yet been observed or demonstrated through experiment that life can emerge from a non‑living entity within a laboratory. Although thousands of experts and scientists have devoted many years to reflection and experimentation in this field, only a faint and preliminary conception has so far emerged, which remains highly undeveloped. What is firmly established is that the mysteries of life are so complex that, despite the vast expansion of human knowledge, they continue to elude complete understanding. Under present conditions in the world, living beings arise only from other living beings, and no organism comes into existence independently of life. Undoubtedly, however, this was not the case at the beginning of life. In other words, the emergence of life on earth has a history, yet this history remains an unresolved enigma. Even more remarkable is the diversity and variation of life. The forms of life differ significantly among living organisms: there are organisms produced from a single cell, visible only through a microscope, and there are immense creatures such as large marine animals whose length may exceed thirty yards, resembling vast masses of living substance. There are countless species of insects, thousands of kinds of birds, and within each category there exist distinct and intricate systems of their own. Books on biology in the modern age constitute a substantial portion of libraries. These works describe only a limited aspect of the secrets of living beings. Among them, aquatic creatures in particular present an extraordinary realm of wonders, and despite considerable advances in knowledge, human understanding of them remains extremely limited. How عظیم is Allah who has created these living beings with such vast diversity, and has granted each what it requires. How عظیم is His knowledge, and how عظیم is His power, that He has arranged each being according to its conditions and needs. Most remarkable of all is that their origin is one: water—and a portion of the earth’s material substance.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

Exegetes have reported two occasions of revelation (asbāb al‑nuzūl) for a portion of these verses, which may be presented as follows: 1. A dispute arose between a hypocrite and a Jew. The Jew proposed that they should go to the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) and seek a judgment from him. However, the hypocrite refused and insisted that they should instead go to Kaʿb ibn al‑Ashraf, who was a Jew. In some narrations, it is even stated that he said: it is possible that Muhammad will not rule justly in our favor. Upon this, these verses were revealed, and such conduct was severely condemned. 2. A disagreement arose between Amīr al‑Muʾminīn ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and ʿUthmān (in another narration, the name al‑Mughīrah ibn Wāʾil is mentioned instead). The dispute concerned a piece of land that one of them had purchased from ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām). When certain stones were found in the land, the purchaser sought to declare it defective and annul the transaction. A disagreement ensued. ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām) said: let us go to the Messenger of Allah (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) and obtain a judgment from him. However, al‑Ḥakam ibn al‑ʿĀṣ, who was among the hypocrites, advised the purchaser against doing so, saying: do not proceed in this manner, for if you go to his cousin (that is, the Messenger of Allah), he will certainly judge in his favor. Thereupon, these verses were revealed, and such an attitude was strongly denounced (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān; Rūḥ al‑Maʿānī; al‑Tibyān; Tafsīr al‑Qurṭubī; Tafsīr Fakhr al‑Rāzī; Tafsīr al‑Ṣāfī; Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, under the relevant verse, with minor variations).

In the preceding verses, the discussion centred on faith in Allah; arguments for Divine unity were presented, and the signs of Allah were described. In the verses now under consideration, attention turns to the effects of faith. They articulate the requirements of belief in unity and call for submission before truth and reality. It is stated: “لَقَدْ اَنزَلْنَا آیَاتٍ مُبَیِّنَاتٍ”. Clear and manifest verses have been revealed—verses that illuminate hearts with the light of faith and unity, refine human thought, and transform the darkness of life. These evident signs prepare the way for faith; however, their true efficacy is realised only through Divine guidance, for “وَاللهُ یَھْدِی مَنْ یَشَاءُ إِلَی صِرَاطٍ مُسْتَقِیمٍ”. It is understood that the Divine will and determination are not arbitrary. The light of faith is granted to those hearts that are prepared to receive it and are worthy of it—those who have initiated striving and taken steps toward it. Subsequently, the hypocrites are condemned—those who profess faith verbally while it has not entered their hearts. It is stated: “وَیَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِاللهِ وَبِالرَّسُولِ وَاَطَعْنَا ثُمَّ یَتَوَلَّی فَرِیقٌ مِنْھُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ ذٰلِکَ وَمَا اُوْلٰئِکَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِینَ”. They claim belief in Allah and His Messenger and profess obedience, yet a group among them turns away; in reality, they are not believers. What kind of faith is this that remains confined to their tongues and does not manifest in their actions? As evidence of their lack of faith, it is further stated: “وَإِذَا دُعُوا إِلَی اللهِ وَرَسُولِہِ لِیَحْکُمَ بَیْنَھُمْ إِذَا فَرِیقٌ مِنْھُمْ مُعْرِضُونَ”. When they are called to Allah and His Messenger so that he may judge between them, a group of them turns away. For further emphasis, and to expose their worldliness and hidden association (shirk), it is added: “وَإِنْ یَکُنْ لَھُمَ الْحَقُّ یَاْتُوا إِلَیْہِ مُذْعِنِینَ”. However, if the judgment is in their favor, they come submissively. It is noteworthy that while the invitation is toward both Allah and His Messenger, the subsequent phrase employs the singular “لیحکم”, referring specifically to the judgment of the Messenger. This is because the decision of the Messenger of Allah is not separate from the decision of Allah; both return to one and the same reality. Likewise, the pronoun in “إِلَیْہِ” refers to the Messenger or to his judgment. It should also be noted that the refusal to accept the judgment of the Messenger is attributed only to a group among the hypocrites, perhaps because another group did not exhibit such boldness, for hypocrisy itself has varying درجات. In the concluding verse under discussion, the fundamental causes of their refusal to submit are presented. It is asked: “اَفِی قُلُوبِھِمْ مَرَضٌ”. Is there a disease in their hearts? One characteristic of the hypocrites is that, although they profess belief, they do not submit to the judgment of Allah and His Messenger, for their hearts are deviated from unity. Or are they in doubt—“اَمْ ارْتَابُوا”? Naturally, one who is uncertain about a religion will not submit to its requirements. If neither of these is the case, then: “اَمْ یَخَافُونَ اَنْ یَحِیفَ اللهُ عَلَیْھِمْ وَرَسُولُہُ”. Do they fear that Allah and His Messenger will act unjustly toward them? This is an evident contradiction, for one who truly believes the Messenger to be sent by Allah, and his command to be Divine, cannot conceive of injustice on his part. Is it conceivable that Allah would commit injustice? Injustice arises from ignorance, need, or self‑interest, whereas the Divine essence is free from all such attributes. Rather, “بَلْ اُوْلٰئِکَ ھُمْ الظَّالِمُونَ”—they themselves are the unjust. They are unwilling to be content with their rightful due, and knowing that the Messenger of Allah will not grant them what belongs to others, they are not prepared to accept his judgment. According to the author of Fī Ẓilāl al‑Qurʾān, each of the three expressions carries a distinct rhetorical force: the first is affirmative, the second expresses astonishment, and the third conveys negation. The first identifies the true cause—namely, the disease of hypocrisy; the second expresses amazement at their doubt regarding the justice of the Messenger, despite their profession of faith; and the third highlights the contradiction between their claims and their conduct. It may be observed, however, that interpreting “اَمْ ارْتَابُوا” as doubt concerning the justice of the Messenger’s judgment is not entirely consistent with the ظاهر, since it more directly indicates doubt in prophethood itself, as acknowledged by many exegetes.

This is not the place where the Qur'an describes hypocrisy as a "disease." Rather, before this, at the beginning of Surah Al-Baqarah, while describing the characteristics of the hypocrites, it is stated: فِی قُلُوبِھِمْ مَرَضٌ فَزَادَھُمْ اللّٰہُ مَرَضًا In their hearts is a disease, and Allah has increased their disease. As we have already mentioned under this verse in the first volume, hypocrisy is indeed a disease and a deviation. A person who is correct and healthy has only one face. His soul and body are in harmony. If he is a believer, the voice of faith arises from all parts of his being, and if he is deviant, his outward and inward both manifest deviation. But the one whose outward appearance is faith while his inner self is aflame with disbelief — this is a type of disease. Such people, due to their stubbornness and shamelessness, do not deserve the pleasure and guidance of Allah. Therefore, Allah leaves them in their state so that their disease may increase. Indeed, the most dangerous people in any society are these hypocrites. This is because their legal status is unclear to others; they are neither true friends nor openly enemies. They benefit from the resources of the believers yet are safe from the punishment of the disbelievers. However, their deeds are worse than those of the disbelievers. We know that this disharmony between outward and inward cannot remain permanent. Eventually, the veil is lifted, and their corrupt inner nature is revealed. As we have observed in the verses under discussion and in their reasons for revelation, when an issue arose, their deceit was uncovered, and their malice became apparent. (Explanatory note: For further clarification regarding the characteristics of the hypocrites, refer to Tafseer Namuna, Volume 1, under Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 10).

There is no doubt that a human being must free himself from the influences of love and hatred, self‑interest, and personal motives, which often affect decisions at a subconscious level—except in the case of one who is maʿṣūm and divinely protected by the Lord. For this reason, it is affirmed that the true lawgiver can only be God. By virtue of His infinite knowledge, He is fully aware of all human needs and also knows the proper means for their fulfilment. He Himself is free of all need, and His judgments are never influenced by love, hatred, deviation, or bias. Therefore, the most just judgment can only belong to God, the Prophet, and the Imams who are maʿṣūm, and thereafter to those who follow their path and resemble them in conduct. However, self‑centred individuals are not prepared to accept such just judgments, nor do they welcome the implementation and expansion of equitable laws. Rather, they seek laws and decisions that fulfil their desires and greed. Concerning such individuals, the Qurʾān has expressed a most profound truth: اُوْلٰئِکَ ھُمْ الظَّالِمُونَ These are indeed the true wrongdoers. Moreover, genuinely just judgments serve as a standard by which the level of a person’s faith is measured. It is noteworthy that in another place the Qurʾān states that true believers not only submit to the judgment of the Messenger, but also feel no inward discomfort or dissatisfaction—even if the judgment appears outwardly to be against them. It declares: فَلَ اوْرَبِّکَ لَا یُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّی یُحَکِّمُوکَ فِیْمَا شَجَرَ بَیْنَہُمْ ثُمَّ لَا یَجِدُوا فِی أَنفُسِہِمْ حَرَجًا مِّمَّا قَضَیْتَ وَیُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِیمًا By your Lord, they shall not be believers until they make you the arbiter in their disputes, and then find no discomfort within themselves regarding what you have decided, and submit in full submission (al‑Nisāʾ 4:65). However, those who obey Allah and the Messenger only when it aligns with their own interests are, in reality, adherents of shirk, being servants of their own interests—even if they profess faith and appear among the believers. Provide your feedback on BizChat

See ayat 54 for tafseer.

See ayat 54 for tafseer.

See ayat 54 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, the condition of the dark‑hearted hypocrites was described—those immersed in layered darknesses, exemplifying “ظُلُمَاتٌ بَعْضُھَا فَوْقَ بَعْضٍ”; and it was seen how they turn away from the just judgment of Allah and His Messenger, as though they fear that Allah and the Messenger would deprive them of their rights. In the verses now under consideration, the condition of the believers is presented in contrast to the hypocrites, particularly regarding their response to Divine judgment. It is stated: when the believers are invited to Allah and His Messenger so that judgment may be made between them, they utter only one statement—they say, “سَمِعْنَا وَاَطَعْنَا” (we hear and we obey) (إِنَّمَا کَانَ قَوْلَ الْمُؤْمِنِینَ إِذَا دُعُوا إِلَی اللهِ وَرَسُولِہِ لِیَحْکُمَ بَیْنَھُمْ اَنْ یَقُولُوا سَمِعْنَا وَاَطَعْنَا). How concise and profound is this expression: “سَمِعْنَا وَاَطَعْنَا” (we hear and we obey). The use of “إنَّمَا” conveys exclusivity, indicating that this alone defines their response—their entire disposition is encapsulated in this submission. Indeed, the essence of true faith is precisely this: “سَمِعْنَا وَاَطَعْنَا”. One who truly believes that Allah is All‑Knowing, independent of all, and infinitely merciful toward His servants cannot possibly prefer any judgment over that of Allah, nor could such a person respond with anything other than complete acceptance and obedience. This constitutes a profound trial and an excellent path to the success of the believers. Thus, at the conclusion of the verse it is stated: such individuals are truly successful (وَاُوْلٰئِکَ ھُمَ الْمُفْلِحُونَ). In reality, the one who entrusts all matters to Allah, recognising Him as the ultimate authority and judge, achieves success in both worldly and spiritual life. In the subsequent verse, this principle is expressed in a general form: whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger, fears Allah, and adopts taqwā—such people are the successful and the ones who attain deliverance (وَمَنْ یُطِعْ اللهَ وَرَسُولَہُ وَیَخْشَ اللهَ وَیَتَّقِیہِ فَاُوْلٰئِکَ ھُمَ الْفَائِزُونَ). In this verse, the obedient and God‑fearing are described as “فائزون”, whereas in the previous verse those who submit to Divine judgment are termed “مفلحون”. Lexical works indicate that “فوز” and “فلاح” are closely related in meaning: “فوز” denotes success accompanied by safety and a good outcome, while “فلاح” signifies attainment of the desired objective. Originally, “فلاح” carries the meaning of cleaving or breaking through; hence, it came to denote success, as successful individuals overcome obstacles and advance. The latter verse presents obedience in a general sense, while the former focuses specifically on submission to Divine judgment. Thus, one conveys a universal meaning, while the other addresses a specific condition; nevertheless, their ultimate outcome is the same. It is also noteworthy that the second verse mentions three characteristics of those who attain success: 1. Obedience to Allah and His Messenger, 2. Fear of Allah, 3. Taqwā. Some exegetes have interpreted obedience as a general principle, fear of Allah as an inner state, and taqwā as its outward manifestation. Hence, the verse first mentions obedience in general terms, followed by its internal and external dimensions. It is also reported in a narration from Imām Muḥammad al‑Bāqir (ʿalayhi al‑salām) regarding the verse “وَاُوْلٰئِکَ ھُمَ الْمُفْلِحُونَ” that: انّ المعنیٰ بالآیة امیر الموٴمنین The referent of this verse is Amīr al‑Muʾminīn ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām) (Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 616). Undoubtedly, ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām) represents one of the most complete and evident examples of this verse; however, this narration does not restrict the general applicability of the verse. The tone of the following verse, along with its reported occasion of revelation, indicates that after the severe condemnation of the hypocrites in the preceding verses, some of them became distressed and came to the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam), swearing emphatically that they were obedient. The Qurʾān addresses this situation decisively: وَاَقْسَمُوا بِاللهِ جَھْدَ اَیْمَانِھِمْ لَئِنْ اَمَرْتَھُمْ لَیَخْرُجُنَّ قُلْ لَاتُقْسِمُوا طَاعَةٌ مَعْرُوفَةٌ إِنَّ اللهَ خَبِیرٌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ They swore their strongest oaths that if commanded, they would leave everything; say to them: there is no need to swear—obedience must be evident in action, for Allah is fully aware of what you do. Many exegetes interpret “لَیَخْرُجُنَّ” as referring to going forth for jihād, while others understand it as leaving one’s home or remaining constantly in the Prophet’s service. Given the context of judgment and disputes in the preceding verses, the latter interpretation appears more consistent, though both meanings may be encompassed. Hypocrites often alter their demeanor under adverse conditions, resorting to emphatic oaths; yet such oaths themselves frequently indicate insincerity. Consequently, the Qurʾān instructs them that oaths are unnecessary—rather, sincerity must be demonstrated through action, as Allah is fully aware of their inner realities. Therefore, in the concluding verse, emphasis is placed once more: “قُلْ اَطِیعُوا اللهَ وَاَطِیعُوا الرَّسُولَ”. Say: obey Allah and obey the Messenger. It is then clarified that if they turn away, the Messenger is responsible only for what has been entrusted to him, and they are responsible for what has been entrusted to them (فَإِنْ تَوَلَّوْا فَإِنَّمَا عَلَیْہِ مَا حُمِّلَ وَعَلَیْکُمْ مَا حُمِّلْتُمْ). However, if they obey him, they will be guided (وَإِنْ تُطِیعُوہُ تَھْتَدُوا), for he calls only to Allah and to the truth. The duty of the Messenger is solely to convey the message clearly (وَمَا عَلَی الرَّسُولِ إِلاَّ الْبَلَاغُ الْمُبِینُ). It is noteworthy that responsibility is described here as a burden, and indeed it is so. The responsibility of prophethood and the sincere obedience to the Divine message are both burdens that must be carried to their rightful fulfilment, and only the sincere possess the strength to bear them.

Al-Suyuti in Asbab al-Nuzul, Al-Tabarsi in Majma' al-Bayan, Sayyid Qutb in Fi Zilal al-Qur'an, Al-Qurtubi in his tafseer, and likewise many other mufassirun (with slight variations) have narrated the occasion of revelation of this verse as follows: When the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and the Muslims migrated to Madinah, and the Ansar greeted them with open-hearted welcome, all the Arabs rose up against them. To the extent that the Muslims were forced to keep weapons with them at all times — sleeping at night while keeping arms nearby, waking up in the morning with weapons in hand, and remaining constantly vigilant. Maintaining this state was very difficult for the Muslims. Some openly expressed, "How long will this condition remain? Will there ever come a time when we can breathe peacefully at night and fear no one except Allah?" In response, this verse was revealed, giving them glad tidings that indeed such a time would come. (Reference: Asbab al-Nuzul, 1632; Majma' al-Bayan; Tafseer al-Qurtubi and Tafseer Fi Zilal, under the discussed verse).

In the preceding verses, the discussion centred on submission to the command of Allah and His Messenger. In the present verse, the same theme continues, and the consequence of such obedience is described as the establishment of a universal authority. The verse emphatically states that those who believe and perform righteous deeds are promised by Allah that He will surely make them successors on the earth, just as He granted succession to those before them (وَعَدَ اللهُ الَّذِینَ آمَنُوا مِنْکُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَیَسْتَخْلِفَنَّھُم فِی الْاَرْضِ کَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِینَ مِنْ قَبْلِھِمْ). He will firmly establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them (وَلَیُمَکِّنَنَّ لَھُمْ دِینَھُمْ الَّذِی ارْتَضَی لَھُمْ), and He will transform their condition from fear into security (وَلَیُبَدِّلَنَّھُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ خَوْفِھِمْ اَمْنًا). The result will be that they will worship Him alone and will not associate anything with Him (یَعْبُدُونَنِی لَایُشْرِکُونَ بِی شَیْئًا). It is evident that after the establishment of the rule of توحید, the consolidation of the divine religion, and the removal of all forms of اضطراب, insecurity, and shirk, those who still revert to disbelief are indeed transgressors: “وَمَنْ کَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذٰلِکَ فَاُوْلٰئِکَ ھُمَ الْفَاسِقُونَ”. In summary, the verse conveys three glad tidings for those believers who possess faith and perform righteous deeds: Authority and succession over the earth. The firm establishment and consolidation of the true religion in all places, as indicated by the term “تمکین”. The removal of all causes of fear and insecurity. The outcome of these blessings is that such individuals will worship Allah with complete freedom, implement His commands, reject all forms of association, and propagate pure توحید throughout the world. Whether this Divine promise has been fulfilled or not will be examined in subsequent discussion.

Exegetes have differed regarding the identity of those who were granted succession before the Muslims. Their views may be summarised as follows: Some have considered it an indication of prophets such as Ādam (ʿalayhi al‑salām), Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al‑salām), and Sulaymān (ʿalayhi al‑salām). This is based on Qurʾānic references: in Sūrah al‑Baqarah (2:30), concerning Ādam (ʿalayhi al‑salām), it is stated: اِنِّیْ جَاعِلٌ فِی الْاَرْضِ خَلِیفَة And in Sūrah Ṣād (38:26), concerning Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al‑salām): یا داوٴد إنّا جعلناک خلیفة فی الارض Similarly, according to Sūrah al‑Naml (27:16), Sulaymān (ʿalayhi al‑salām) inherited the kingdom of Dāwūd, and thus he too held succession. However, some exegetes, including the distinguished scholar ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī in al‑Mīzān, have regarded this interpretation as unlikely. They reason that the expression “الَّذِینَ مِنْ قَبْلِھِمْ” is not consistent with the elevated مقام of the Prophets, since such terminology is not typically employed in the Qurʾān in reference to them. Accordingly, ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī interprets it as referring to previous communities who possessed faith and righteous action and were granted authority on the earth. Other exegetes have suggested that the verse refers specifically to Banū Isrāʾīl. Following the destruction of the power of Pharaoh and his followers during the time of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām), they became rulers, as indicated in Sūrah al‑Aʿrāf (7:137): وَ اَوْرَثْنَا الْقَوْمَ الَّذِینَ کَانُوا یُسْتَضْعَفُونَ مَشَارِقَ الْاَرْضِ وَ مَغَارِبَھَا الَّتِی بَارَکْنَا فِیھَا And also in the statement: وَنُمَکِّنَ لَھُمْ فِی الْاَرْض It is true that among Banū Isrāʾīl in the time of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) there existed individuals who were morally corrupt or even disbelieving; however, authority in reality rested in the hands of the righteous believers. Thus, the objection raised by some exegetes against this interpretation is effectively addressed. This third interpretation appears to be closer to the intended meaning.

According to the verse, Allah has promised authority over the earth, religious establishment, and complete security to those who possess faith and perform righteous deeds. Concerning the identity of those to whom this promise applies, exegetes have expressed differing views. - Some have considered it specific to the Companions of the Messenger, who, through the success of Islam, attained authority during the time of the Prophet (although, according to this interpretation, “earth” does not imply the entirety of the globe but rather a particular region). - Others have regarded it as referring to the rule of the first four caliphs. - Some have taken its meaning to be broad, applying it to all Muslims who embody these qualities. - Others have interpreted it as referring to the rule of Imām al‑Mahdī (ʿalayhi al‑salām), under whose authority the شرق and غرب of the world will come, the true religion will prevail everywhere, fear, insecurity, and warfare will cease, and all people will engage in worship free from polytheism. There is no doubt that the verse encompasses the early Muslims, and there is likewise no doubt that the rule of Imām al‑Mahdī (ʿalayhi al‑salām) represents its most complete manifestation. All Muslims—whether Shīʿah or Sunni—believe that the rule of Imām al‑Mahdī (ʿalayhi al‑salām), at a time when the world has become filled with oppression and injustice, will transform it into one filled with justice and equity. Nevertheless, there is no impediment to understanding the verse in a general sense. In summary, whenever the foundations of faith and righteous action become firmly established among Muslims, they will attain effective authority. Some have argued that the term “ارض” is absolute and refers to the entire earth, and that this exclusively relates to the rule of Imām al‑Mahdī (ʿalayhi al‑salام). However, this claim does not correspond with the phrase “کَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ…”, because the authority granted to previous believers did not encompass the whole world. Moreover, the occasion of revelation also indicates that even during the later period of the Prophet’s life, a form of such authority had already begun to manifest for the المسلمين. In any case, it may be reiterated that the culmination of the efforts and continuous دعوت of the Prophets will ultimately appear in the form of a universal order in which توحید prevails, security and tranquillity are established everywhere, and worship is purified from all forms of association. This will be the era of Imām al‑Mahdī (ʿalayhi al‑salام), the descendant of the Prophets and the son of the Messenger of Islam. Regarding that time, all Muslims have transmitted the following hadith from the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam): لو لم یبق من الدنیا الا یوم لطول الله ذٰلک الیوم حتی یلی رجل من عترتی، اسمہ اسمی، یملا الارض عدلاً وقسطاً کما ملئت ظلماً وجوراً If there were to remain only a single day of the world, Allah would prolong it until a man from my progeny emerges, whose name will be my name, and he will fill the earth with justice and equity just as it had been filled with oppression and injustice. It is noteworthy that Ṭabrisī, under this verse, reports a tradition from the Ahl al‑Bayt (ʿalayhim al‑salام): انھا فی المهدی من آل محمد This verse concerns al‑Mahdī from the family of Muḥammad. Similarly, in Rūḥ al‑Maʿānī and many Shīʿī exegetical works, it is reported from Imām Zayn al‑ʿĀbidīn (ʿalayhi al‑salام) that he stated in the interpretation of this verse: ھم والله شیعتنا اھل البیت یفعل الله ذٰلک بھم علی یدی رجل منا، وھو مهدی ھذہ الامة، یملا الارض عدلاً و قسطاً کما ملئت ظلماً وجوراً، وھو الذی قال رسول الله (ص) لو لم یبق من الدنیا الا یوم… By Allah, they are our Shīʿah, the أهل البیت; Allah will establish this through one of us—the Mahdī of this Ummah—who will fill the earth with justice and equity as it had been filled with ظلم and جور. As previously noted, these interpretations do not restrict the meaning of the verse to these instances alone; rather, they indicate its most complete manifestation. However, some exegetes, such as Ālūsī in Rūḥ al‑Maʿānī and others who did not adopt this perspective, have regarded these narrations as questionable. The well‑known Sunni exegete al‑Qurṭubī narrates from Miqdād ibn al‑Aswad that he said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) state: ما علی ظھر الارض بیت حجر ولا مدر الا ادخلہ الله کلمة الاسلام There will remain no house of stone or clay upon the face of the earth into which the word of Islam will not enter. For further elaboration regarding the rule of Imām al‑Mahdī (ʿalayhi al‑salام), reference may be made to the detailed discussion in tafsīr literature.

The expression “یَعْبُدُونَنِی لَایُشْرِکُونَ بِی شَیْئًا” may function grammatically either as a circumstantial clause (ḥāl) or as indicating purpose (ghāyah). In the first case, it corresponds to the preceding pronoun and serves as a descriptive state; in the second case, an implied “لام” may be assumed, rendering it originally as “لیعبدوننی”. Some have also suggested that it constitutes an independent (istiʾnāfīyah) clause, although this interpretation is regarded as weak. In either case, the meaning is that the primary objective behind the establishment of a just government, the consolidation of the true religion, and the attainment of security is to strengthen the foundations of worship and pure monotheism. In another verse, the purpose of creation itself is expressed as follows: وَمَا خَلَقْتُ الْجِنَّ وَالْإِنسَ إِلاَّ لِیَعْبُدُونِ I have not created the jinn and humankind except that they worship Me (al‑Dhāriyāt 51:56). This worship is that which nurtures human beings and serves as an elevated school for the cultivation of the soul. It is an عبادت of which Allah is entirely independent, while human beings remain in profound need of it for their perfection and spiritual development. This perspective represents the Islamic worldview, in contrast to materialist outlooks, whose primary objective is the attainment of a higher standard of material prosperity. Islam, however, cannot adopt such a goal as an ultimate end; in its view, material life possesses value only insofar as it serves as a means toward higher spiritual objectives. It is also necessary to note that worship free from association (shirk), the negation of non‑Divine legal authority, and the dissolution of the dominion of personal desires cannot be realised without the establishment of a just governance. While it is possible, through continuous teaching, education, and propagation, to guide certain individuals toward truth in the absence of such a government, the widespread institutionalisation of these principles within society cannot occur without the governance of righteous believers. For this reason, the Prophets exerted their greatest efforts to establish such an order. In particular, the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam), upon obtaining the opportunity during the migration to Madinah, established such a government as an exemplary model. From this, it may also be concluded that whether such a government engages in peace or conflict, and regardless of whether it operates in the spheres of education, culture, economy, or military affairs, all its programmes and activities are directed toward the worship of Allah—worship that is entirely free from all forms of association. It is important to clarify that the establishment of the rule of the righteous, the consolidation of the true religion, and the promotion of pure monotheistic worship do not imply that no sinful or deviant individuals will exist within such a society. Rather, the meaning is that the system of governance rests in the hands of the righteous believers, and that the general character of society is free from shirk. As long as human beings possess freedom of will, the possibility of deviation remains—even within the most refined divine and human societies.

See ayat 57 for tafseer.

In the preceding verse, a promise was given to righteous believers of succession and authority upon the earth. In the two verses under consideration, people are invited to establish the foundations of this sovereignty, while, at the same time, God undertakes responsibility for removing the major obstacles. It is stated: “وَاَقِیمُوا الصَّلَاةَ”. Establish prayer— that very prayer which creates a bond between the creation and the Creator, ensures the continuous connection of servants with Allah, and restrains human beings from wrongdoing and disobedience. “And وَآتُوا الزَّکَاةَ”. Give zakāt— that very zakāt which links individuals with the creation of God, plays an effective role in reducing social disparities, and strengthens the bonds of human sympathy and solidarity. And, in a general sense, “وَاَطِیعُوا الرَّسُولَ”— maintain obedience to the command of the Messenger in all matters. This obedience leads one onto the path of the righteous believers and qualifies one to be among those deemed worthy of earthly authority. “So that you may receive mercy” (لَعَلَّکُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ), by acting upon these commands, and become eligible to bear the standard of a just and rightful order. If it is imagined that powerful and obstinate opponents may create obstacles and prevent the fulfilment of the Divine promise, such an assumption is unfounded, for their power has no standing before the Divine power. Therefore: “لَا تَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِینَ کَفَرُوا مُعْجِزِینَ فِی الْاَرْضِ”— do not suppose that the disbelievers can escape or frustrate Divine authority upon the earth. They will not only fail to escape Divine consequence in this world, but in the Hereafter as well, “وَمَاْوَاھُمْ النَّارُ وَلَبِئْسَ الْمَصِیرُ”— their abode shall be the Fire, and what an evil destination it is. The term “معجزین” is the plural of “معجز”, derived from “اعجاز”, meaning to render powerless. It is used in the sense of attempting to evade capture or escape pursuit—yet the implication of the verse is that no one can move beyond the reach of Divine power or evade its dominion.

See ayat 60 for tafseer.

See ayat 60 for tafseer.

As previously noted, this Sūrah places particular emphasis on modesty and chastity, repeatedly prohibiting all forms of indecency and immorality from various perspectives. The verses under discussion continue this theme, presenting regulations concerning entry into the private quarters of spouses by both minors and others. It is first stated: “یَااَیُّھَا الَّذِینَ آمَنُوا لِیَسْتَاْذِنْکُمْ الَّذِینَ مَلَکَتْ اَیْمَانُکُمْ وَالَّذِینَ لَمْ یَبْلُغُوا الْحُلُمَ مِنْکُمْ ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ”. O believers, those whom your right hands possess (slaves) and those of your children who have not yet reached puberty must seek permission from you on three occasions. These occasions are specified as: before the dawn prayer, at midday when garments are laid aside, and after the night prayer (مِنْ قَبْلِ صَلَاةِ الْفَجْرِ وَحِینَ تَضَعُونَ ثِیَابَکُمْ مِنَ الظَّھِیرَةِ وَمِنْ بَعْدِ صَلَاةِ الْعِشَاءِ). The term “ظھِیرَة” denotes the time around noon, when people customarily remove their outer garments and may withdraw into privacy. These three times are described as “ثَلَاثُ عَوْرَاتٍ لَکُمْ”, that is, periods of privacy. The word “عورة”, derived from a root meaning defect or vulnerability, refers to times or conditions in which exposure would entail embarrassment; hence, it is applied here to periods when individuals are less guarded. This directive is addressed to guardians, as minors have not yet reached the stage of legal accountability. It applies equally to both boys and girls, since the masculine plural does not restrict the general scope. The context further indicates that the ruling concerns children who have attained a level of discernment sufficient to understand the meaning of permission. Regarding “مَلَکَتْ اَیْمَانُکُمْ”, the apparent sense includes both male and female dependents, and this generality is consistent with the wording of the verse. It is further stated: “لَیْسَ عَلَیْکُمْ وَلَا عَلَیْھِمْ جُنَاحٌ بَعْدَھُنَّ طَوَّافُونَ عَلَیْکُمْ بَعْضُکُمْ عَلیٰ بَعْضٍ”. Outside these specified times, there is no blame upon either party for movement and interaction without formal permission, as they frequently move about in service and familiarity with one another. The term “طَوَّافُونَ” implies frequent and repeated movement, indicating that constant restriction would impose undue hardship. The verse concludes: “کَذٰلِکَ یُبَیِّنُ اللهُ لَکُمْ الْآیَاتِ وَاللهُ عَلِیمٌ حَکِیمٌ”. In the following verse, the ruling for those who have reached puberty is clarified: “وَإِذَا بَلَغَ الْاَطْفَالُ مِنْکُمْ الْحُلُمَ فَلْیَسْتَاْذِنُوا کَمَا اسْتَاْذَنَ الَّذِینَ مِنْ قَبْلِھِمْ”. Once children attain maturity, they are required to seek permission at all times before entering, as do adults. The term “حُلُم” denotes maturity, either in the sense of intellectual development or as a reference to physical signs associated with puberty. Thus, a distinction is drawn between minors—who are required to seek permission at specific times—and those who have reached maturity, who must observe this etiquette consistently. The similar phrase concluding this verse—“کَذٰلِکَ یُبَیِّنُ اللهُ لَکُمْ آیَاتِہِ وَاللهُ عَلِیمٌ حَکِیمٌ”—reinforces the clarity and wisdom of these ordinances. In the final verse under discussion, an exception is made concerning elderly women: “وَالْقَوَاعِدُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ اللاَّتِی لَایَرْجُونَ نِکَاحًا فَلَیْسَ عَلَیْھِنَّ جُنَاحٌ اَنْ یَضَعْنَ ثِیَابَھُنَّ غَیْرَ مُتَبَرِّجَاتٍ بِزِینَةٍ”. Women who have passed the age of marriage desire are permitted to relax certain outer coverings, provided they do not engage in adornment or display. This concession is subject to two conditions: first, that they have reached an age at which desire for marriage has ceased; second, that they refrain from self‑adornment. It is clear that this permission pertains only to outer garments—such as coverings described in narrations as “الجلباب والخمار”—and does not authorize exposure beyond that. A narration from Imām al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) clarifies that this relaxation applies generally, provided there is no display of adornment. The verse further states: “وَاَنْ یَسْتَعْفِفْنَ خَیْرٌ لَھُنَّ”. Nevertheless, maintaining greater modesty remains better for them, as increased observance of chastity and modesty is always closer to taqwā. Finally, it concludes: “وَاللهُ سَمِیعٌ عَلِیمٌ”. Allah is Hearing and Knowing—He is aware of both spoken words and inner intentions—serving as a reminder that even within permissible concessions, vigilance and sincerity must be maintained.

In order to prevent immorality and corruption, it is not sufficient merely to punish offenders through corporal measures. Such an approach alone cannot yield the desired results in any social issue. Rather, it is essential to establish intellectual and moral تربیت, to impart sound cultural education, to teach ethical conduct, to disseminate correct Islamic teachings, and to create a pure, healthy social environment. Only thereafter should punishments, legal limits (ḥudūd), and disciplinary measures be implemented as one element among these broader factors. For this reason, Sūrah al‑Nūr adopts precisely such a comprehensive method. It first mentions the punishment for adulterous men and women, then commands the provision of appropriate means for marriage, discusses the regulations of پردہ, prohibits illicit gazing, forbids false accusation, and, finally, prescribes that children must seek permission before entering the private quarters of their parents. In this manner, the entire discourse forms a cohesive framework aimed at safeguarding chastity and moral purity. The detailed treatment of these matters demonstrates that Islam has not neglected even the smallest aspects related to this issue. Servants are required to seek permission before entering a room occupied by husband and wife. Adult children must likewise refrain from entering without permission. Even younger children—who frequently remain in close proximity to their parents—are instructed at least to seek permission at three specific times (before the dawn prayer, after the night prayer, and at midday when the parents are resting). These are Islamic etiquettes; yet it must be noted with regret that in the present age they are often neglected, despite the clarity with which the Qurʾān has addressed them. It is seldom observed that these directives and their underlying wisdom are discussed in writings, speeches, or instructional contexts. It is unclear why such an explicit Qurʾānic injunction is disregarded. Even if it were considered merely recommended rather than obligatory, it should still be treated with seriousness and elaborated upon. In contrast, some naïve individuals assume that young children are not attentive to such matters, or that servants are unconcerned with them; however, it has been established that even young children are highly sensitive in this regard. At times, parents act negligently and behave carelessly in the presence of children, engaging in conduct that is inappropriate for observation. As a result, children may develop moral deviations or psychological disturbances. There are cases in which individuals have acknowledged that such parental neglect led to resentment and aversion toward them, even to the extent of contemplating harm or, in some instances, reaching the point of self‑destructive tendencies. In such contexts, the wisdom and value of these Islamic teachings become clearly evident. Matters that contemporary scholars and specialists have only recently recognised were addressed explicitly in Islamic teachings fourteen centuries ago. It is therefore appropriate to advise parents to adopt these etiquettes with seriousness and to train their children to seek permission before entering their private space. It should also be noted that, beyond other considerations, the presence of discerning children in the same room where husband and wife sleep may itself become a source of early تحریک in the child. As far as possible, such situations should be avoided. It must be clearly understood that in matters of تربیت, these etiquettes and regulations carry great importance. It is noteworthy that in a hadith, the Prophet Muhammad (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) stated: ایّاکم وان یجامع الرجل امرئتہ والصبی فی المھد ینظر الیھا One should avoid engaging in marital relations while a child in the cradle is observing (Biḥār al‑Anwār, vol. 103, p. 295).

There is no disagreement among Islamic scholars that elderly women are exempt from certain aspects of the requirement of hijab, since the Qurʾān has explicitly stated this ruling. However, there is divergence of opinion regarding the details of this exemption. One point of اختلاف concerns the age at which the term “قواعد” applies to such women. In some narrations, the expression “مسنّة” (advanced in age) has been used (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, Kitāb al‑Nikāḥ, Bāb 110, ḥadīth 4). In other narrations, the expression “قعود عن النکاح” is found, indicating women who are no longer candidates for marriage (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, Kitāb al‑Nikāḥ, Bāb 110, ḥadīth 5). Some jurists and exegetes have further defined this condition as the cessation of menstruation, the loss of capacity for childbirth, and the absence of inclination toward marriage (Javāhir, vol. 29, p. 85; Kanz al‑ʿIrfān, vol. 2, p. 226). In appearance, these various formulations point to a single underlying meaning: women who have reached an age at which, generally, marriage is no longer sought, even though rare exceptions may occur. Another point of discussion concerns the extent to which such women may relax their covering. The Qurʾān states in a general manner that there is no harm if they lay aside their garments, but it is understood that this refers only to outer garments. In response to the question as to which garments may be removed, Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) is reported to have said: الجلباب that is, the outer covering such as the cloak or veil (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, Kitāb al‑Nikāḥ, Bāb 110, ḥadīth 1). In another narration, the expression “الجلباب والخمار” is mentioned (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, Kitāb al‑Nikāḥ, Bāb 110, ḥadīth 2, 4), where “خمار” denotes a head covering. These narrations are not contradictory; rather, they indicate that it is permissible for such women to leave the head uncovered and not conceal the hair, neck, and face. Some traditions and juristic statements also include the wrists within this exemption, but there is no evidence to extend the concession beyond this. In all cases, this permissibility is conditional upon the absence of adornment, as indicated in the phrase “غَیْرَ مُتَبَرِّجَاتٍ بِزِینَةٍ”. They must refrain from self‑display and continue to conceal their hidden adornments, avoiding decorative attire. In other words, it is permissible for them to appear in public without the outer covering, provided they do so in simple dress, without embellishment or display. Nevertheless, it is not necessary for them to avail themselves of this concession. If they continue to observe full covering, as other women do, this is regarded as more virtuous, as explicitly indicated in the verse: “وَاَنْ یَسْتَعْفِفْنَ خَیْرٌ لَھُنَّ”. The greater the degree of modesty and chastity, the more commendable it is in the perspective of Islam and the closer it is to taqwā. It is also acknowledged that even in advanced age, there remains, however rarely, the possibility of lapse; hence the encouragement toward continued restraint and modesty.

In the previous verses, it was discussed about seeking permission at appointed times or generally before entering the private chambers of parents. The verses under discussion here, however, address an exceptional aspect. They identify certain relatives and other persons in whose presence one may go under special circumstances and eat without seeking permission. It is stated: There is no blame on the blind, the lame, or the sick if they eat with you (لَیْسَ عَلَی الْاَعْمَی حَرَجٌ وَلَاعَلَی الْاَعْرَجِ حَرَجٌ وَلَاعَلَی الْمَرِیضِ حَرَجٌ). Some traditions mention that before embracing Islam, the people of Medina used to forbid the blind, the lame, and the sick from sitting at their dining tables and did not eat with them, as they disliked this practice. After the advent of Islam, some people made separate arrangements for such individuals, not because they disliked eating with them, but because they thought perhaps the blind person could not see the food properly and might eat alone while the blind person could not, which they considered discourteous. Likewise, they thought the lame and the sick might lag behind in eating while the healthy ones ate, and for whatever reason, they did not eat together with them. Consequently, the blind, lame, and sick also isolated themselves, fearing they might cause inconvenience to others, and regarded causing such inconvenience as a sin upon themselves. Regarding this matter, when the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was asked, this verse was revealed clarifying that if these persons eat with you, there is no blame (Explanatory note: In Tafsir al-Dar al-Manthur and Tafsir Nur al-Thaqalayn under the relevant verse, along with some other interpreters, this narration is recorded. For example, al-Tabarsi in Majma‘ al-Bayan, the late Faiz in Tafsir al-Safi, Fakhr al-Razi in Tafsir al-Kabir, and Sheikh Tusi in Tafsir al-Tibyan have included it). However, in explaining this phrase, interpreters have also mentioned other interpretations, one of which is that these persons are exempt from the command to participate in Jihad. Another interpretation is that you are permitted to take such disabled and weak persons with you to the eleven houses mentioned in the verse and that they may eat from there as well. But these two interpretations seem very unlikely and inconsistent with the apparent meaning of the verse (Consider this carefully). __________ Thereafter, the Quran further states: There is no sin upon you to eat and drink from your own houses where your children or wives live, which are counted as your own homes (وَلَاعَلٰی اَنْفُسِکُمْ اَنْ تَاْکُلُوا مِنْ بُیُوتِکُمْ), or from the houses of your fathers (اَوْ بُیُوتِ آبَائِکُمْ), or from the houses of your mothers (اَوْ بُیُوتِ اُمَّھَاتِکُمْ), or from the houses of your brothers (اَوْ بُیُوتِ اِخْوَانِکُمْ), or from the houses of your sisters (اَوْ بُیُوتِ اَخَوَاتِکُمْ), or from the houses of your paternal uncles (اَوْ بُیُوتِ اَعْمَامِکُمْ), or from the houses of your paternal aunts (اَوْ بُیُوتِ عَمَّاتِکُمْ), or from the houses of your maternal uncles (اَوْ بُیُوتِ اَخْوَالِکُمْ), or from the houses of your maternal aunts (اَوْ بُیُوتِ خَالَاتِکُمْ), or from the houses for which you hold the keys (اَوْ مَا مَلَکْتُمْ مَفَاتِیحَہُ), or from the houses of your friends (اَوْ صَدِیقِکُمْ). However, there are some conditions and clarifications regarding this command which we will mention later. Continuing the discourse, it is stated: It is no sin upon you whether you eat together or separately (لَیْسَ عَلَیْکُمْ جُنَاحٌ اَنْ تَاْکُلُوا جَمِیعًا اَوْ اَشْتَاتًا). This implies that some Muslims in the early days of Islam did not consider eating separately to be appropriate, and if they did not find any companion to eat with, sometimes they would remain hungry for long periods. The Quran teaches them that eating both communally and separately is permissible. (Reference: Tafsir al-Tibyan under the relevant verse). Some have said that among certain Arabs it was customary to take the guest’s food separately as a mark of respect and not to eat with him, so that he might not feel embarrassed or be unable to eat freely. The verse abolished such restrictions and taught that this is not a good custom. (Reference: Tafsir al-Tibyan under the relevant verse). Others have said that some wealthy individuals refrained from eating with poor people and maintained class barriers even at the dining table. The Quran denies this cruel attitude in this verse. (Reference: Tafsir al-Tibyan under the relevant verse). Nevertheless, none of this is blameworthy considering the context of the verse. Afterward, a social ethical command is given: When you enter a house, greet yourselves with peace—a greeting from Allah, blessed and good (فَإِذَا دَخَلْتُمْ بُیُوتًا فَسَلِّمُوا عَلٰی أَنفُسِکُمْ تَحِیَّةً مِنْ عِندِ اللّٰهِ مُبٰرَکَةً طَیِّبَةً). The verse concludes with the statement that Allah has thus revealed His signs to you…Perhaps He advises you to use intellect and reasoning. (كذٰلک یبین اللہ لکم الاٰیات لعلکم تعقلون). Which "houses" are meant by "Bayoot"? Some commentators consider the above-mentioned eleven houses as the reference. Some other commentators interpret "Bayoot" as meaning mosques. But it is clear that the verse is absolute and can refer to all houses, whether they are the aforementioned eleven houses to which a person goes to eat or the houses of other relatives and friends, because there is no evidence to limit the broad meaning of the verse. As for the question of what is meant by greeting oneself with salam (peace)? Various interpretations have been noted in this regard: * Some have said it means some individuals greeting others, as in the incident of Bani Israel mentioned in Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 54: فاقتلو انفسکم "Kill one another as a punishment." * Some have said it means greeting one’s wife, children, and household, because they are considered like one’s own self; thus, they are called "Anfus" (selves). This expression is also seen in Ayat al-Mubahala (which is Surah Aal Imran, verse 61), indicating that sometimes a person becomes so close to another as if they are one soul. For example, Hazrat Ali (peace be upon him) was very close to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family), and this term was used for him. * Some have said it means those houses in which no one resides; thus, when entering such a house, one should greet oneself with these words: السلام علينا من قبل ربنا "Peace be upon us from our Lord." Or greet with these words: السلام علينا وعلى عباد الله الصالحين "Peace be upon us and upon the righteous servants of Allah." Our view is that there is no contradiction among these interpretations. One should greet with salam upon entering every house. The household members should greet one another. Believers should greet one another, and if no one is in the house, then one should greet oneself. Because every salam ultimately results in greeting one’s own self. That is why from Imam Baqir (peace be upon him), a hadith is narrated in which he was asked about the interpretation of this verse, and he said: "It means that when a person enters a house, he greets the household, then they return his salam and greet him back, and this is as if you are greeting yourself." (Reference: Nur al-Thaqalayn, Vol. 3, p. 627). From Imam Baqir (peace be upon him) it is also narrated that he said: "When a man among you enters his house, if there is someone in it, he should greet him with salam, and if there is no one in it, he should say: 'Peace be upon us from our Lord'; as Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, has said: a greeting from Allah, blessed and pure." (Reference: Nur al-Thaqalayn, Vol. 3, p. 627).

In the verse under discussion, it was observed that Allah has permitted a person to eat and drink in the houses of close relatives and certain associates. Eleven categories of such households are mentioned, and the verse does not explicitly impose the condition of seeking permission. It is evident that this allowance is not contingent upon formal permission; otherwise, one could eat at any house with permission, and the specification of these eleven categories would hold no particular significance. However, the question arises as to whether implicit consent (riḍāʾ bāṭinī) is also required, especially since it may not always be outwardly apparent whether the host is genuinely pleased. Ordinarily, one can infer the disposition of close relatives and associates, and the apparent generality of the verse seems to negate the requirement of explicit or even inferred consent, suggesting that the mere likelihood of satisfaction is sufficient. Nevertheless, if the nature of the relationship or specific circumstances indicate with reasonable certainty that the host is not pleased, then it is not unlikely that such cases would fall outside the scope of the ruling. Such instances are exceptional, and general rulings typically admit of exceptions in rare cases. Accordingly, this verse provides a degree of specification to those verses and narrations which condition the use of another’s property upon their consent. At the same time, the permission granted here is limited: one may partake of food to the extent of need, without wastefulness or excess. The foregoing interpretation is widely accepted among jurists, and certain aspects of it are explicitly supported by narrations. In a معتبر report, when Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) was asked about the expression “او صدیقکم”, he stated: ھو والله الرجل یدخل بیت صدیقہ فیاکل بغیر اذنہ By Allah, it refers to a man entering the house of his friend and eating without seeking permission (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, p. 434, Kitāb al‑Aṭʿimah wa al‑Ashribah, Bāb Ādāb al‑Māʾidah, ḥadīth 1). There are also numerous other narrations indicating that explicit permission is not required in such contexts. At the same time, there is no disagreement among jurists that if a person is explicitly prohibited, or if there is clear knowledge of displeasure or عدم رضا, then it is not permissible to partake, and the ruling of the verse does not apply. Narrations further emphasise that food must not be wasted, spoiled, or consumed in an excessive manner (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 14, p. 434, Bāb Ādāb al‑Māʾidah, ḥadīth 4). Some reports suggest that the permission may apply only to ordinary types of food rather than all forms of provision; however, many jurists have not relied upon such narrations. Others have excluded special or reserved foods—such as those prepared for particular guests or occasions—from the general permissibility, and such an exception is not inconsistent with the intent of the verse (cf. Jawāhir al‑Kalām, vol. 36, p. 406, Kitāb al‑Aṭʿimah wa al‑Ashribah).

It may be asked how this ruling can be reconciled with the explicit and stringent prohibitions in Islam concerning usurpation (ghaṣb). Despite Islam’s firm stance against unauthorized appropriation of another’s property, how has this allowance been deemed permissible? It appears that such a question arises from an exclusively materialistic perspective. It reflects the conditions of societies resembling those of many contemporary Western environments, where even one’s own children, upon reaching a certain age, may be expelled from the household and deprived of their rights, with little expression of affection. In such contexts, all considerations revolve around material and economic concerns, and genuine human sentiments often receive little attention. Given the prevailing characteristics of that social order, such an attitude is not surprising. By contrast, within the framework of Islamic civilization and social structure, profound importance is accorded to human relationships and emotional bonds. In particular, close relatives and intimate friends occupy a highly significant and sensitive position. In Islam, relationships of kinship and friendship transcend purely material considerations and are regarded as deeply sacred. The ethical outlook of Islam seeks to eliminate narrow‑mindedness, selfishness, and ego‑centredness. There is no doubt that the rulings concerning usurpation (ghaṣb) continue to apply beyond these specific contexts. However, in such exceptional circumstances, Islam gives precedence to the preservation of human relationships and sentiments over the strict application of legal prohibitions concerning property.

There is no doubt that friendship possesses a broad conceptual scope; however, in this context, the term “صدق” refers specifically to close and intimate friends—those between whom there exists frequent interaction and strong relational bonds, such that they visit one another and partake of food in one another’s homes. In such cases, even formal permission is not required; it is sufficient that there be reasonable certainty of the absence of dissatisfaction. For this reason, some exegetes, commenting on this expression, have stated that it refers to a friend who is sincere and truthful in his friendship. Others have held that it denotes a friend whose outward and inward dispositions are consistent. In essence, these interpretations converge upon a single meaning. It is appropriate at this point to consider the concept of friendship and its defining conditions as articulated in a narration of Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām), who stated: لاتکون الصداقة الّا بحدودھا، فمن کانت فیہ ھذہ الحدود او شیء منھا فانسبہ الی الصداقة ومن لم یکن فیہ شیء منھا فلاتلبسہ الیٰ شیء من الصداقة Friendship cannot exist except within its defined limits. Whoever possesses these characteristics, or even some of them, may be regarded as a friend; and whoever possesses none of them should not be associated with friendship in any sense. He then elaborates upon these conditions: فاوّلھا ان تکون سریرتہ وعلانیتہ لک واحدة The first condition is that his inner state and outward conduct toward you should be the same. والثانی ان یریٰ زینک زینہ وشینک شینہ The second is that he should regard your honour and reputation as his own, and your harm or deficiency as his own. والثالثة ان لاتغیرہ علیک ولایة ولامال The third is that neither authority nor wealth should alter his conduct toward you. والرابعة ان لایمنک شیئاً تنالہ مقدرتہ The fourth is that he should not withhold from you anything within his capacity to provide. والخامسة وھی تجمع ھٰذہ الخصال ان لایسلمک عند النکبات The fifth—encompassing all the preceding qualities—is that he should not abandon you in times of hardship. (Uṣūl al‑Kāfī, vol. 2, p. 467) Thus, true friendship is defined by sincerity, loyalty, constancy, generosity, and steadfastness, and such a relationship forms the ethical foundation upon which the permissibility described in the verse is understood.

It has been reported in numerous narrations concerning the occasion of revelation that, in the early period of Islam, when Muslims would go out for jihād, they would sometimes entrust the keys of their homes to individuals who were unable to participate due to valid excuses. They would even grant them permission to partake of the food present in the house; however, such individuals would often refrain from eating out of fear of committing a sin. According to these reports, the expression “مَا مَلَکْتُمْ مَفَاتِحَہُ” refers precisely to such houses whose keys are under one’s charge (Tafsīr al‑Qurṭubī; Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 16, p. 436, Bāb 24 min Abwāb al‑Māʾidah). It is also narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās that this expression refers to an agent or representative of a person—one entrusted with matters such as water, property, agriculture, or livestock. Such a representative is permitted to partake, according to need, of the fruits of a garden or the milk of animals. Others have interpreted it as referring to a custodian of a storehouse, who is entitled to consume food from it. However, when considered alongside the categories mentioned in the verse, it appears that the intended meaning is those individuals who, due to close trust and relationship, are entrusted with the keys of a household by its owners. This close association justifies their inclusion alongside relatives and friends. Some narrations likewise interpret this expression as referring to an entrusted agent (wakīl) responsible for managing property; in this sense, such an interpretation represents one particular instance encompassed within the general meaning of the phrase.

As previously noted, the term “تحیّة” is fundamentally derived from the root “حیات” (life). It conveys the meaning of invoking well‑being, safety, and continued life for another. This invocation may take forms such as “سلام علیکم” or “السلام علینا”, or even expressions like “حیات الله”; however, in common usage, “تحیّة” refers broadly to any form of affectionate or respectful greeting exchanged at the beginning of an encounter. The phrase “تَحِیَّةً مِنْ عِنْدِ اللهِ مُبَارَکَةً طَیِّبَةً” signifies that such a greeting should, in essence, be connected to Allah. Thus, when one says “سلام علیکم”, the implied meaning is that the peace of Allah be upon you, or that Allah grant you safety and well‑being. For a monotheistic believer, every supplication ultimately returns to Allah, and is directed to Him alone. Naturally, a supplication of this nature is both “مبارک” (blessed) and “طَیِّب” (pure and wholesome). The importance of greeting (salām) and the obligation of responding to it in all its forms have been discussed previously in connection with the verse: “فَإِذَا حُیِّیتُمْ بِتَحِیَّةٍ فَحَیُّوا بِاَحْسَنَ مِنْھَا اَوْ رُدُّوھَا” (al‑Nisāʾ 4:86).

See ayat 64 for tafseer.

See ayat 64 for tafseer.

Exegetes have reported diverse occasions of revelation regarding this verse: In some narrations, it is stated that the verse was revealed concerning Ḥanẓalah ibn Abī ʿĀsh. The circumstance was that on the night he intended to consummate his marriage, the Battle of Uḥud was to occur the following day. While the Prophet Muhammad (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) was consulting with his companions regarding the battle, Ḥanẓalah came to him and requested permission to spend that night with his wife. The Prophet granted him permission. At dawn, however, he hastened to join the battle and, due to urgency, did not perform the ritual غسل. In that state, he entered the میدانِ جنگ and ultimately attained martyrdom. The Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) said regarding him: “I saw the angels giving Ḥanẓalah his غسل between the heaven and the earth.” For this reason, he came to be known as “Ḥanẓalah al‑Ghasīl al‑Malāʾikah” (the one washed by the angels) (reported in Tafsīr ʿAlī ibn Ibrāhīm, cited in Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 628). Another reported occasion of revelation relates to the Battle of the Trench (Khandaq). During this time, the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam), together with the Muslims, was engaged in hastily digging a trench around Madinah. Among them were some منافقین who outwardly appeared to be part of the Muslim community but worked very sluggishly. Whenever they perceived that others were not paying attention, they would quietly slip away to their homes without seeking permission from the Messenger. In contrast, the true believers, when faced with any necessity, would come to the Prophet, seek permission, attend to their task, and promptly return to continue their work so that they would not lag behind in this collective خیر. Thus, the verse criticizes the former group and commends the latter (Fī Ẓilāl al‑Qurʾān, vol. 6, p. 126).

The relationship of these verses with the preceding ones may be explained as follows. According to Ṭabrisī in Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, Sayyid Quṭb in Fī Ẓilāl al‑Qurʾān, and other exegetes, the earlier verses dealt with the etiquettes of social interaction with relatives and friends, whereas the present verses address the mode of interaction between Muslims and the Messenger (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam). In these verses, believers are instructed to observe discipline in their conduct so that they remain attentive to the Messenger in all affairs and do not depart from important matters without necessity and permission. It may also be suggested that the preceding verses discussed the obligation of obedience to Allah and His Messenger, and one of the essential requirements of such obedience is that no action is undertaken without their permission and command. Hence, the present verses elaborate upon this requirement. Accordingly, the first verse under discussion states: “إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ الَّذِینَ آمَنُوا بِاللهِ وَرَسُولِہِ وَإِذَا کَانُوا مَعَہُ عَلیٰ اَمْرٍ جَامِعٍ لَمْ یَذْھَبُوا حَتَّی یَسْتَاْذِنُوہُ”. True believers are those who believe in Allah and His Messenger, and when they are together with him in a collective matter, they do not leave without seeking permission. The expression “اَمْرٍ جَامِعٍ” refers to an important matter that necessitates collective participation and cooperation—whether it be consultation on a significant issue, engagement in jihād, participation in congregational gatherings such as Jumuʿah, or any other matter of similar importance. The various interpretations offered by exegetes—whether consultation, jihād, or communal prayer—are therefore to be regarded as illustrative instances of a general principle. In essence, this verse establishes a rule of discipline and order. No organized community can disregard such a principle, since, in such contexts, even the absence of a single individual may result in harm or undermine the intended objective. This is particularly true when the leader is the Messenger of Allah, whose commands are binding. It should also be noted that seeking permission is not merely a formal or superficial act; rather, it entails genuine consultation—meaning that if the leader does not consider the absence harmful and grants permission, then departure is permissible; otherwise, one must remain and sacrifice personal considerations for the greater collective purpose. For this reason, the verse continues: “إِنَّ الَّذِینَ یَسْتَاْذِنُونَکَ اُوْلٰئِکَ الَّذِینَ یُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللهِ وَرَسُولِہِ”. Those who truly seek your permission are indeed the ones who genuinely believe in Allah and His Messenger. Their faith is not merely verbal but rooted in sincere obedience. It is further stated: “فَإِذَا اسْتَاْذَنُوکَ لِبَعْضِ شَاْنِھِمْ فَاْذَنْ لِمَنْ شِئْتَ مِنْھُمْ”. When they seek permission for some necessary matter, grant permission to whom you deem appropriate. Here, “شَاْنِھِمْ” signifies matters of genuine necessity and importance, not trivial concerns. At the same time, the discretion granted to the Messenger does not imply arbitrary decision‑making; rather, it presupposes careful consideration of circumstances. This is confirmed in Sūrah al‑Tawbah (9:43), where it is stated: عَفَا اللهُ عَنْکَ لِمَ اَذِنتَ لَھُمْ حَتَّی یَتَبَیَّنَ لَکَ الَّذِینَ صَدَقُوا وَتَعْلَمَ الْکَاذِبِینَ This indicates that permission should be granted with due reflection and awareness of its implications. At the conclusion of the verse, it is stated: “وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لَھُمْ اللهَ إِنَّ اللهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِیمٌ”. Seek forgiveness for them from Allah, for Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. This raises the question as to why forgiveness is required if permission has been granted. Two explanations have been proposed: first, that prioritizing personal matters over collective concerns, even with permission, constitutes leaving what is preferable; second, that this instruction reflects a gesture of compassion and appreciation for their adherence to proper conduct. These interpretations are not mutually exclusive. This principle of discipline is not restricted to the time of the Prophet but extends to all divinely guided leadership—whether that of prophets, Imams, or their successors—since it is essential for the preservation of order within the Islamic community and is also affirmed by rational considerations. Subsequently, another injunction related to adherence to the Messenger is given: “لَاتَجْعَلُوا دُعَاءَ الرَّسُولِ بَیْنَکُمْ کَدُعَاءِ بَعْضِکُمْ بَعْضًا”. The call of the Messenger must not be treated like the calls exchanged among yourselves. His call pertains to significant divine matters and must be received with seriousness, for his command represents the command of Allah. It is further stated: “قَدْ یَعْلَمُ اللهُ الَّذِینَ یَتَسَلَّلُونَ مِنْکُمْ لِوَاذًا”. Allah is aware of those who slip away secretly, using pretexts to withdraw from collective obligations. Such conduct was characteristic of the hypocrites, who would evade participation in important undertakings. Therefore, the verse warns: “فَلْیَحْذَرِ الَّذِینَ یُخَالِفُونَ عَنْ اَمْرِہِ اَنْ تُصِیبَھُمْ فِتْنَةٌ اَوْ یُصِیبَھُمْ عَذَابٌ اَلِیمٌ”. Those who مخالفت His command should beware lest they be afflicted by فتنة or a painful punishment. The term “فتنة” has been interpreted broadly to include misguidance, internal corruption, social disorder, or divine trial; similarly, “عذاب الیم” may refer to punishment in this world, the Hereafter, or both. Finally, the concluding verse of the Sūrah directs attention to its foundational theological themes: “اَلَا إِنَّ لِلّٰہِ مَا فِی السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْاَرْضِ”. All that is in the heavens and the earth belongs to Allah. He is fully aware of human conduct—“قَدْ یَعْلَمُ مَا اَنْتُمْ عَلَیْہِ”—and all actions are recorded in His knowledge. On the Day of Return, all will be informed of their deeds—“وَیَوْمَ یُرْجَعُونَ إِلَیْہِ فَیُنَبِّئُھُمْ بِمَا عَمِلُوا”—for “وَاللهُ بِکُلِّ شَیْءٍ عَلِیمٌ”. These repeated assertions of Divine knowledge underscore their profound تربیتی impact: the awareness of continual oversight by Allah exerts a powerful influence upon human conduct, restraining individuals from wrongdoing. The concluding supplication expresses a longing that hearts be illumined by the light of knowledge, faith, chastity, and guidance, and that human society be preserved from deviation and corruption under the establishment of a just order: “إِنَّکَ عَلَیٰ کُلِّ شَیْءٍ قَدِیرٌ”.